The Finance Commission of 1907, when entrusted with the task of framing a new city charter, sought to correct the evils which had arisen in the city administration by means of several expedients. A complete separation of the executive and legislative branches of government was sought. The appointments by the Mayor were no longer subject to confirmation by the Board of Aldermen, but all heads of departments were to be certified by the Civil Service Commission. A penalty was imposed for interference with executive business on the part of the City Council. In regard to finances, the new charter provided that all appropriations to be met from sources other than loans must originate with the Mayor. The City Council could no longer increase any item or add new ones. The Mayor was given an absolute veto power over all acts of the City Council, extending to a veto of any item in a bill requiring the expenditure of money and to any part of an item. The term of the Mayor was extended to four years, subject to recall at the end of two years.

The new charter abolished the bi-cameral organization of the City Council and provided that it should consist of but nine members, to be elected at large for a term of three years, only three being elected each year. An entirely new charter feature provided for the appointment of a permanent Finance Commission, with all the powers of the first commission, but its members were to be selected by the Governor, the idea being that a body quite independent of the municipal government would be able to serve as a check on waste and corruption. The charter as drawn up by the Finance Commission of 1907 was passed by the General Court of 1909, but its political features, to be submitted to the voters for their acceptance, were divided into two plans, one providing for a single legislative council consisting of one member from each ward, to be elected for two years, and nine members at large, to be elected for three years. Also, the term of the Mayor was left at two years. The other plan contained the recommendation of the Finance Commission of a single legislative chamber of nine mem

bers, and this plan was adopted by the voters. The charter of 1909 has been amended in some respects, the principal changes being that the Mayor shall not be eligible for re-election for the succeeding term (that is, a term of four years must elapse before a Mayor can again become a candidate), the abolition of the recall of the Mayor, different dates for elections, and various changes of minor importance.

BOSTON AND THE COMMONWEALTH.

The successive charter amendments show very clearly a distrust of the capacity of the municipal legislature and its committees to conduct the executive affairs of the city for the common good. The only alternative presenting itself has been to substitute the one-man power for a less responsible, or irresponsible, city council. city council. But this tendency toward concentrating responsibility for city affairs has undoubtedly acted as an incentive to the General Court to extend its control over the municipality of Boston. Occasionally, administrative mishaps or difficulties have served as an excuse for interference.

The underlying principles upon which a city government is established are that, in the first place, it is an organ for local self-government; and, secondly, an administrative agency through which the state government secures within the municipality the execution of state laws of general application. Thus a municipal corporation has a twofold function; but just how and where the dividing line between the authority of the city and that of the state should be drawn has given rise to much dispute. From the very beginning there has been an insistence on the part of the municipal authorities for a larger measure of self-government, or complete control of municipal affairs. On the other hand, the Commonwealth has not only demanded the execution of general laws within the city, and rightfully so, but has attempted to make Boston its mere agent in carrying out matters of purely local concern and legislated accordingly.

It is obvious that in much of the city's administrative work,— as for instance, through the Board of Elections, the Board of Assessors, the Board of Health, the School Committee, etc., the interests of the Commonwealth as well as those of the city must be served. In other words, some city departments are partly, but