The Recall—Its Provisions and Significance

• Author: H.S. Gilbertson
• DOI: 10.1177/000271621204300114
• Published date: 01 September 1912
• Date: 01 September 1912
• Subject Matter: Articles

THE RECALL—ITS PROVISIONS AND SIGNIFICANCE
BY H. S. GILBERTSON,
Assistant Secretary of The Short Ballot Organization, New York.
A decade of exposure in the field of American politics brought
forth some ugly and insistent facts. In Grover Cleveland’s phrase,
it is now a condition, not a theory, which confronts the reformers,
the builders, those who are seeking to construct anew the foundations
of democracy, or representative government, or call it whatever you
will.
These men have an eye for the effectiveness of their weapons
and rather less for tradition or fine logic. No wonder, then, that
some institutions appear in the catalogue of remedies which seem
ill-harmonized with politics of the text-books.
The recall is one of these practical instruments, and whether we
like it or not, it is an emphatic protest against some of our long-stand-
ing legal and political traditions. It is radical, revolutionary, in one
view, and yet in another it has a certain conservatism of its own,
though relying upon an entirely different set of forces from the legal
processes which it partially supplements, to prevent abuses.
In
order, then, to analyze it adequately, this article must treat it both
from the practical and the theoretical standpoint.
The Growth of the Idea
For the first legal enactment of the recall principle we are in-
debted to the charter of Los Angeles, which contained the provisions
first in 1903.
During the next four years a number of other Cali-
fornia cities adopted the idea. In 1906 it was incorporated into the
charter of Seattle, Wash. Soon also the initiative and referendum
advocates of Oregon became interested in it as a supplement to their
own &dquo;People’s Power&dquo; measures, and by employing the initiative,
they succeeded in getting it inserted in their constitution in 1908,
where it was made applicable to all elective officer, local and general,
including the judiciary. It may then be said to be one of the peculiar
contributions of the Pacific coast to the present movement, a move-
ment that looks toward a more direct participation of the rank and
file of the people in affairs of government.
216

---

217
But the circumstance which gave to the recall its greatest vogue
was its incorporation in the commission government laws of Iowa,
and almost simultaneously into those of South Dakota and Dallas,
Tex. This was in 1907, and ever since it has shared in the publicity
which has attended the spread of that form of government. It is,
however, not an essential part of the commission plan, and this
the Galveston people would have us at all times to understand.
But so closely are the two ideas associated that the recall is now a
part of every state-wide commission government law, except those of
Utah and Kentucky, and of fully three-fourths of the special charters.
The relative simplicity of this form has also made the recall a far
more feasible and logical adjunct than is perhaps the case with our
typical forms of state and local government. For, where, as under
the &dquo;commission&dquo; scheme all the elective officers are directly con-
cerned with public policy, the individual citizen has every reason to
concern himself with their official conduct.
Moreover, responsibility
for the acts of government is so much more definitely fixed that
action under the recall is more apt to be well-aimed and effective.
And again, the persistent demand for &dquo;checks&dquo; in our political
thinking finds some satisfaction in the recall, when, as under the
commission plan, the theory of the separation of powers has been
cast aside for a system in which the unity of the organization is bound
up in the single group of elective officials.
As a proposition applicable to state officers, it has a slower road
to travel.
Following the example of Oregon, the nascent State of
Arizona sought to make it a part of her system, without taking the
precaution of excepting the judiciary. The veto of this measure in
its original form and its repassage so as to exclude the judiciary from
the recall provisions are a matter of common knowledge and can
receive only passing mention here. But the California constitution,
by amendment adopted October 10, 1911, permits the recall of all
elective officers including judges. Idaho and Nevada will vote in
1912 on similar amendments.
The application of the recall to state officers in its earlier days
faced a possible constitutional obstacle in the obligation imposed
upon the states to maintain a republican form of government. This
difficulty was finally cleared up by the supreme court in the case of
The Pacific States Telephone Company v. The State of Oregon
(223 U. S. 118) wherein it was decided that all questions as to the

---

218
form of state government are political and not judicial and lie outside
the jurisdiction of the courts.
In the absence of any judicial definition of republican government
it is impossible, of course, to determine whether or not the recall is
inconsistent with it, and until congress intervenes, the recall is good
political practice.
Founded on the Right of Petition
The recall has something more than a mere experimental founda-
tion. As in the case of many another chance creation of politics,
it turns out that its fashioners, unconsciously perhaps, have built
upon a solid basis of thoroughly accepted political principles which
are a vital part of our American political system. And of these
principles the first is the well-grounded right of petition, which is
one of the chief pillars of our national bill of rights. In the his-
toric sense, this right, to be sure, is limited, and so...