The Civic Revival in Ohio.

The article informs that the opinion of the leaders of the Civic Revival in regard to the value of political remedies as aids to the solution of civic problems is made plain by contrasting their attitude toward the revision of city charters with their belief in the initiative and referendum and home rule. Unlike many municipal reformers the leaders of this movement were not primarily concerned with the form of city government. They recognized the utility of a model charter but they had learned that privilege was indifferent to forms. They believed that no matter how perfect a paper system of government was devised, tinkering with city charters would do no real good until privilege had been overthrown. The Civic Revivalists looked upon the initiative and referendum as powerful weapons for an awakened democracy. By giving the electorate the right to originate legislation, the initiative would make it possible for the people to secure the enactment of measures whose passage a reactionary legislature or council might otherwise prevent. The referendum would give the electorate a veto over acts or ordinances passed by the legislature or council and thus check corruption. Privilege would not corrupt the legislature to obtain laws which the people would overrule.