solidation of the county or the sanitary district government with the city.

Under the amendment of 1904, a comprehensive city charter was prepared by a local charter convention in Chicago; but this was amended in important respects by the general assembly; and the amended charter was defeated at the local referendum. In 1915 a less comprehensive consolidation act was passed by the general assembly; but this also failed at the local referendum, mainly on account of temporary local political conditions. This act may be again submitted to local vote; but it is only a partial solution of the problem.

In recent years a series of reports on the complex machinery of local government in Chicago and plans for unification has been published by the Chicago Bureau of Public Efficiency. In these the defects of the existing arrangements have been discussed, including useless overhead expenses, enormous election costs, cumbersome assessing machinery, the cost of the courts, expensive law departments, the purchase of supplies and materials; rent, light and telephone service; the advantages of park consolidation; the sanitary district, and other economies. The direct money savings have been estimated at $3,200,000 a year; and in addition more important results could be secured by greater efficiency and better plans for future development.

Several alternative plans have been suggested as a basis for unification and consolidation. In addition to the partial measures possible under the constitutional amendment of 1904, may be noted proposals to organize the city of Chicago as a separate county, or to establish a consolidated city and county for an area such as that of the sanitary district, including most of the suburban communities adjacent to the city. Under either of these plans, the remainder of Cook County might be organized as one or more new counties, or attached to neighboring counties.

Any of these plans will give rise to a number of problems of adjustment with the present county of Cook and communities now outside of Chicago. Some of these problems and suggested solutions are considered in the pamphlet. But the problem for the constitutional convention will be, not to solve the local difficulties, but to frame constitutional provisions under which the local questions may be worked out by the communities themselves.

A large number of provisions in various articles of the present state constitution operate to prevent any comprehensive unification of local government in Chicago. Some of these may be removed by changes made on account of general conditions throughout the state. But it is probable that consideration will be needed for provisions specially applicable to Chicago and Cook County.

City-county consolidation elsewhere. In a number of other states, provisions have been made for the consolidation, to some extent, of city and county government for large cities; and in several Euro

pean countries there is likewise consolidated local governments for larger cities.

New York City includes five counties. In Philadelphia and San Francisco the city and county are identical in area.

Baltimore and St. Louis combine city and county functions. Boston includes most of Suffolk County. In all of these cases, the city government includes some county functions and absorbs some county officers. In Denver, city and county government have been more thoroughly consolidated. In the District of Columbia, a single government exercises some of the functions elsewhere divided between the city, county and state.

In Virginia, all cities are excluded from the counties; and the city government provides for county functions. Several state constitutions authorize the larger cities to be organized as separate counties; in Michigan and Missouri, cities over 100,000; in Minnesota, cities over 20,000. The California constitution contains a general provision authorizing city and county consolidation, as well as special provisions for San Francisco and some other counties.

Plans for city-county consolidation have been actively urged in recent years for a number of larger American cities. Proposed constitutional amendments for this purpose have been presented in Ohio and Oregon; and definite proposals have been urged in Los Angeles and Alameda counties, California.

In England, municipalities of over 50,000 population are regularly organized as county boroughs. In Prussia, most cities of over 25,000 are classed as Kreis-stadte, combining the functions of the city and the local district known as the circle; and there are somewhat similar arrangements in Bavaria. Several Swiss cantons are predominantly urban; and in the Basel-stadt the municipal and cantonal functions are combined.

In Paris, the municipal government is partly combined with that of the Department of the Seine. In that city, and also in Vienna, are permanent administrative districts within the city, which may suggest methods for preserving the identity of local districts in the suburbs of Chicago.

In Appendix No. 4 will be found a tentative proposal prepared by a special committee of the Chicago city council. It will be noted that this proposal relates primarily to municipal home rule, a subject dealt with in Bulletin No. 6 of this series. If the policy of municipal home rule is to be adopted, it would probably be made applicable to other cities as well as to Chicago, although some provisions relating specifically to Chicago might be necessary. Under the amendment of 1904 Chicago problems may now be dealt with by special legislation

II. LOCAL GOVERNMENTS IN COOK COUNTY.

Introduction: Much the most important and most complex array of local governments in Illinois is that in Chicago and Cook County; and it has been said that probably no other community in the world presents a more confusing complexity. Within the City of Chicago there are no less than 38 distinct local governments, most of them independent of one another. Outside of the city and within the larger area of the Sanitary District of Chicago there are 162 other local governments. Beyond the Sanitary District there are 192 additional local governments within Cook County. Upon the map which faces this page will be found an outline of the local areas which are most important from the standpoint of the problem of consolidation. This map is printed here through the courtesy of the Chicago Bureau of Public Efficiency. In the aggregate there are 392 separate agencies of local government in Cook County, as shown in the table below:

a-Cook County and the Forest Preserve District, which are co-extensive, extend beyond the limits of Chicago, although not shown in columns two, three, and four. The area of Chicago is 200 square miles; of the Sanitary District, 390 square miles; and of Cook County, 993 square miles.

b-Includes part of Elgin, which is largely in Kane County.

e-Eight wholly within, and 6 partly within Chicago. (Three of the latter

are partly outside the Sanitary District).

d-Includes 6 partly outside the Sanitary District.

e-Does not include 9 partly within the Sanitary District.

f-Does not include 6 partly within Chicago.

g-Includes 5 partly outside the Sanitary District, and Cicero, which is also

counted as a town.