Enforcement of early acts left to local officers, 1867-1893 State Factory Inspector appointed, 1897.... Inspection of mines under a State officer, 1879 Central control over the production and distribution of natural gas, 1889. Regulation of hours of labor and payment of wages of adult males, 1887, 3. Protection of the Pecuniary Interests of the People.. State inspection of banking institutions... State inspection of building and loan associations.. State inspection of insurance companies Official analysis of fertilizers required, 1881 319 Enforcement of early laws left to local officers... Office of Commissioner of Fisheries created, 1881 Commissioner granted supervisory authority over the enforcement of Territorial centralization followed by decentralization... CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION By administration is meant that department of government which is concerned with the detailed execution of the will of the state as it is manifested in the laws. It is to be distinguished from the legislative department, which expresses the will of the state. It is also distinct from the judicial authority, which applies the law to specific cases as they arise, and from the executive par excellence, which is responsible for the general supervision of the execution of the state will.' Students of political science have observed in the United States a strong tendency towards centralization in the Federal and municipal 3 administrations. In state administration, likewise, a similar movement has recently been described. The preparation of this paper was undertaken 'Goodnow, Frank J., Politics and Administration, p. 17. “The authorities which are attending to the scientific, technical, and, so to speak, commercial activities of the government......are...... .known as administrative authorities." Ibid. Goodnow, F. J., Administrative Law, i, pp. 62-74, and Politics and Administration, p. 118; Bryce, James, The American Commonwealth, i, ch. ix. 'Goodnow, F. J., Administrative Law, i, pp. 207-213, and Municipal Problems, ch. x; Bryce, James, The American Commonwealth, ch. lii; Wilcox, D. F., The Study of City Government, pp. 189, 191–202; Fairlie, John A., Municipal Administration, pp. 96–8. 'Webster, W. C., Recent Centralizing Tendencies in State Educational Ad ministration, Col. Univ. Studies, viii, no. 2; Whitten, R. H., Public Administration in Massachusetts. Ibid., viii, no. 4; Fairlie, J. A., The Centralization of Administration in New York State. Ibid., ix, no. 3; Sites, C. M. L., Centralized Administration of Liquor Laws in the American Commonwealths. Ibid., x, no. 5. 15] 15 with a view of ascertaining to what extent this centralization has progressed in Indiana; and what effects, if any, it has produced upon the efficiency and economy of the administration. In order to give the proper setting it is deemed advisable to preface the discussion by a brief historical outline of the government of Indiana prior to its admission as a State. Under French dominion there was in what is now Indiana, scarcely anything that could be called local civil government. For administrative purposes Indiana was divided somewhat indefinitely between the provinces of Louisiana and Canada. Vincennes was in the Illinois district of Louisiana, and was governed from New Orleans through Fort Chartres, Illinois. Each district in this part of New France had its own commandant, who exercised authority as superintendent of police and justice of the peace. The people had no conception of local self-government, nor even of trial by jury. They trusted every thing to the character and authority of those appointed over them.3 They were careless, easy-going and contented; honest in their business transactions; and simple in their manner of living. The multitude of functions exercised by the modern state and municipal governments was unknown to them. Hence, there was little occasion for the formal enforcement of law and no necessity for an elaborate system of civil administration. Even after this territory had been transferred to Great Britain in 1763, there was no introduction of civil govern 'Law, Colonial History of Vincennes, p. 10; Breese, Early History of Illinois, P. 216. 3 Walker, C. I., The Northwest during the Revolution, in Michigan Pioneer Collections, vol. iii, p. 14. 4 * Dunn, op. cit., pp. 94-7; Law, p. 16; Breese, pp. 220-2. ment until 1774. Military officers appointed magistrates and defined their authority, which was enforced by the soldiers. The well-known Act of 1774, extending the limits of the Province of Quebec to the Ohio and Mississippi Rivers, vested the legislative authority in the Governor and Council of Quebec, both appointed by the king. The criminal procedure of England and the civil procedure of France were established. But this was little more than a paper system. Indeed, it was not until 17773 that English authority was exercised over the French inhabitants at Vincennes. Though a civil government had a nominal existence at this time, justice was still dealt out in much the same way as under the preceding military regimé.5 On July 4, 1778, Colonel George Rogers Clark under a commission from Virginia captured Kaskaskia. Almost as soon as the news of this event was received in Virginia, the Legislature of that State passed a temporary act establishing the County of Illinois,' including all the territory northwest of the Ohio River. The government provided by this law was highly centralized. The Governor of Virginia was empowered to appoint a county-lieutenant or commandantin-chief of the county to hold during pleasure. He in turn had authority to designate as many deputy-commandants, militia officers and commissaries as he should think proper. The religious, civil and property rights of the inhabitants were guaranteed. All civil officers to whom the inhabitants had been accustomed for the preservation of peace and the administration of justice, were to be chosen by the citizens, convened by the county-lieutenant for that purpose. They were to enforce such laws as the settlers had been accustomed to. The county-lieutenant had the power to grant pardons except in the case of murder and treason, and in such cases he could allow respites pending an appeal to the State. Under this authority civil government was actually inaugurated in May, 1779, and later the first election was held. Although the statute which vested the officers with powers expired in 1781, they held over until the arrival in 1787 of Colonel Harmar, representing the authority of the United States. His successor, Major John F. Hamtramck, abolished the governmental machinery established by Virginia, and “remained for three years the autocrat of the Wabash, the sole legislative, executive and judicial authority." a Such a condition of affairs could not be permanent. In fact, the Congress of the Confederation had begun the consideration of the proper method of governing this territory within a few months after the ratification of the Treaty of 1783. The Ordinance of 17843 provided a temporary government for the "Western Territory," though it was never put into actual operation. The Ordinance of 1785* providing "for ascertaining the mode of disposing of lands in the Western Territory" was of much greater significance. The following provisions only are of interest in this connection: "The surveyors shall proceed to divide the said territory into townships of six miles square," and "There shall be reserved the lot number 16 of every township, for the maintenance of public schools within the said township." This law as confirmed by the Congress of the United States has Journals of Congress, vol. viii, pp. 153–5, Phila., John Dunlap. 4 Journals of Congress, vol. ix, pp. 167–175. |