heartily in favor of permitting cities to adopt any form of government which meets local conditions and local wishes. Selfgovernment is the secret of good government.

NECESSITY FOR RURAL POLICE.

For years in this State the issue of a State-directed and controlled police system has been a football of politics. No doubt this has been due largely to the popular impression, gained years ago, that a State Constabulary, so-called, could mean nothing else but an organization instituted by the Government for the purpose of bulldozing and roughriding Labor in its controversies with Capital. There never was a time in the history of the State when rural police protection was more imperatively necessary than it is to-day, and it seems to me that it is our duty to face this question courageously, regardless of the consequences of popular misunderstanding, and to invite citizens to look upon the subject not as a conspiracy against any particular class, but without prejudice and traditional opposition as one of vital concern to many sections and all interests in New Jersey.

New Jersey is a thickly populated State. Its problems are both similar to and different from those of Pennsylvania and New York. The rapidly increasing population in suburban sections that is beyond town and city limits-needs protection to-day more than ever because of the abnormal conditions. Unfortunate instances which have occurred both before and since. the beginning of war strongly indicate this necessity. Industrial plants and industrial sections likewise require such protection, in addition to the local communities, because of the fact that our manufacturers are turning out many of the supplies needed by the Government and her Allies for the war. Local police forces are necessarily inadequate for this function because of the location of many plants outside of city limits. I am frank to say that I believe a properly regulated and directed State Police Force can be established under wisely formulated legislative regulations and restrictions, which will be adequate to

provide such proper protection and yet not be subject to such abuses as are commonly anticipated and against which the public is amply warranted in demanding safeguards. It is the duty of the Legislature to provide some practical method of rural police protection under State control. The form which this should take is a matter for legislative consideration.

ELIMINATION OF TOLL BRIDGES.

The task of eliminating toll bridges, which are undemocratic and relics of a past day, should be continued vigorously, and to this end it is the duty of the Legislature to continue the Commission appointed for the purpose and to see that it is sufficiently. equipped with funds for the work.

CORPORATION LAW REVISION.

With a view to further attracting legitimate business to New Jersey, and yet taking care not to open the doors to corporate fraud, there should be an additional modification of our existing corporation laws. The last Legislature found that New Jersey, entirely without reason, was limping under corporation restrictions which did not conform at all to the Clayton Act of the Federal Government, thus creating an atmosphere of business uncertainty and penalizing the State unnecessarily. This was remedied. Since then other defects have been found and these should likewise be remedied to the end that New Jersey may offer a hospitable field for legitimate business while not forfeiting any of the safeguards against frenzied and unscrupulous financiers.

STATE'S ATTITUDE TOWARD BUSINESS.

I submit, as a general proposition, that the attitude of a State government toward business corporations should be judicial. By that I mean it should be fair, sound, dispassionate, free alike from the sinister influences of organized capital corrupted

and the destructive prejudices of that school which misjudges all corporation business by the abuses of some. We should consider that corporations, large and small, are feeling the pinch of the high cost of living, of materials and of labor in the same degree as individual business men. Moreover, wise public regulation prevents certain classes of corporations from arbitrarily shifting the burden of higher costs to the shoulders of the ultimate consumer as unregulated business is doing. Conditions today are no respectors of business because it is big. We must keep our minds open, therefore, and be as ready to assist the corpor ation business, especially under State regulation, in the solution of financial economies and other emergency problems, as we are the small business or the consumer or patron not under State or Federal control. Perhaps such an attitude will require courage since it flies in the face of popular prejudice. But there is not a single interest in a community which may be unjustly penalized without the injury spreading to other interests. Popular prejudice is a contagious disease. One function of sound government is to equalize the poison by adopting the square deal policy.

LIMIT ON AMOUNT AND USE OF CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURES.

Wanton waste of money in political campaigns demands immediate legislative attention. New Jersey's Corrupt Practices Act is effective as far as it goes, but it does not go far enough. True, a candidate is limted in his expenses, and his committee must give an accounting of moneys received and disbursed, but the loophole is found in the fact that there is nothing to prevent a candidate's friends from spending as much as they like in his behalf. This opportunity for circumvention has led to excessive campaign extravagances in the past, from all political sides. Unless promptly curbed these are apt to lead to money corruption and a popular contempt for the ballot. I respectfully suggest that the remedy be applied through an amendment to the Corrupt Practices Act, further restricting contributions and also the uses to which they may be put in political

propaganda. Such restrictions should be upon the candidate's friends as well as upon the candidate himself, and an expenditure of money by them in excess of the legal limit should have the effect of rendering the expendor liable for a misdemeanor and likewise forfeiting the right of the candidate to take office, in all cases except where there was evidence of a conspiracy to violate the law deliberately to keep a political opponent out of office. In other words, the expenditure of more than a certain amount in the interest of a candidate or party, no matter who spends it, should be prohibited. My thought is that $25,000.00 in a State candidacy and $5,000.00 in a county candidacy would be regarded as a fair maximum to be contributed in total by the candidate and by his friends in his behalf. Certainly such sums would not be found inadequate if the uses to which campaign money is put were further regulated. Intelligent newspaper advertisements, discussion of issues at public meetings and personal mailed appeals are far more effective than gaudy billboard posters, meaningless pictures on telegraph poles or the popularly ignored circular that litters the front yard. The latter methods should be absolutely prohibited in an amendment to the Corrupt Practices Act, which amendment would prove more effective than the so-called highway-marring bill of the last session. When the law supervises or circumscribes campaign expenditures in a practical way it will be found possible to limit campaign expenditures to sums within reason and within the price of the average man. Then again, it would prove a great deterrent if campaign expenditures were published before a primary and an election instead of afterward. In simultaneous action on both propositions, therefore, lies the solution.

REDUCING ELECTION OPERATING EXPENSES.

I think everyone agrees that considerable money can be saved on the actual physical operation of elections. The suggestion has been made that a long step in this direction could be taken by arrangement to conduct elections in public schoolhouses. In addition to the saving of expense of rental, such a proposition

would tend to heighten the tone of elections, removing them further from degrading environment and placing them on the plane conceived by the framers of the Constitution. Elections are strictly of an educational character, the fundamentals of civil government, and I cannot imagine a more proper use for a public school building on a day that is by law a legal holiday. It seems to me that it is the duty of the Legislature to seek counsel of public school administrators in the State for the purpose of finding out how these arrangements may be made in a practical and satisfactory way.

If our experience with public school buildings as polling places were to be found satisfactory, the next logical step would be to secure the services of our public school teaching forces as election officers, of course with compensation additional to that granted for teaching duties. I fail to see anything inconsistent or impractical in commandeering the brains and training of our public school instructors in the highly important task of honestly conducting our elections and accurately interpreting our complex election laws.

Further election law changes I propose discussing in a later message.

AMPLIFICATION OF COMPENSATION LAW.

As conditions change, the necessity of paying constant attention to our Workmen's Compensation Act and its practical operation will be recognized. The Compensation Bureau established in the Department of Labor should be clothed with power to decide disputes, rather than merely persuade toward compromise and thus sometimes fail to avoid needless and costly litigation. Furthermore, there is need of legislation looking to the interests of the State with reference to the disposition of compensation in the case of the death of persons without dependents or known beneficiaries. In fact, this is only reasonable. Unlike most States, the insurance carriers are not required to compete with a State Insurance Fund, but practically all the business of the State is divided among them with a supervision of rates by