Cincinnati

The charter group was again successful in the November elections in Cincinnati and retained the six seats won in the first contest, while the Republican organization lost one seat to an Independent candidate. Seven of the nine councilmen were reÑ‘lected to office. The victory of the charter ticket was due in large measure to public approval of the unusual accomplishments of the last two years, and in part to the political sagacity of the leaders throughout the series of campaigns. The election of 1924, which resulted in the adoption of the council-manager form of government with a council chosen by proportional representation, and the election of two years ago which “kept the charter in the hands of its friends,†have been described in the pages of this journal. It was appreciated that the real test of the reform movement would come at the election of 1927 when the charter party would be on the defensive. This test has now been met.Cincinnati was fortunate in the character of the men who composed the first council under the new system. They employed a manager with administrative ability, a charm of manner which quickly ingratiated him with the people, and a personality which complemented the personal qualities of the councilmen themselves. These men elected by the people did not refuse leadership, and the mayor especially has become a dominant force in the community. The combination of Mayor Seasongood and Manager Sherrill is an unusual one. The former is a leader of reform; the latter, the man to carry out the policies which the representatives determine upon. Consequently, the manager himself never became a campaign issue. Both groups pledged him support. As the mayor said of him, “He personifies the people's own desire for good government.â€