Abstract
This paper examines the performance in office of 846 individuals who were mayors of
nineteen major cities in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Biographical accounts of
mayors’ terms typically list a number of non routine accomplishments. Four non routine aspects
of performance in office are examined physically developing a city, controlling conflict,
providing social service, and avoiding corruption. The analysis indicates that mayors are most
successful in promoting the physical and organizational development of their cities and less
successful at adding programs designed to improve social services and regulate behavior.
Although individuals who were mayor before 1830 show relatively high levels of
accomplishments, activism in general declined after 1830 and only gradually recovered at the
end of the nineteenth century. While government structure has little impact on accomplishments,
political power as measured by the distinction between those mayors who first entered politics by
winning elective office and those who first came to office through other means is related to
success in physically developing their cities, providing social services and regulating conflict.
Further, implementing new social services seems to be largely a function of mayoral preferences
while corruption is most closely related to machine politics.
Mayors are the most important municipal officials. No matter how extensive or limited their
Convention