[378 ] RICHARD SKOLNIK The memorial to Waring was but a minor addition to the monument he himself left. By introducing orderly procedures into his Department and in cleaning the streets of the city, he had established a compelling standard against which his successors would continually be measured. Waring did not doubt that they would adhere to it because "once the people have learned what good government is, they will not give it up!'46 Waring, like other reformers, tended to accept an overly sanguine view regarding the acuteness of popular perceptions and was similarly inclined to overestimate the durability and acceptability of reform standards. Despite this, Waring's influence did endure. Reformers in the 1901 mayoralty campaign pledged themselves to maintain the streets in the manner of Waring. Ten years after his term of office, an aldermen's committee used Waring's record to evaluate the inadequacies of the incumbent. Years after his death, scholarly books on municipal government continued to cite Waring's landmark accomplishments.47 By translating the reform program, hitherto a set of abstract axioms, into an effective model for change, Waring convinced many New Yorkers that it was a realistic alternative to machine rule. Seemingly rejuvenated by this demonstration, the reformers subsequently enjoyed an unprecedented number of major political successes in the period 1901 to 1917 and progressively built upon the foundations first constructed by Waring.48 As a result, the close of the period saw the reform forces accepted as legitimate contenders for political power. Their appearance created a truly competitive political system that enlivened politics within the city, broadened the base of civic participation, and increased the likelihood of a more creative response by the city to an increasing array of urban problems. 46 Shaw, Life of Waring, 42. 47 Board of Aldermen, Report, 5-12; Fox, Report, 6ff, Among the studies citing Waring's work are John Fairlee, Municipal Administration (New York: 1906), 258; Charles Zueblin, American Municipal Progress (New York: 1916), 252; Charles Beard, The American City (New York: 1912), 247; Wilcox, The American City, 94. 48 For an account of the reform movement in this period see Richard Skolnik, "The Crystallization of Reform in New York City, 1894-1917 (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University, 1964).