for removal in the state constitution of the party and there is no record of any such case. The chairman of the Delaware Republican organization states, in reply to the question touching removal, that "ostracism" is the only method known to him; and from Iowa comes the answer: "making it so hot for him that he will resign." But in many states there is a well defined understanding as to the process by which a recalcitrant or disloyal member may be removed from. the managing committee. In the Montana Democratic committee a unanimous vote is required for removal; in the Kansas Democratic committee and in the Mississippi Republican committee a two-thirds vote is necessary; in other states a mere majority is deemed sufficient. In the Republican organizations of Georgia and of Utah the county convention possesses the power of removal.

Officers and sub-committees. - The officers of a state committee are few in number. There is a chairman, a secretary, a treasurer, and sometimes, in addition to these, a vice-chairman and a sergeant-at-arms. These functionaries are generally elected by the committee itself; but they need not be, and frequently are not, members of the committee. In most of the organizations there are sub-committees, of which the most important is the executive or campaign committee. This is usually composed of from three to nine members and is the most active part of the state organization. Another important committee is that on finance, and in many state organizations there is a separate auditing committee. 'A speakers' bureau or literary bureau or both are frequently found. Of all the officers the chairman and the secretary of the whole committee are the most important. Indeed, the campaign in many cases is really placed in the hands of these two men. Powers. The powers of the state central committee are seldom clearly defined, either by the written or by the unwritten constitution of the party. It can scarcely be said to govern and guide the party in the formulation and execution of policies, for as a rule this is a matter altogether outside its jurisdiction. The informal steering or managing committee which really determines the policy of the party is likely to be another group of politicians, although the actual leaders of course control the state committee through their agents and are sometimes found there in person.

The important powers and duties of a state committee, as of a 'national committee, center in the conduct of the campaign. Given the candidates and the platform, it is the function of the state committee to see that these particular persons and principles are endorsed by the voters of the state, or at least that the full party ⚫ strength is polled for them. The state committee determines the time and place of the nominating convention, fixes the ratio of representation, and issues the call for the convention. It often makes up the temporary roll of the convention, suggests temporary officers of the convention, and in general assists in putting the machinery of the nominating body in operation. After the convention is over, the committee takes charge of the conduct of the campaign and exercises general supervision over its progress. The committee raises the funds necessary for the prosecution of the work and distributes them at its discretion. It prepares and sends out appropriate literature to strategic points within the state, and assigns speakers to places where it is supposed they will be most effective. In short, the state committee is the managing board entrusted with the conduct of the state campaign, and as such is expected to practise all the arts known to politicians to bring about the success of the party.

The adoption of the Australian ballot system has involved a legal recognition of the political party as sponsor for nominations to appear on the ballot under the party emblem or with the party name. The convention was declared the official representative of the party in the first instance, but it was found necessary to make further provision for vacancies caused by the death or disability of candidates for state office. The laws of most states accordingly authorize the state central committee of the party to fill vacancies occurring on the ticket. In some of these laws this power is granted only in case there is not time to reconvene the convention; in others there is no such limitation. It is sometimes further provided that the substituted name must be that of a member of the party in question. Thus the Missouri statute reads: "No central committee shall have power to substitute, to fill any vacancy, the name of any person, who is not known to be of the

1 Illinois Rev. Stat., sec. 296; Massachusetts Rev. Stat., ch. ii, sec. 152.

same belief and party as the person for whom he is substituted." 1 In the conduct of a campaign the state committee coöperates with the national committee, and to some extent with the congressional committee. It must also be constantly in touch with the local organizations of the state. On the nature of the relation between the state and the local authorities, the printed rules of the state organizations present many interesting facts. In some instances the authority of the central committee over the local committees is very great. In Colorado, the Democratic state committee has full power, except during the session of the state convention,

to consider, pass upon and determine all controversies concerning the regularity of the organization of the party within and for any congressional district or county or city in the state of Colorado and also concerning the right to the use of the party name.2

Procedure in the case of contests is elaborately regulated, and full power is conferred on the committee to carry out its decrees. In Pennsylvania the Democratic state committee is empowered to examine the rules of party organizations, and to refuse representation in the state convention or the use of the party name unless the rules are such as to meet with its approval. The committee is empowered to "direct such changes as may appear necessary and expedient,” and to refuse recognition of the local committee until such changes are made. The rules of the Indiana Republican organization declare that the central committee has

immediate and full control of the political affairs of the Republican party in the state, the management of its campaigns, the collection and disbursement of funds, the selection of speakers, the distribution of documents, and generally shall adopt such honorable and vigorous measures as may be necessary to insure the success of the Republican party and the election of its members.*

1 Missouri Rev. Stat., sec. 7088.

• Rules, sec. 7.

4

Rules, ii, sec. 3. Cf. the Democratic rules in Virginia and Kentucky.

Cf. the Republican rules in Kentucky, art. 3, and in Missouri, sec. 4.

Where the authority conferred on the central committee is not so extensive as in Colorado and Pennsylvania, the central organization is expected to watch over the local agents of the party, and to stimulate and encourage their activity in every possible way. Especially in localities where factional strife endangers the success of the party, it is the function of the state committee to act as a board of conciliation and arbitration and, if possible, bring about at least a temporary truce between the combatants. As the Missouri Court said in the case of State v. Leseur:

It would seem inherently necessary in all party organizations that there should be some governing head, some controlling power, some common arbiter, which, if emergency should arise therefor, can lay its hands. on the heads of the warring factions within the party and compel the observance of wholesome regulations, conducive alike to efficient party organization, order, fair dealing and good government.1

In another Missouri case, however, the interference of the state committee in local affairs was overruled by the supreme court of that state. In Jackson County there was a bitter factional fight between two wings of the Democratic party, and two conventions were held. Each convention nominated a set of candidates and each held that its nominees were the regular candidates of the Democratic party and entitled to appear as such on the official ballot. The state committee, after considering the case, decided that the proceedings were irregular in character and ordered a new convention. The case was carried to the supreme court, where it was held that one of the two sets of candidates was regularly nominated, and that the state committee had no authority to declare the nominations invalid without granting a hearing to both factions. The court said:

Before a committee organized for the efficient management of party affairs of the state at large can set aside the action of a party acting under its own local government, it must first be shown that the local organization has either become disrupted and disorganized, or that the nominations for a particular election have been procured by fraud or in disregard of the usages and customs of the party; and it inevitably

1 15 S. W. Rep. 539 (1891).

follows that the nominees of the local organization whose nominations are to be set aside shall be accorded a hearing and a time and place fixed for that hearing of which they shall have had reasonable notice, and an opportunity to present their evidence.1

In conclusion it may be said that the plans of organization here outlined are by no means rigid and inflexible in their nature. They are convenient methods of directing campaign work, but they may be altered or radically changed by the action of the state convention. Thus in Illinois, in 1900, when the nominee of the Republican party for governor failed to secure a majority of the state central committee, a resolution was introduced in the convention increasing the number of the committee by the addition of eight members at large. This motion was declared carried by the chairman of the convention, who proceeded to name eight members in the interest of the gubernatorial candidate. In any party emergency, or in the course of a fierce factional fight, the rules governing the organization of the central committee are likely to be overridden by the stronger or more cunning. To infer, however, from such instances of intervention on the part of state conventions, that the organization of a state central committee is a matter of slight importance, and that it makes little difference in whose hands the control rests, would be quite erroneous. To the ambitious aspirant for party authority the state central committee is a point of great strategic importance, and many a bitter fight has been waged for its control. The possession of the central committee is, if not conclusive, at least presumptive evidence of party authority and control - one of the external marks of sov ereignty.

THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO.

C. E. MERRIAM.

1 State v. Crittenden, 64 S. W. Rep. 162, at 169. In the case of Whipple v. Broad, 55 Pacific Rep. 172, the Colorado court held that the removal of Broad, the chairman of the Silver Republican state central committee, by C. A. Towne, provisional chairman of the national committee, was unauthorized and could not affect the party standing of Broad.