CHAPTER XXIII PARTY ORGANIZATION ing of which the PARTY is as old as politics, and the operation of party in working the machinery of government is seen in all countries having free institutions; but of party as an external authority, expressing its determinations through its own peculiar organs, the United States as yet offers to the world the only distinct example, although tendencies in that direction are showing themselves in England. There is still, however, nothBritish Parliament is more intolerant than an assumption that there exists any constitution of authority exterior to its own, which can claim to give expression to the will of the people. No less keen a jealousy might have been expected from the Congress of the United States, which, according to the constitution, directly represents both the people and their state governments. Assuredly nothing would have been more incomprehensible and astonishing to the framers of the constitution than to have been informed that a political jurisdiction would be established, unknown to the constitution and without warrant of law, whose determinations would be recognized as entitled to delineate the policy of the administration and bind the proceedings of Congress. Such obligation, though constantly paltered with by faction interests and continually evaded by tricky politicians, is nevertheless unreservedly admitted. To such an extent is this submission carried that it is not an uncommon thing for members of Congress to admit that they are acting under the compulsion of such obligation against their own judgment.1 Although party organization asserts jurisdiction over the constitutional organs of government, its own pretensions to a representative character have a very slight basis. The theory of party organization is that its power emanates directly from the people, by means of a system according to which the party membership, at primary elections, choose delegates who meet to state the party principles and name the party candidates. In practice, few people besides the politicians have any share in the transaction. As a rule, the vote at primary elections is very small, and even when exceptional 1 Mr. Gorman. -The senator from Wisconsin says that both parties were somewhat intimidated by the people who were the special advocates of this law. For one, I do not believe we can shirk our duty in this matter. Mr. Spooner. All I said was this, and I repeat it, that both the political parties were committed to the principle of the civil serIvice law and its maintenance. Mr. Gorman.-To that I agree. -Congressional Record, February 24, 1891, p. 3395. circumstances bring out a large vote, it is still small as compared with that polled at a regular election. In many cases there is hardly the pretence of an election by the party membership, but the politicians frankly bargain among themselves who shall attend the conventions and figure as party representatives. The total vote polled for the members of a national convention, which nominates the President and declares the policy to be pursued by the government, is but a small percentage of the vote polled at a congressional election. What is still more significant is the fact that there appears to be no connection between the extent to which a constituent quality has been imparted to a convention, and the force with which its decisions appeal to public confidence and support. So far as the appearance of representative character in party organization is concerned, it is generally greatest when its subjection to professional management is most complete. In an old party, which has acquired a valuable stock of traditional sentiment and popular attachment, the reciprocal efforts of struggling factions have evolved a stringent code of regulations to prevent unfair advantages, and their mutual jealousies insure vigilant attention to regularity of procedure. A spontaneous movement, issuing from popular enthusiasm, is tolerant of irregularity in method. It welcomes without question those whose heart is in the cause. The convention of a new party has largely the character of a mass-meeting. Established usage requires some observance of the form of delegation, but practically any one of respectability and standing, who is in sympathy with the movement, may take part in the proceedings. A reform movement will eagerly cluster around a self-constituted leadership, while the regular political boss in selecting candidates must carefully respect the form of nomination by delegates from the people. The Committee of Seventy, appointed by some citizens' associations, nominated a ticket which swept New York City in the election of 1894, while the Tammany ticket, regularly nominated by a body of genuine constituent character, was defeated. Such considerations make it plain that the true office of party organization is that of a factor. It carries on a self-assumed procuration in the name. of the people and by their acquiescence, but not by their desire. The appearance of a representative character is the result of arrangements gradually effected under pressure of a demand that the emoluments and opportunities of this business of factorship should be open to competition. This view of the case is fully confirmed by the history of party organization sketched in the preceding chapters. The occasion for it was the need of means of concentration so as to establish a control over the divided powers of government. Party ६ machinery was devised under the stimulus of necessity and has been submitted to because there was no help for it. A paradoxical phrase, often used in regard to this very matter, puts the case exactly as the people regard it. It is a necessary evil. The development of party organization has been elaborate and extensive in keeping with the vast expansion of the nation and the multifarious political activities of our complicated system of government. The struggles of the people to convert the government to democratic uses have introduced complications which have greatly enlarged the functions of party organization and intensified their energy. The movement towards the mul tiplication of elective offices originated in popular revolt against class rule. The constitutional framework of the national government was so unyielding that effort was expended upon it in vain; but plastic material was found in the state constitutions. The democratic movement which raised Jackson to the presidency, although baffled in all its designs of amending the constitution of the United States, has left a deep influence upon state constitutions. A sentiment of popular hostility to aristocratic control was the force that sustained the movement of constitutional reform, and, as a means of diminishing the sphere of such control and admitting new interests to power, there was no expedient so effective as turning appoint |