F'OREWORD THE study of public administration is often confined to problems which arise in the organization and operation of government agencies. Without questioning the highly important character of such problems or the value of the numerous and intensive inquiries which have been devoted to them, many students are coming increasingly to believe that public administration cannot adequately be considered apart from the other processes of government. The staff of the Bureau of Public Administration of the University of Alabama have generally been of the. belief that public administration cannot be viewed as a thing apart, can not be understood out of context. A most important element in the· context of public administration is politics. The Bureau has published a goodly number of monographs on problems of public administration more or less narrowly defined. It was inevitable that eventually its attention should be turned to the setting in which public administration functions in the southern region. Funda mental to an understanding of the democratic process and to the success ful fulfillment of its purposes is the study of the selection of elective officials and the resolution of public controversies at the ballot box. Through the study of politics the cause of good government may be ad vanced, a purpose wholly appropriate to the Bureau of Public Adminis tration as a division of a state university. The politics of the South has a regional unity which necessitates its scudy over a broad area if there is to be maximum opportunity for under· v vi FOREWORD standing. With this in mind, an inquiry was projected which resulted in the present volume. The conception of such a project developed over a number of years beginning in 1944. It reached the stage of action in 1946 when the Rockefeller Foundation made a grant to the University of Alabama for a study of "the electoral process in the South." The Bureau was fortunate to secure the services of V. 0. Key, Jr., Professor of Political Science at The Johns Hopkins University, as director of research. On September l, 1946, the offices of the project were opened on the campus of the University of Alabama at Tuscaloosa, and shortly thereafter Mr. Key had a staff at work. Research into contemporary politics early and inevitably introduces problems of method. The acquisition of reliable basic data was a first need. The staff began by assembling election statistics, statutes and con stitutions, party rules, court decisions. and newspapers and· periodicals. It was realized that no matter how complete the collection of legal, statis tical, and other documentary data, there could be no genuine under standing of the electoral process without intimate acquaintance with the day to day practice of politics; consequeQdy it was planned from the be ginning to engage in extensive field interviewing. It was thought that the raw material for interpreting the political process could best be obtained ' . from those active in public life. Over a period of fifteen months 538 southerners were consulted in interviews. Approximately six weeks were spent by a field investigator in each of eleven states. Alexander Heard did t\lis field work in nine states and Donald S. Strong in two. The persons whose testimony was sought were in large measure active or retired politicians, including congressmen, governors and other state officials, state legislators, campaign managers, Democratic and Re publican party officials, precinct leaders, and individuals charged with the administration of the poll tax, registration, and elections. A large number of other persons, participants in the political scene or close ob· servers, were consulted. These included, among others, publishers, edi tors, newspaper reporters, leaders in labor and industry and farm organi· zations, plantation owners, small farmers, influential Negroes, leading spirits in reform movements, and students of government and politics. To all these people, scattered in large communities and small over the whole South, a great deal of gratitude is due. Almost invariably persons whose help was solicited responded cooperatively, and in many cases with enthusiasm and generosity of spirit which reflected an appreciation of the efforts of a group of southerners (for the principal staff members were all southerners) to arrive at an understanding of their own problems. Most of the interviews were granted on condition that the person interviewed not be quoted. For that reason specific acknowledgments have not been made. It is hoped that the many people who provided this essential assist· ance will accept this expression of the deep, appreciation of the staff. FOREWORD Yil Professor Key, with the consent of his University, carried on the work of directing the study through three years, and during the summers of 1947 and 1948 spent his full time .in the project offices. In the execution of all phases of the project, from the initial collection of data to the · preparation of final manuscript, Mr. Key had the assistance of Mr. Heard. Mr. Strong, Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of Alabama, served for two summers in field work and in the preparation of manuscript. Merrill R. Goodall and Frederic D. Ogden, Instructors in Political Science at the University of Alabama, worked one summer each in the preparation of special studies which were used by the author as the bases for certain chapters. Mary Helen Crawley and Katherine Wade Thompson served for extensive periods as research assistants. To them is due a yeoman's reward for the tireless efforts needed to keep the project moving during the long absences of other members of the staff. . Margaret Bittner and Samuel Strang worked for shorter periods in a similar capac ity. There was in addition a faithful corps of clerical and stenographic assistants to whom the author has asked that special appreciation be expressed. Throughout the life of the study York Willbem gave generously of his counsel and assistance far beyond the requirements of his position as · Assistant Director of the Bureau. The author and I wish to join in ex tending him special thanks. In an undertaking that is dependent on the cooperation of ·a large number of persons, obligations are incurred which cannot be acknowl edged indiviliually. There are, nevertheless, certain debts of gratitude which must not go ignored. Foremost is that to tire trustees and officers of the Rockefeller Foundation, whose recognition of the usefulness of a scholarly study of southern politics made possible the financing of the project. While the enterprise was yet in embryo I made a trip around the South and consulted some twenty prominent newspaper editors about the desirability and method of procedure of such a project. To these per sons a note of particular appreciation is due for their counsel in the for mative stage. Also always ready with wise advice and a helping hand in the planning stage was Ellis Arnall, then Governor of Georgia. During the field interviews numbers of people lent hospitable and courteous as sistance which greatly facilitated the collecting of information and smoothed the way of the travelling inquirer. That they are too numerous to list individually in no way lessens the sense of indebtedness which the staff feels toward them. After the manuscript was prepared, two or three persons in each state read and commented on the chapter on that state which appears in the first part of this volume. They sometimes dissented in part from the views expressed, and this acknowledgment of their assistance is not in tended to saddle them with responsibility for what is said anywhere in viii FOREWORD the book. Among these readers were Henry M. Alexander, Harry S. Ashmore, George A. Buchanan, Jr., W. G. Carleton, Hodding Carter, David A. Cheavens, Brainard Cheney, Virginius Dabney, Manning J. Dauer, Rowland Egger, Hallie Farmer, C. E. Gregory, Robert J. Harris, ·Noble B. Hendrix, Charles Houston, Herman Jones, John Blount Mac Leod, Edward J. Meeman, Allen Morris, H. C. Nixon, Alden Powell, Forrest Rozzell, Albert B. Saye, Kenneth Toler, 0. Douglas Weeks, Josephine Wilkins, and Bryan Willis. Professor E. E. Schattschneider, Chairman of the Department of Political Science of Wesleyan University and Chairman of the Committee on Political Parties of the American Political Science Association, read the entire manuscript and contributed numerous helpful suggestions. The author and I join again to thank him most cordially for his con structive comments. Research in the field of politics, no matter how schqlarly or detached, inevitably touches the heart of many matters of controversy. This is espe cially true in the South, where deep and long standing emotional strains run through political affairs. In the preparation of this work Mr. .K ey enjoyed complete freedom. The Rockefeller Foundation imposed no re strictions _on scope, methods, or findings. As a public educational institu tion, the University of Alabama is pleased to maintain the Bureau of Public Administration for the study of public problems, but no conclu sions concerning University policies or views are to be drawn from this volume. The materials presented and the opinions expressed are exch.i sively those of the author, who accepts full responsibility for them. ROSCOE C. MARTIN Director of the Bureau of Public Administration University of Alabama PREFACE 0 F books about the South there is no end. Nor will there; be so long as the South remains the region with the most distinctive character and tradition. Yet in all the writing about the South there exists no comprehensive analysis of its politics. Instead we have relied on a pair of caric;atures .for our understanding of southern politics. On one hand, regional leaders are described as statesmen of the old school, sound in. their economics, devoted to the Constitution; and ever alert against subversive and foolish proposals. The contrary picture is of a southern ruling class dedicated to reaction, intent on the repression of little people, both black and white, and allied with northern finance in a conspiracy to grind down the masses. In both caricatures there is a grain of truth; yet each is false. The South, to be sure, has its share of scoundrels, but saints do not appear to. be markedly less numerous there than on the· other side of Mason and Dixon's line. Rather, the politics of the South is incredibly complex. Its ~ariety, its nuances, its subtleties range across the political spectrum. The richness and diversity of the subject make an attempt to present a pano ramic view more an act of brashness than of boldness. Nevertheless, the broad outlines of the structure and character of southern politics are here sketched out with the full realization that more prolonged examination would bring modification. Further, the South is changing rapidly. He \VhO writes about it runs the risk that change will occur before the presses stop, no matter how he strives, as I have done, to identify and emphasize elements of continuity. These special hazards give more than ordinary justification to the usual expressions of diffidence with which a book is offered to the world. There is no illusion that the whole story has been told or that solutions ix x PREFACE have been found. It is only hoped that some better understanding of th~. politics of the South is promoted, for the subject, though not without its rollicking aspects, is of the gravest importance. The South is our last frontier. In the development of its resources, human and natural, must be found the next great epoch of our national growth. That develop ment, in turn, must in large measure depend on the contrivance of solu· tions to the region's political problems. A first step toward solution is identification; this study can claim to offer no more than a part of the first step. A word about the structure of the book is in order. In telling the story of southern politics the objective has been to deal, insofar as pos sible, with the common characteristics that give the South its peculiar qualities. For that reason state boundaries have been leaped wherever possible and subject matter treated as southwide phenomena. The section with which the book opens is concerned with the nature of factional com· petition in the internal politics of the states. It was impractical to handle this subject except by analysis of the politics of each state. The book com mences, therefore, with a series of chapters describing the alignments within the Democratic party in each state. In these descriptions the pre-; dominating characteristic of each state has been accentuated, not only to present it in clear relief but to illustrate a condition which usually runs throughout the South but may exist in less discernible form elsewhere. The reader who dips into only one or two state chapters, therefore, will gain only a part of the interpretation this book intends to convey. It should also be said that certain predispositions color the book. One of them is a belief in the democratic process as it is professed in the United States. Another is a belief that southerners possess as great a ca-· pacity for self-government as do citizens elsewhere in the country. Yet another is the conviction that the best government results when there is free and vigorous competition at the ballot box in contests in which genuine issues are defined and candidates take a stand. A work of this scope must necessarily be a team product. In his fore· word Roscoe C. Martin has recorded my extensive obligations. A special word is in order concerning the contribution of Alexander Heard, who bore the brunt of interviewing and assisted in every phase of the project. To him should go a major share of the credit for whatever merit the book may have. I also must express my appreciation to Mr. Martin, Director of the Bureau of Public Administration of the University of Alabama, for the opportunity to do this work and for aid and assistance in many ways. To the authorities of the University of Alabama, I am deeply indebted, but they should not be taxed with what I have said. They gave no intima tion of what I should say or should leave unsaid; the responsibility for what follows rests with me. v. o. KEY, Js..