dealer, one a merchant, one a jeweler, one a saloon-keeper, and one a barber-shop proprietor.

Local issues were most varied and persistently intrusive. In regard to this, 86 communities made full or partial reports. In these elections the personal character of the candidates figured largely in 17; local option, prohibition, and liquor-law enforcement in 16;17 corruption, inefficiency and maladministration, graft, and extravagance in 14; bipartisan combinations, boss and gang rule in 10; special cases of municipal ownership in 6;18 general municipal ownership and control in 5; commission government in 5;19 industrial depression and labor controversy in 5; public improvements in 4; factional fights in 3; general local dissatisfaction in 3; oppressive taxation in 2. Among other issues mentioned were disgust with old parties, vice, franchisegranting, law-enforcement, annexation, disincorporation, countyseat fight, La Folletteism and Governor Stubbs.20 In the smaller places the election apparently often turned on very trivial matters. "Hitch-racks on the public square," "school economy by the Dutch," were explanations offered in two cases; while in a third "the fight swirled and thundered" about the problem of the retention or non-retention of a city engineer.21

There is no doubt that the Socialist creed and persistent "or

"The Socialists were not consistent on this issue.

"The Socialists, of course, in all cases stood for the principle of municipal ownership. "Commission government does not seem to have operated unfavorably to the Socialists. They elected three commission mayors and in a fourth case a motive given for voting the Socialist ticket was that thereby the old gang could be broken up and commission government secured.

"Many interesting special causes were shown to have figured sometimes in determining the results. Among these were minority representation and preferential voting. One Socialist mayor under the new preferential system received 362 out of 1,799 first-choice votes and stood third in the list but was elected by third-choice votes. A prominent cause of Socialist victories mentioned was "good, clean, young" men on the ticket as opposed to old, inefficient, and corrupt politicians.

"No opposition, Socialist running as an independent, lack of interest, apathy, no Socialist ticket in the field, not in good standing, good fellow, bad fellow, personal popularity, trade with the churches, religion, were phrases which altogether appeared thirty-two times in the explanations offered by correspondents. A well-known Socialist says that the socialist victories in the smaller places usually have nothing to do with the class struggle. "Bill Jones is storekeeper in Podunk; ninety of the hundred voters are friends of Bill. Bill happens to get hold of some Socialist literature and calls himself a Socialist. Bill's friends vote for him. Great Socialist. victory!" It is but fair to say that this statement comes out of the mouth of an impossibilist.

ganization, agitation, and education" were factors in bringing about the recent Socialist successes, but further evidence is surely not needed to show that, standing alone, they do not account for a large proportion of them.

On the other hand, the case goes even harder with the remaining all-inclusive explanations. The fact that the stronghold of Socialism is in the Middle West, the home of insurgency and populism, would seem to lend some color to the notion that there is a causal connection between these movements and the Socialist advance. Doubtless to many farmers, especially of Missouri, Kansas, Nebraska, and Oklahoma, Socialism seems to be a substitute for the lost cause, and the evidence shows that in these states it is largely recruited from the members of the farming class. Doubtless, too, the preaching of the insurgent gospel in Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Illinois has influenced many to go a step farther than their mentors; but a study of the individual cases rules out both populism and insurgency as more than supposititious and minor factors. In all the letters of explanation received from men on the ground populism was only once mentioned and insurgency received but the slightest consideration.

A far stronger case can be made out for the belief that the present increase of Socialistic strength represents a general revolt against ring rule and corporation control in city politics, with their corollaries of corruption, unequal taxation, inefficiency, and waste. The determination to be rid of this sinister combination at any cost probably turned to the Socialists the greater part of their sympathetic vote and tipped the scale for them in some of their most important successes-notably in the cases of Milwaukee and Butte. Moreover, this sort of thing makes Socialists. Still the appeal to fact rules against attributing success solely or even predominantly to this cause. If the returns are to be trusted, probably in less than one-third of the actual cases were gang rule and corruption, with their concomitants, immediate issues. To make the proof stronger, there were, indeed, cases in which the Socialists won in a contest with reform city governments.

The notion that the growth of Socialism finds easy explana

tion by reference to the foreign element in our population will as little stand scrutiny. That the north Europeans and especially the Germans have been to a great extent the fathers and leaders of American Socialism is true and very significant; that cities with a strong foreign element are conspicuous in the list of Socialist successes was shown in the preceding analysis; but a study of the ethnical character of the communities concerned in these successes shows the absurdity of trying to find here any general explanation. The 42 cases which received special study may be taken as ethnically fairly representative. Among these 42, 16 were distinctly American, and apparently untouched by any considerable foreign influence, while others were stated to be "prevailingly American," and "largely American."

Trade-union support also affords an insufficient explanation. In many places the unions did support the Socialist candidate loyally and in some the Socialist fight was really a union fight. A very large part of the Socialist vote was without doubt union. in character. In this case as usual, however, the unions pursued no consistent political policy. Many of the Socialist successes occurred in places where no unions exist or where they are not a strong factor. In respect to this matter the testimony received was not complete nor in all cases consistent, but the following facts are a sufficient basis for the conclusion reached. In at least 14 of the 42 cases either there were no unions or they did not constitute a strong factor; in 4 others they were reported as divided politically; in only 13 was unionism reported to be a strong factor and at the same time one which actually gave the Socialists strong support.

Most of the remaining assumed explanations need little comment. General discontent and desire for change really mean nothing in this connection. High prices were mentioned as a contributing cause in but one instance. Apathy, carelessness, and lack of opposition were at most very minor operating causes.

Finally then, in the pursuit of a single, all-inclusive explanation, we are driven to local issues. Can these Socialist victories be explained as the result of a combination of purely local issues and circumstances in which the Socialists happened to be in all

cases the fortunate or favored party? The notion is attractive and the great variety of local issues and special causes lends considerable support to it. Of course in a sense all of these elections turned on local issues and conditions. There was no single case probably in which the tariff or the national monetary policy or even national Socialism was in question. In short even Socialism was a local issue. But if the phrase be thus widened it is not at all enlightening. If it be narrowed to include only nonSocialist issues and conditions not created by the Socialists then we are confronted with evidence that there was a not inconsiderable group of communities in which the situation was a clear-cut case of Socialism against the field and in which the Socialists won because of superior organization and a vigorous campaign of agitation and education.22

Clearly the attempt to give a single all-inclusive explanation of these Socialist successes is something which is bound to fail. In the pragmatic terminology, it will not work. The most that can be done in the way of truthful generalization is to see in these victories certain fairly distinct types23 with reference to general character, conditions, and causes. If the matter is viewed thus, seven such types seem to stand out with a reasonable degree of definiteness.

There is first the clean-cut'victory of a broad, liberal, opportunistic, moderate type of Socialism, of comparatively slow and solid growth. This type appears mainly in the Middle West, especially in Wisconsin and the states grouped immediately around it. The communities in which it occurs are for the most part manufacturing cities and railroad centers both large and small. These cities generally have a strong foreign element in the population; and Germans, especially, foster and guide the movement, which has a real working-class basis and strong tradeunion support, but also a good deal of backing from the well-to-do and middle classes. This type of triumphant Socialism appears

"It has already been seen that in 16 of the 42 cases examined Socialism was the sole or predominant issue.

"It must not be understood that these types are intended to represent particular individual cases. Few if any actual cases would correspond exactly to the types. They are, however, the truest presentation in general terms of what is going forward.

to stand immediately for honest and efficient city administration, the equalization of tax burdens, the curbing of corporations, direct popular control of legislation and officials,24 the improvement of labor conditions and of the housing, education, and amusements of the working people, and the greatest practicable extension of municipal ownership and control. It claims to be real Socialism because it is an integral part organically of the National Socialist party, and has always the Socialist creed in the background. The type of Socialist victory thus described may be said to have resulted primarily from long-continued organization and persistent agitation and education by the Socialists along moderate and progressive lines. It is most nearly represented in perhaps 7 or 8 of the 42 cases studied, among which should be placed Milwaukee.

The second type of Socialist victory is also the immediate result of long-continued “organization, agitation, and education,” but represents a more class-conscious Socialism which places, perhaps, more emphasis on the ultimate Socialist ideas. It occurs. mainly in a line extending through the Middle West and on into the Rocky Mountains. The most significant thing about it is that it is characteristically to be found in mining communities 25 and apparently owes its existence mainly to the mineworkers' union. It rests, therefore, very largely on the support of men with European blood in their veins, but the leadership in this case seems to come most largely from the English, Scotch, Welsh, and Americans. That there is apparently this special type of Socialist victory at mining centers in otherwise unaffected territory leads to the thought that there is something in the working environment of these miners which makes them think in different terms from those about them and gives them a different outlook on life and society. That this type seems to occur more often in the bituminous and far-western fields than in the anthracite, would seem to indicate that it is due largely to the leadership of the old English stock crowded west by the influx of the eastern

"Socialists require prospective candidates to place signed resignations in the hands of their local before nomination. If elected they are expected to retire from office when the organization demands this of them. The demand is made when they reject party control. "Sometimes, however, at railroading and lake shipping centers.