The outcome of the committee's investigation was the discovery of several superfluous employees, whose dismissal was promptly recommended. At the same time the committee felt it inadvisable to dispense with any of the fifty committee clerks under the present scheme of committee organization; and they declared that the expression "pure unadulterated graft" as used by the Governor in his message was "an unhappy choice of words to express the thought which the Governor's reply to your committee shows he had in his mind, and that it was unwarranted by the facts as they have been disclosed to this committee. ''96 (For a discussion of committee patronage see also Mr. Pollock's paper on Some Abuses Connected with Statute Law-making in this volume, pp. 665-670.)

That there was, however, some foundation for the Governor's statement that nearly half of the committees would have little occasion to meet is shown by the accompanying table, from which it appears that four committees had no bills referred to them, five had but one bill each, and thirteen others had less than an average of ten bills referred to them.

Name of Committee

TABLE V-SHOWING NUMBER OF MEASURES REFERRED TO COMMITTEES IN THE SENATE

Ways and Means.

Judiciary

VIII

CRITICISMS OF THE COMMITTEE SYSTEM

THE value of the committee system when efficiently and conscientiously administered can scarcely be overestimated. Through the method of hearings, it not only acquaints the members of the legislature with the nature of proposed legislation, but also gives them some idea as to the extent of the public demand for such measures. It operates as a wholesome check upon hasty and ill-considered legislation.97 In spite of the adverse criticisms that have been directed against it the committee system is regarded by many as "an absolute necessity for a legislative body which does not restrict the right of initiation of its individual members, and confer upon some set of persons sole power to bring in important bills."'98 One writer declares that the committee system was adopted to escape the evils of one man control. But in practice some unifying influence has been found necessary in legislation; and in this necessity lies the whole secret of the speaker's position and power.

No one, perhaps, has stated the objections to the committee system more clearly than James Bryce, who, after pointing out that the deliberations of the committees are usually secret and that the formal reports of the committees do not show how the members voted, says of the system that it "destroys the unity of the House as a legislative body"; that it "prevents the capacity of the best members from being brought to bear upon any one piece of legislation, however important"; that it "cramps de

38

593

bate"; that it "lessens the cohesion and harmony of legislation"; that it "gives facilities for the exercise of underhand, and even corrupt influence"; that it "reduces responsibility"; and that it "lowers the interest of the nation in the proceedings" of the legislature. At the same time he comes to the conclusion that "were the committees abolished and no other organization substituted, the work could not be done."'99

Another critic has offered objections to the committee system in the following words:

From the standpoint of practical politics, the most serious disadvantages arise from the following circumstances: The deliberations of committees are usually secret . . . ordinarily no record is kept of committee sessions, and of how each member votes. Consequently it is difficult, if not impossible, to fix responsibility for what takes place in the committee room. The public ordinarily knows little or nothing of committee deliberations. In strict parliamentary practice, no member is permitted to allude in the house to anything which has taken place in committee. It is largely owing to this secrecy that the legislative committees are subjected at times to tremendous pressure of private interests, so that the bills which they finally report to the House are often little more than the combined concessions to eager advocates who make their direct personal appeals to the committees concerned. Abundant opportunity is offered for underhand and corrupt influences to be brought to bear upon committeemen,100

It has been declared that the committee system lacks unity; that committees act independently of each other; that the speaker appoints members but can not remove them; that bills appropriating money are recommended by committees having no responsibility for providing new sources of revenue; and that powers of legislation are

exercised by men who are not responsible to the country at large.

Complaints have been directed against what are considered as unwarrantable delays in making committee appointments, and against the needless enlargement of important committees which renders deliberation impossible. The abolition of the sub-committee, which has been characterized as a means for keeping other members in the dark in regard to important subjects, has been recommended. Finally, there appears to be little defence of the practice of giving the defeated caucus candidates for the speakership the chairmanships of the most important committees.