tent of popular demand for measures submitted for their consideration, while the general public is educated through the newspaper accounts. The successful working of this system is undoubtedly due in large measure to the location of the capitol at Boston in the center of a metropolitan area containing about half the population of the state and within easy reach of threequarters of the people of the commonwealth. Although considerable publicity is given to the hearings, especially the important ones, through the newspapers, it is unfortunate that the committees do not keep official records of such hearings nor of their executive sessions which are accessible to the public. Committees not only grant a public hearing on each measure but the joint rules require that every bill shall be reported to the whole house on or before the second Wednesday in March which may be and usually is extended to the second Wednesday in April. Upon the expiration of this period all measures in possession of a committee must be reported within three days. This report must recommend that such bills be referred to the "next General Court," which means that the measure goes over to the next session when it may be taken from the files by any member. This report is used in cases where the committee is unable or does not wish to reach agreement. But at this stage any member may move that the original bill be substituted for the report "reference to the next General Court" and if such a motion receives the required majority the measure is brought before the whole house. Every measure must, therefore, be reported by the committee to which it has been referred prior to the last month or two of the session either favorably, adversely, or by "reference to the next General Court." Committees are thus kept from pigeonholing measures in such a manner that they never see the light of day, while the rule requiring report before a certain date avoids the last-minute rush which is common in many legislative bodies at the close of the session. The rule requiring a report on all measures of course lengthens the sessions, but it has the advantage of getting all business before the legislature in time to dispose of it in an orderly fashion. Measures reported out of committee go on the calendar of either branch, except money bills which are reported to the house, and are taken up in a specified order which cannot be set aside except by unanimous consent or a special majority and which must be completed as noted above before the expiration of the session. It is the practice of the present speaker to lay before the members of the house each week information showing the number of bills referred to each committee, the number reported by each to date, and the number still in committee as compared with the status at the same period in previous years. Recently this data has appeared weekly in the house journal. This practice keeps the members informed as to the progress of legislation and has been responsible for producing competition among the committees to finish their work as speedily as possible. Another helpful feature is the weekly publication of a "Bulletin of Committee Work and Business," which shows the committee to which each measure has been referred, the date set for hearings, the committee report, the action by each branch, and the action of the governor. This bulletin is not only furnished to the legislators but is issued for general distribution. In this way the members of the legislature and the public are furnished with accurate, carefully arranged and easily understandable information concerning the status of any measure. A daily list is also published showing the committee hearings each day as well as a calendar for each house setting forth the business which will come before it during the day. The procedure is thus arranged in such a manner as to make possible a careful consideration of every measure by a joint committee; to provide for ample publicity; the reporting of all bills to at least one house which then go through a regular order which cannot be changed except by a special majority, and the forcing of legislation step by step. Such a procedure, of course, makes it necessary for the legislature to remain in session from five to six months each year which has certain disadvantages as well as merits. It is clear, therefore, that the Massachusetts system is not adapted to states where the session is definitely limited in the constitution. Besides the unlimited duration of the session, and the rules of procedure, there is another requirement which assists the legislature in conducting its business in an orderly fashion. The rules provide that practically all proposals for legislation must be introduced on or before the second Saturday of the session. Petitions or bills coming in after that time go to the "next General Court" unless the rule is suspended by a four-fifths vote of each branch. The only exceptions to this rule are reports from the state departments, commissions or special committees appointed to investigate various matters or legislation based upon recommendations in the governor's message, which may be introduced at any time. As a matter of fact the rule is susnded when such action is regarded as desirable, but it has a very decided advantage in that, with these exceptions, measures do not come straggling in all during the sessions; the leaders and committees know early in the session what is before them and can plan accordingly. In 1922 and in 1923 the work of the legislature was still further assisted by a requirement that state officers, heads of departments, and also certain commissions which were authorized to make investigations during the recess should file copies of their proposed bills early in December, the month before the legislature convenes. The present speaker has recently sent requests to members of the legislature urging them to submit as many of their proposed bills as possible prior to the opening of the 1924 session. An attempt is thus being made to get bills filed even prior to the date fixed by the rules, so as to have them printed and distributed in order that the committees may commence work at once instead of marking time for several weeks. At the present time the legislature consists of 160 Republicans and 80 Democrats in the house and 33 Republicans and 7 Democrats in the senate, thus giving the Republican party a large majority in both branches although a somewhat smaller majority than in 1921 and 1922, when the Democrats had only five members in the senate and about 50 in the house. Partisanship, however, plays a small part in the legislature and an examination of the journal for the last few sessions fails to show a single instance of a strict party alignment on any measure. Also the legislature is not under the domination of the state organization of either party. As expressed by a competent observer and one who was for a long time a member of that body: "It especially resents anything savoring of dictation by party leaders outside the chamber. Few things would more hurt the chances of a bill than to let it be known that it was urged by the state committee of the majority party." At the same time there is most effective and able leadership among the majority party in both houses and the Republican party assumes credit if not responsibility for the showing of the legislature. The principal leaders of the house are the speaker, the floor leader who serves on the rules committee, the chairman of the committee on ways and means, the chairman of the committee on judiciary, and a half-dozen others who gain prominence because of their ability and personality. The floor leader is placed in front of the speaker so that he may be promptly recognized by him, while the chairmen of the committees on ways and means and judiciary have especially assigned seats. In the senate, with only forty members, there has not been the same need for highly developed leadership, but the president of that body and the floor leader have been largely responsible for the direction of legislation. The leadership of these officers has been effective and the positions have been held by men of unusual ability and with a broad interest in improving the substance of legislation and legislative procedure. The list includes within recent years such names as President Coolidge, who was at one time president of the senate; the present governor, Channing Cox, who served first as chairman of the judiciary committee and later as speaker; Louis A. Frothingham, now a member of Congress, and author of The Constitution and Government of Massachusetts, and the present speaker, Benjamin Loring Young, who has taken a large part in the establishment of the budget system, in the new plan for continuous consolidation of the laws, in bringing about various changes in the rules strengthening legislative procedure, and who has made a scientific study and taken a keen interest in the general improvement of legislative methods and output. The positions of president of the senate and speaker are eagerly sought for not only as places of power and honor but also because they are regarded as stepping-stones to the office of lieutenant governor, who by tradition has a strong claim on his party's nomination for the governorship. It is perhaps this factor that has furnished the incentive to leadership in the Massachusetts legislature. A presiding officer, a floor leader, or the head of an important committee, if ambitious, knows that his future depends upon his record in the chair and upon the manner in which he conducts his work. As long as a presiding officer cares to serve it is the custom to reelect him but, when a vacancy occurs by retirement or resignation, a brisk contest usually takes place. The various candidates then carry on a campaign after the close of the session prior to the primary and final elections in an attempt to pledge as many of the members or prospective members as possible. If one of the candidates has an extremely strong following the other may retire, but if this is not the case the fight is carried into the party caucus which is called two or three days before the meeting of the legislature. The chief weakness of the Massachusetts legislative system is the mass of local and special legislation. About half of the actual output of the legislature, and even a larger proportion of bills introduced, consists of special and local measures auizing cities and towns to borrow beyond their debt limits; granting pensions to specified local employees; changing the names of city officers; creating public utility, charitable, and educational corporations; regulating the location of garages in a particular city; authorizing a specified charitable society to acquire property; authorizing a particular city to sell or lease certain land held by it for playground purposes; authorizing the registration of Mary Jones as a chiropodist without examination, etc. Then, too, there are numerous measures regulating the details of administration which should fall within the jurisdiction of some department or commission. ... This means that a large part of the time of the legislature is taken up with proposals of purely local significance and with details of an administrative nature at the expense of measures of state-wide interest and large importance. The legislature has attempted to reduce the burden somewhat through the introduction of a budget system, the requirement that all local measures be advertised in the locality affected, and the requirement that petitions for pensions must come from the proper local officials rather than from individuals. Yet the bulk of special legislation is still too great. The remedy would seem to be not in a constitutional prohibition of special legislation but in the adoption of a caretul home-rule system for cities and the development of administrative machinery for passing upon requests for special and local legislation. 136. JOINT LEGISLATIVE RULES As has been shown in the preceding selection, one of the distinctive features of the legislative procedure in Massachusetts is the joint committee system. In addition to the separate rules of the two houses, there are also a number of joint rules of the Senate and House of Representatives, which are designed especially to expedite business. The following selection sets forth some of the more important of the Massachusetts joint rules, which are observed in practice with rare fidelity. In other states, notably Illinois, although each house ordinarily adopts separately its set of rules, some of the rules which are identical in both houses may be adopted jointly. [Massachusetts Joint Rules, in Manual for the General Court, 1. Joint standing committees shall be appointed at the begin ning of the political year as follows: A committee on Constitutional Law; A committee on Counties; A committee on Highways and Motor Vehicles; |