¹ For a discussion of SPD party finances see Schuetz, Klaus, “Die Sozialdemokratie im Nachkriegsdeutschland,” in Parteien in der Bundesrepublik (Berlin, 1955), pp. 121 ff.Google Scholar Schuetz notes that there also exists a certain “lack of clarity” as to the sources of funds which the SPD executive's statements attribute to “special contributions,” “collections,” etc.

² Former Interior Minister Robert Lehr confirmed to the author that the cabinet at the time rejected further consideration of the Parties law, which it considered too difficult and potentially dangerous. On this point see also Rabus, Guenther, “Die Innere Ordnung der politischen Parteien,” Archiv des oeffentlichen Rechts, Vol. 78, No. 2 (Tuebingen, 1952), p. 163Google Scholar. On February 21, 1957, an FDP spokesman in the Bundestag expressed “regret that the Parties Law has still not been brought about. We know that drafts of this law have been lying in the Ministry of Interior for six years.” The CDU spokesman retorted that the Minister of the Interior had appointed a special commission to prepare material for presentation. This commission was due to make its report in April, 1957.

³ Kirchheimer, Otto, “Parteistruktur und Massendemokratie in Europa,” Archiv des oeffentlichen Rechts, Vol. 79, No. 3 (Tuebingen, 1953), p. 319Google Scholar.

⁴ Hielscher, Erwin, “Die Finanzierung des politischen Parteien,” Politische Studien, August 1955 (Munich), p. 6Google Scholar.

⁵ von der Heydte, Friedrich August and Sacherl, Karl, Soziologie der deutschen Parteien (Munich, 1955), p. 166Google Scholar.

⁶ So there are sixteen CDU Land parties even though (including the Saar and West Berlin but excluding Bavaria) the CDU is organized in only ten Laender. As a rule the provincial parties founded before the official creation of the new Laender maintained their independent status. Thus Land Northrhine-Westphalia has two separate CDU Land parties, one for Westphalia and one for Rhineland. Similarly Lower Saxony has three CDU Land parties, one each for Hannover, Brunswick and Oldenburg. Wuerttemberg-Baden, finally, has four CDU Land parties, one each for South-Baden, North-Baden, North-Wuerttemberg and Wuerttemberg-Hohenzollern.

⁷ Dr. Bruno Heck, the CDU's Federal Agent, made the first public announcement of the Federal party's membership figures at the 1956 party convention at Stuttgart. In contrast to considerably higher estimates previously accepted by German political scientists, Heck said that CDU membership in April, 1954, had been 215,000 and that it had then risen to 245,000 by January, 1956. For an examination of the CDU's membership structure see the writer's article in a forthcoming issue of the Revue Française de Science Politique.

⁸ Cited from “Bericht des Landesgeschaeftsfuehrers der CDU des Rheinlandes ueber das 3. Quartel 1954,” mimeographed, Archive CDU Rhineland, Cologne.

⁹ Cited from “Ergebniss der Konferenz der Landesgeschaeftsfuehrer vom 17.1. 1951 in Koenigswinter,” mimeographed, Archive Federal CDU, Bonn. More forceful methods were employed in a Schleswig-Holstein Kreis, whose practices were recommended for adaptation in “Deutscher Wahlblock Rundschreiben Nr. 11, 2 Juni 1950,” Archive CDU Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel: “It was made clear to the Buergermeisters and Landraete in a friendly fashion that they had been elected to these positions as the trusted representatives of their party, and that they had a special duty to fulfill in the present difficult situation. Those who did not want to recognize this were informed that a negative position on their part might have unhappy consequences.”

¹⁰ The principle of state subsidy of political parties was endorsed by the 1955 convention of the “Sozialausschuesse” representing the Christian Democratic trade unionists, and also in an article in the right-wing Catholic Rheinischer Merkur (Cologne, 22 April 1955)Google Scholar. Among its many critics have been the jurists and political scientists on the Electoral Law Commission, whose report noted that the idea was “difficult to reconcile with the political function of parties in the state.” Grundlagen eines deutschen Wahlrechls: Bericht des vom Bundesministerium des Innern eingesetzten Wahlrechtskommission (Bonn, 1955), p. 72Google Scholar.

¹¹ Von der Heydte, op. cit., p. 169.

¹² In his post-1953 election report, Federal Agent Heck noted that the personnel and material costs of Kreis agents offices would have to be budgeted at a very minimum of DM 800 per month, “a financing which will generally not be possible from membership dues.” He also stressed that the hitherto widely prevailing Kreis agents' salaries of DM 400 monthly did not suffice to attract “qualified personnel.” See “Die Bundestagswahlen vom 6. September 1953,” mimeographed, December, 1953, Archive Federal CDU, Bonn.

¹³ Letter Kreis Husum to Land Office, 26 June 1950, Archive CDU Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Folio D V.

¹⁴ Cited from “Protokolle der Landesleitung,” meetings of 17 July and 14 August 1948, Archive CDU Hessen, Frankfurt, Folio “Landesleitung II.”

¹⁵ “Niedersachsen CDU Rundschreiben,” 5 December 1949, mimeographed, Archive CDU Lower Saxony, Hannover.

¹⁶ Cited from “Protokoll der Landesvorsitzenden Konferenz,” meeting of January 8–9, 1949, Archive Federal CDU, Bonn, Folio “Landesvorsitzenden.”

¹⁷ Cited from “Protokoll des Wahlrechts und Propaganda Ausschusses,” meeting of 19 May 1949 (private), Archive Doerpinghaus, Roisdorf/Rhein, Folio 24.

¹⁸ Cited from “Protokoll des CDU Britisch-Zonen Ausschusses,” meeting of 14 October, 1949, Archive Doerpinghaus, Folio 22.

¹⁹ Thus the Rhineland Land agent, Dr. Schreiber, reported to the Land Executive in June, 1950: “Against the will of all Kreis parties and of the Land executive there have again been business collections for the parties' election funds. Connected with this collection drive of the business community (Wirtschaft), was the attempt to influence both the party's policy and its selection of candidates. There is also the fact that Business puts at our disposal only a fraction of the money collected.” Later, in March, 1951, he reported that “There is a tendency within the Federation of German Industry to have a large political fund constantly at its disposal, but to make available to the parties, especially the CDU, only the means needed to meet current expenses.” Cited from “Bericht des Landesgeschaeftsfuehrers der CDU Rheinland,” reports of June, 1950 and March, 1951, mimeographed, Archive CDU Rhineland, Cologne.

²⁰ See Unternehmermillionen kaufen politische Machtl Finanzierung und Korrumpierung der Regierungsparteien durch die Managerschicht der Wirtschaft, Herausgegeben vom Vorstand der Sozialdemokratischen Partei Deutschlands (Bonn, 1953)Google Scholar. The material reprinted in this booklet is generally recognized to be genuine, though its presentation is naturally tailored to propagandists purposes. See von der Heydte, op. cit., p. 346.

²¹ Unternehmerbrief, 7 August 1952.

²² The exact formulation of this clause: “Die Parteien erklaeren sich bereit einige Ihrer vorgesehenen Spitzenkandidaten dem Verein bekanntzugeben, wobei der Verein das Recht haben soil von diesen Namen Gebrauch zu machen.” The extremely guarded phrasing of this sentence indicates the party leaders' attempt not to make any explicit commitments and to maintain the appearance of reserving to themselves final decision on the placement of candidates. Cited from minutes of meeting of 28 November 1952, Folio “1953 Wahl,” Archive CDU Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel. Other citations in this section also refer to material in this folder.

²³ “Bericht des Landesgeschaeftsfuehrers ueber die Landtagswahl vom 27 Juni 1954,” mimeographed, Archive CDU Rhineland, Cologne.

²⁴ A certain amount of unfavorable publicity was cast on CDU finance operations in the summer of 1956 as the result of a court action between a dismissed CDU accountant and the CDU Federal Treasurer. These revelations provided material for, among others, a full-length article in Der Spiegel, 5 September 1956.

²⁵ The controversy over the adoption of the amendment is mirrored only fleetingly in the minutes of the committee and of the plenary session, where the discussion was limited to a single Socialist speech. See Stenographische Berichte des Deutschen Bundestages, II Wahlperiode, 16 November 1954, pp. 2683, 2732Google Scholar.

²⁶ Ibid., 10 January 1957, pp. 10123 ff.

²⁷ Ibid., 21 February 1957, pp. 10984 ff.

²⁸ For a balanced journalistic estimate and description see the article series in the Westdeutsche Allgemeine, Essen, 19–24 July 1956.

²⁹ Kropff, H. F. J., Die Erste Public Relations Campagne in Deutschland: Erfolgreiches Beispiel der Anwendung von Prinzipien, Methoden und Mitteln der Wirtschaftswerbung zur Ausbreitung nationaler, sozialer und kulturellen Ideen, (Frankfurt, 1954)Google Scholar.

³⁰ Die Waage: Ein Bericht ueber die Taetigkeit in den Jahren, 1952–4 (Cologne, 1955)Google Scholar.