In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Reviewed by:
  • The Three Governors Controversy: Skullduggery, Machinations, and the Decline of Georgia’s Progressive Politics by Charles S. Bullock III, Scott E. Buchanan, and Ronald Keith Gaddie
  • Maarten Zwiers
The Three Governors Controversy: Skullduggery, Machinations, and the Decline of Georgia’s Progressive Politics. By Charles S. Bullock III, Scott E. Buchanan, and Ronald Keith Gaddie. (Athens, Ga., and London: University of Georgia Press, 2015. Pp. xiv, 292. $32.95, ISBN 978-0-8203-4734-9.)

For a short time in early 1947, Georgia had three men claiming to be governor. The Three Governors Controversy: Skullduggery, Machinations, and the Decline of Georgia’s Progressive Politics describes the events leading up to this unusual circumstance in great detail. Written by three political scientists, the book not only offers many anecdotes on Georgia politics in the 1930s and 1940s but also provides statistical data about election returns and voting behavior in the state legislature. Eugene Talmadge, “the legendary Wild Man from Sugar Creek,” plays a central role in the narrative (p. 1). His untimely death in December 1946, right after he had won election as chief executive of the state, caused the gubernatorial crisis in Georgia.

In six chronological chapters, The Three Governors Controversy explores the background and consequences of the 1946 campaign for the governorship. In the first chapter, the authors describe the political culture of Georgia during the Great Depression. They devote specific attention to the county unit system, which explains why a rural demagogue like Eugene Talmadge could win elections in a state with sizable cities, most notably Atlanta. Because the county unit structure gave disproportionate electoral power to rural counties, Talmadge did not need to win the more densely populated (and more progressive) urban regions. The conflict between Talmadge’s “rustic” forces and the progressives [End Page 975] intensified during and right after World War II, as industrialization and urbanization accelerated in Georgia and as African Americans became more vocal in their opposition to the Jim Crow laws Talmadge passionately defended (p. 46).

After setting the stage the authors delve into the 1946 primary and general elections and the aftermath of these campaigns. The book’s subtitle promises stories about skullduggery and machinations, and there is plenty of both in this segment of the narrative. The sixty-four-page chapter on the 1946 Democratic primary summarizes the platforms of the three candidates who participated in the race, describes the attempts of the Talmadge forces to purge black voters, and ends with a statistical analysis of the election results. The final part of the book recounts the events after Eugene Talmadge’s death, when sitting governor Ellis G. Arnall refused to give up his post. While Talmadge’s name was the only one to appear on ballots, his son Herman E. Talmadge claimed the governorship after finishing the general election with the largest number of write-in votes. Yet newly elected lieutenant governor Melvin E. Thompson maintained he was now the legitimate successor to Arnall. Although the state legislature voted in favor of Herman Talmadge, the Georgia Supreme Court decided in March 1947 that Thompson was the rightful new governor until special elections for the office could be held. Herman Talmadge quietly withdrew from the scene but took power in November 1948 after defeating Thompson in the special election. The authors argue the victory of the younger Talmadge in the 1948 special election signaled the decline of progressive politics in Georgia.

The last part of the subtitle—the decline of Georgia’s progressive politics—receives much less attention than the skullduggery and machinations surrounding the governors controversy. This is a shame, because it would have enhanced the significance of the book. There is in-depth coverage of various political shenanigans, but the great amount of facts often blurs the more interesting storyline of the work: the downfall of progressivism in the state. The book thus misses an obvious opportunity to clarify how this decline fits into the wider story of the failure of progressive reform in the South after World War II. The epilogue asks, what if the Talmadge forces had not prevailed? But this peculiar segment of what-if history does not explain a great deal. After all...

pdf

Share