1. It can hardly be anticipated that one who once acquired a leadership in a group will be in a posit'on to regain it immediately by rejoining the group after a temporary absence. Eventually he tends to be obsorbed into the group, remaining a mere follower under the pressure of its cohesive force. And yet, sooner or later, he will presumably regain the leadership. My study aims to present an approach to the analysis of group morale in relation to the group and its former leader. 2. Our experiments of April 1953 were shared by three sessions. In the first session, two groups, each being made up of four children and a leader-child, had a co-operative work for 30 minutes. In the second session, each group did thirty minutes' work twice with its leader excluded. In the last session the same work was carried on once with each group, including its former leader. 3. Reactions equally observed with each group. (a) Rejoining the group, the former leader askes many questions of the process of the work done during his absence. (b) Rejoining the group, he becomes much less active in his directing group affairs. (c) A new leader appeares during his absence. (d) In the last session, the new leader continuously hold away over his group, supplanting the former leader. (e) In the third session, little or no increasing sign is shown that the members sought any command or approval of their first leader. (f) It remains undetermined, however, Whether or not the new leader in the second session was asked for his order-or approval. (g) The first leader, reluctant to participate in the group work, claims to divert the operation into another channel by offering anew project, which, however, has been rejected by the members. In effect, he failes to assume group control. (h) When and how he will regain the leadership remains to be solved.