wages for disability, and in case of death, funeral expenses, and from one to two thirds of the estimated wages to the widow and children or to other dependent relatives.

4. Compensation should be the exclusive remedy, replacing completely the old method of suits in court.

5. The employer should be required to take out insurance under a plan of state insurance. In order to carry out effectively the above provisions it is necessary to create an accident and insurance board.

Workmen's compensation legislation was retarded in its enactment and enforcement on account of the adverse attitude of courts which held such laws unconstitutional. Though constitutional amendments and changes in the laws have removed some of the objections raised by the courts, the operation of compensation acts is necessarily restricted by judicial interpretation of constitutional inhibitions. Despite these obstacles, laws have now been enacted in most of the states, and their administration has, it is generally conceded, greatly improved the methods of paying workers for losses due to industrial accidents.1 In 1916 a new Federal compensation act became a law. This act replaced the earlier law of 1908 and is significant in that better provisions are made for about a half million civil employees of the United States government.

Trade unions and fraternal societies began the system of sick benefits. The work of these societies were first encouraged by law through state subsidies and regulated accordingly. Out of these beginnings has grown the state systems of sickness insurance. Four per cent of the income of wage workers is now expended for the care of sickness and burial insurance. This amount, if collected from employers and wage earners, can, through state efforts, be made to give better medical service, to cover an indemnity for loss of wages, and to aid in securing better public

1 See Report of Commission of the American Federation of Labor and the National Civic Federation to study operation of State Workmen's Compensation Laws, Senate Document No. 419, Sixty-third Congress, Second Session.

health. While this form of insurance has not received favorable consideration in many states, a number of states are preparing, as a result of special studies by commissions of investigation, to accept the principle of universal workman's health insurance. Investigating commissions have advocated

. . . the inclusion of practically all low paid wage earners under a system providing adequate medical care and financial aid during illness; support of the system by joint contributions from employers, employees, and the state; and the entire exclusion of profit-making insurance companies from the field.

In addition to accident and health insurance, the majority of European nations have made similar provisions for old age and dependency. The United States, it

is claimed, is "the only great industrial nation in the civilized world that has not already attempted a practical and permanent solution of this problem of old age and dependency."1 The most recent development in social betterment is the attempt of the state to provide insurance against unemployment. There are two methods of state aid to the unemployed-one is to subsidize the relief afforded by trade-unions and the other to provide compulsory state insurance for certain industries. The system of subsidy of the trade-unions has been adopted especially in European countries; the compulsory system has been undertaken by Great Britain. The British Act went into effect in 1912 and was applied to approximately 2,500,000 wage earners. Contributions are made three eighths by employers, three eighths by wage earners, and two eighths by the state. This form of social insurance has not been adopted in the United States, although the serious difficulties involved in unemployment call for more effective remedies than have been applied. Social insurance is still in the experimental stage and it is as yet a question how

1L. W. Squier, Old Age Dependency in the United States (The Macmillan Company, 1912), p. 325.

far the state should go in bearing the burdens of the ills and weaknesses of our industrial system.

REGULATION OF EDUCATION AND SOCIAL WELFARE

Education.-From being a matter of wholly private initiative, as was the case in the United States as late as the middle of the nineteenth century, education has now become a very important function of government, both local and state. Moreover, present tendencies seem to indicate that education will become a matter of increasing concern of the national government. No longer is it a question to be determined by parents whether or not their children shall receive instruction in the rudiments of knowledge, nor is it left to parents to decide the subjects in which this instruction shall be given. The question likewise of the fairness of taxing an individual for the purpose of educating another person's child is no longer a debatable one. In the early history of the United States the great majority of the people obtained what education they possessed through the rugged experiences gained in developing a new country. Where knowledge thus gained was supplemented by additional learning it usually meant little more than the ability to read, write, and cipher, which was acquired in a private school or through individual initiative. From this humble beginning the question of education has developed until it has come to be looked upon as a matter of public concern and as the greatest security of democracy, and, consequently, a very important function which should be performed by the government.

Public education to be provided for by general taxation was at first considered as a fanciful dream of the reformer and was regarded by the practical man of affairs as a futile and unnecessary project. But by the middle of the nineteenth century the restrictions which had previously been set for the electorate had been removed to a considerable degree. With the extension of the right of suffrage educa

tion came slowly to be regarded not as a luxury to be indulged in at the will of the individual, but rather as the necessary foundation for a government which was to respond to the wish of the electorate. The maintenance of public schools from this time to the present became and has remained one of the primary functions of government. At first the function was performed almost entirely as a local one, but before long the state governments made specific requirements of localities and assisted in the carrying out of these requirements by the appropriation and application of state funds to meet local needs.

Along with the feeling that an education was the birthright of every child and with the giving to the child of an opportunity to come into his right has come a steady extension of the curricula of the public schools. The economic and industrial changes which occurred after the Civil War soon depleted the home of its ability to furnish the experiences and training to fit the child for the complex life which resulted from these changes. Hence, the public schools have been made to supply the deficiency and the curricula have come to include, in addition to the rudiments of knowledge, cultural and scientific studies, and training along educational and professional lines. What formerly was considered a function of the home or shop has now passed to the community to perform, usually with the aid and supervision of the state and along some lines under the guidance and assistance of the national government.

The World War revealed to the public, in a more or less sensational way, the fact of which educators have long been aware—namely, that the problems concerning popular education in the United States are both numerous and serious. To which department or departments of government, national, state, or local the solution of these problems will ultimately rest it is not necessary here to discuss. But since the government has assumed the task of popular education and since alarming deficiencies in it have become evident, a more serious attempt will necessarily have to be

made to bring popular education abreast with the present needs of a democracy.

Among these deficiencies which are now obvious are the lack of any unity in the educational policies and the wide diversity of educational opportunities which exist among the different states and even among different sections of the same state. The kind of education a child receives depends pretty largely on the community where the child happens to have been born and reared. If the citizens of a community are enlightened, progressive, and ambitious, the educational opportunities afforded by that community will doubtless reflect these qualities. If, on the other hand, nonprogressiveness, narrow-mindedness, and backwardness are the chief attributes, the school generation suffers accordingly. Just how the advantages of popular education are to be equalized more nearly than is now the case is still to be determined.

Also, the enforcement of the Selective Service Act revealed deplorable facts relative to illiteracy and physical inabilities of the young men of army age, and also brought to light the failure of a large number of aliens to become full-fledged American citizens even though they have lived and earned their livelihood in the United States for many years more than are required in order to become naturalized. Here again the question arises as to how the government may best function in the way of fitting this exceedingly large number of illiterates, physically unfit, and un-Americanized persons to assume a just proportion of the responsibilities involved in a self-governing group.

The lack of training and the immaturity of those entering the teaching profession is likewise deplorable. This is especially true of the personnel of the primary and secondary schools. The lack of tempting chances of promotion to well-paid positions is leading many ambitious young persons to look to other professions and avocations for their livelihood. While it is true that the teacher's best and most satisfying remunerations are not to be counted