The investigation in the District showed that as in many other communities about a third (in Washington 31 per cent) of the women. at work were living away from home. This answers the frequent assertion that working girls do not need to be paid a living wage because they are supported by their families and are merely supplementing the family income. The wages paid must take into account this substantial proportion of wage earners who are not living with families. Moreover, 21 per cent of the 600 women interviewed had dependents. That is, one-fifth were under the necessity of contributing to the support of others, besides supporting themselves. On the other hand, 45 per cent needed to receive outside assistance in order to make both ends meet.

REMEDY PROPOSED.

The remedy which is proposed in this bill has already been tried and found successful in various States of the Union and in other parts of the English-speaking world. It is known as the minimum wage system because it provides a method for setting wages which are not too low for subsistence and below which wages may not fall. It lays down the general principle that a competent worker must have enough food, clothing, and shelter and the other essentials to keep life going. Without these essentials, the workers' efficiency as well as their personal welfare must inevitably suffer and decline. with resulting injury also to the community of which they form so large a part.

This bill creates a permanent wage board, which in turn is to appoint a subordinate wage board for each occupation. These boards are to consist of representatives of employers, employees, and the public. After careful study of the cost of living and after public hearings, minimum wage rates are to be set for women and minors in each occupation, sufficient to meet the necessities of life, to maintain lealth and efficiency. Following the successful operation of the minimum wage system in England where it has been in effect 8 years and in Australia where it has been in effect 25 years, the first American minimum wage law was enacted in Massachusetts in 1912. This has been followed by similar legislation in 11 other States Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Kansas, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nebraska, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wisconsin. Minimum-wage legislation is no longer in an experimental stage. It has proved practicable.

The chairman of the Massachusetts Minimum Wage Commission testified that during the past five years the commission has established wage boards

in the industries of brush making, corset making, candy making, laundries, retail stores, in paper boxes, women's clothing (cloaks, suits, shirts, dresses, and waists), men's clothing and raincoats and outer farments, men's furnishings (practically everything from collar buttons to shoe strings), women's muslins and white goods; and in the manufacture of millinery, and also to deal with office women and charwomen, and similar classes of workers.

In the first industry regulated it was found after investigation that there was a remarkable increase in the actual earnings of the women. Ruinously low earnings no longer were paid and the proportion of women employed at wages higher than the prescribed minimum had

doubled. This corroborates experience in England and Australia, disproving the fear that the minimum-wage will become the maximum. Moreover, these results were accomplished without injuring business, because during the two years covered by the investigation of the Massachusetts commission, during which the minimum rates had been in operation, "the total number of brush establishments in Massachusetts had increased, the total capital invested in the industry had increased, the total value of the material used in the industry had increased, and the total value of the product had increased."

Similarly, after a year's operation of minimum rates for women employed in department stores, the Massachusetts commission investigated the results. They found that

These increases ranged all the way from 50 cents to $4.50 a week, and altogether caused an addition to the weekly pay roll for women and girls employed in retail stores amounting to more than $6,000 in the 208 establishments from which this information was obtained,

and the commission found further that

these good results have apparently been accomplished without imposing any undue financial burden upon the retail stores. The acceptance of the minimum wage required a general readjustment of rates in many stores, and in some of these the process of readjustment entailed a change of occupation on the part of a relatively small number of women. In most cases, however, where it was possible to identify and trace these women it was found that they were better off financially as a result of their change of occupation.

LEGAL QUESTIONS INVOLVED.

The provisions of the present bill have been modeled on the law of Oregon where a commission has also set rates for women employed in various occupations. The Oregon law is taken as a model because it has successfully met the test of the courts-both of the State of Oregon and of the Supreme Court of the United States and has been upheld as a proper exercise of the police powers of the state, to preserve public health and welfare. (243 U. S. 629, April, 1918.) Since that time the Supreme Courts of both Arkansas and Minnesota have upheld similar statutes.

Prof. Felix Frankfurter of the Harvard Law School, who appeared for the State of Oregon in defense of this act before the Supreme Court of the United States, pointed out at the public hearing on the Keating bill, that it met the test of constitutionality just as the Oregon statute did. The exclusive responsibility rests with Congress for protecting the life, health, and morals of women and children in ndustry in the District of Columbia. Modern industrial conditions and the increasing employment of women have created new and difficult problems and it is to assist in solving such problems that this legislation is directed. It is not only an exercise of the police power to safeguard health and morals; it is, further, a positive measure of constructive value, to encourage and strengthen the most valuable of our national resources-the human resources of the State and Nation.

AMENDING AN ACT CREATING A BUREAU OF WAR-RISK INSURANCE.

MAY 16, 1918.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union and ordered to be printed.

Mr. RAYBURN, from the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, submitted the following

REPORT.

[To accompany H. R. 12037.]

The Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, to whom was referred the bill H. R. 12037, having considered the same, report thereon with a recommendation that it pass.

The bill has the approval of the Treasury Department. The Acting Secretary of the Treasury submitted the following letter:

APRIL 25, 1918.

MY DEAR CONGRESSMAN: On the 22d instant I had the honor to transmit a bill covering the amendments which we thought necessary and desirable for Articles I, III, and IV of the war-risk insurance act, and at that time I stated that we would be pleased to advise further within the present week as to the effect of the proposed amendments and the reasons for offering them.

We are proposing to strike out the requirement that injury must be suffered “in line of duty" before compensation is payable and to insert a provision that it is sufficient if the injury is suffered "in the service." We are not inclined to insist upon the retention of the substitute phraseology, though it is, we think, desirable to get away from the test as to "line of duty.' This test has given rise to many conflicting decisions and has been the source of much uncertainty as to whether or not a given case is within the scope of the act.

Under the present law compensation is payable to a mother only when she is widowed and is not payable to a father under any circumstances. We propose to amend the sections in question-sections 301 and 302-so as to provide for the payment of compensation to a mother or father, or both, if they are dependent upon the man who entered the service. Cases have been presented to the bureau where a soldier's dependent mother is taking care of an invalid and helpless husband, but under this act she is entitled to nothing whatever because she is not widowed. The amendment here proposed would cover all such cases.

The automatic insurance provided for in section 401 is, in one respect, similar to compensation, for it is payable to a mother only when widowed and under no circumstances is payable to a father. Our proposal is to make it payable to a mother, or if there is no mother, to a father.

A further proposal is to enlarge the class of persons who may receive compensation so as to include the widower of a woman in the service if such widower was dependent

upon the deceased for support. These cases will be few, but if the proposed amendment is enacted the bureau will be able to satisfactorily dispose of the exceptional

cases.

The foregoing amendments providing for the payment of compensation and automatic insurance to a soldier's mother regardless of whether she is widowed, and also for payments to his father, are made retroactive so that they will be effective as of October 6, 1917, the date of the approval of the act. The effect of these provisions, as well as of the provision bringing the dependent widower within the benefits of the act, will be to increase the load on the compensation and insurance appropriations now available. We have not as yet, however, estimated the probable increase.

It is proposed to extend the insurance and compensation benefits of the act to West Point cadets, Annapolis midshipmen, and Coast Guard cadets and cadet engineers; and it is also proposed to enlarge the permitted class of beneficiaries for insurance to include the persons who have stood in loco parentis to the insured for a period of five years. The first of these proposals recognizes the close relationship of these members of the military and naval forces to active war service, and the second proposal is prompted by many cases of the character suggested in the amendment itself.

Another proposal is to terminate the compensation and insurance rights of any person who is discharged from the service on the ground of being an enemy alien or a conscientious objector. We trust that the reasons for this proposal are obvious.

In addition to the proposals above set forth, effecting certain changes in the substantive provisions of the act, there are several others dealing with administrative features. Thus, section 23 is amended to clarify the situation as to the appointment of guardians for minor claimants; section 313 is modified for the purpose of making a more workable plan for subrogating the Government to causes of action arising by reason of injuries to persons in the service; and a new penalty section is added to enable the bureau to more effectively curb fraudulent claims.

Yours, very truly,

Hon. T. W. SIMS,

JAS. H. MOYLE, Acting Secretary.

Chairman Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce,

House of Representatives.

The first amendment brings under the definition of "parent,' father through adoption and mother through adoption. It also provides that the term "parent" shall include a person who has stood in loco parentis to the enlisted person for a period not less than five years next preceding October 6, 1917, or the person's enlistment or entrance into the service of the United States.

These amendments are absolutely necessary for the reasons that many apparent injustices are done by their not having been included in the original act.

Four new sections are added to the bill to be known as sections 27, 28, 29, and 30.

Section 2 of this bill amending section 23 of the act is for the purpose of meeting the situation that has grown up in reference to the appointment of guardians. Under this section the bureau can proceed with the making of payments where no guardian has been appointed. It seemed to your committee that this should not be done, especially in reference to insurance and compensation, for the reasons that payments of insurance involve considerable amounts and will run over a long period of time; but it seemed that under article 2 or for the allotment that the money ought to be made immediately available for the current needs of the enlisted man. Hence the amendment.

Section 27 is a new section and adds a new penalty for anyone who collects money under articles 2, 3, or 4 of the act with intent to defraud the United States Government or any person in the naval or military forces.

Section 28 simply provides a uniform rule about money received under articles 2, 3, or 4 of the act, shall not be assignable and shall not be subject to claims of creditors.