should be the duties of the state to its citizens. This doctrine attained an advanced state of development with the enactment of insurance against sickness, accidents and old age during the period 1883-1889. § 21. Influence of Fichte and Hegel.-The philosophers Fichte and Hegel planted the germ of socialistic doctrine which took root during that period and which has since been developed by the German socialists to so high a degree. Concerning the influence of these writers it is said by John Graham Brooks: "The three laws of insurance against sickness, accident, and old age and invalidity confessedly rest upon a conception of society which is sharply opposed to what is loosely called individualism, or laissez faire. In the portentous mass of this insurance literature the thought is constantly expressed that the weaker members of society will be excluded from all that accords with our usual sense of justice and fair dealing until the centers of social influence, of which the first and most powerful is the state, become imbued with the idea that a large proportion of the misfortunes, sickness, accident, and premature age are social in origin rather than individual; that a vast part of these evils spring, not from the fault of the individual, but from sources over which the individual has little or no control. The philosopher Fichte applies this thought with such eloquent power to the duty of the state as to result in a distinct practical change of the state's attitude."1 The social philosopher Lassalle shaped much social legislation in Germany. He was greatly influenced by two books written by Fichte, one in 1796, the other, Der geschlossene Handelsstaat, 1800. Lassalle quotes many sentences from this latter work about the duties of the State which in all essentials are the same as the innum 1 Fourth Special Report of Commissioner of Labor, 1893, p. 19. erable utterances that filled the discussion upon state insurance during the years which immediately preceded the enactment of these laws. The State, according to Fichte's conception, “is not to be negative nor to have mere police function, but to be filled with Christian concern, especially for the weaker members. The conceptions of property and contract are such as compel such intervention on the part of the superior authority in order to realize the ends of justice and equality among men." It is necessary to deal with these things in order to understand the theory of the State's duty to which Bismarck and the economists constantly made their appeals during the period of agitation which preceded this legislation. § 22. Views of Sismondi.-Sismondi, another of the powerful writers on this subject, said in 1819: “We regard the government as having the duty of protecting the weak against the strong." He contrasts sharply the permanent interests of society as a whole with fluctuating personal and private interests amidst which the weak and ignorant may go to the wall. Precisely as in the case of Professor Winkelblech he seems to have been. converted to this view by a journey through certain industrial centers of Europe. He describes the unhappy condition of the laborers in the manufacturing centers, adding at the close: "I became persuaded that governments were upon the wrong road." "A state may be very miserable indeed even though a few individuals gather colossal fortunes." § 23. Views of Winkelblech.-Professor Winkelblech, prior to 1850,2 in criticising the liberal school, maintained "the necessity of a general obligatory insurance as alone adequate to protect laborers in their struggle with the conditions of the great industries." He 2 Organization of Labor, Vol. II, p. 328. saw in this a sure way of helping on toward a greater equality of conditions, and above all, that such insurance would free labor from the haunting sense of insecurity, which was one of the chief evils to be remedied. § 24. Views of Schaeffle, father of compulsory state insurance. Dr. Schaeffle is called the father of compulsory state insurance. He conceived the plan in the year 1867 or prior thereto. He advanced the idea of such insurance in his work on Kapitalismus und Socialismus.3 As Joseph Chamberlain has since done in England, he maintained that the existing charity administration was not only a vicious sort of communism at its worst, but did not even begin to reach its end. Even if state insurance was socialistic, it was less harmfully so, in Schaeffle's opinion, than the existing forms of charity. In place of the old charity he demanded a "nationalized general self-provision for the whole life" (planmässige Selbstfürsorge für das ganze Leben). The expense must be paid by the employer, but would in his opinion become a part of the cost of production. Though the laborers pay the contributions, their minimum wage would rise by that amount. He found in this compulsory insurance a close analogy to compulsory education, an argument also used by those who have pleaded in England for old age pensions. § 25. Views of Wagner.-The same arguments were made against this interference by the State for the protection of the weak that are made today against the compulsory workmen's compensation acts that are being adopted. These laws were opposed because they were socialistic and paternalistic. The second, strongest opposition was that of private insurance companies of whom Professor Wagner said "Your own selfish interests blind you to the merits of a question whose only 3 pp. 700-702, 731. decision can come from the higher ground of general social welfare." The most forceful leader of the social political economists, whose agitation covered a period of sixteen years prior to the passage of the insurance laws, was Professor Wagner. His point of view is concisely stated in the following quotation:1 "Perhaps the most prominent thought in this relation is Wagner's assertion that the great mass of weaker laborers will not be helped out of their condition by the free struggle of private business interests. He holds that these masses are unable to cope with the conditions which capitalistic production imposes upon them. His reaction against the current economic individualism is sharp and direct. The State has here not merely an exceptional task to perform, but the permanent duty of strengthening the laborer in his struggle. Not only should co-operative groups in every form be favored, but trade organizations as well. There is no limit, except the purely practical one, to the State's duty of interference. The very meaning of the 'social question' to Wagner is this putting of the laborer into a position where the struggle for existence can be made as fair as the nature of the problem admits. That the odds are now greatly against the weaker workers is not only admitted, but vigorously maintained. Neither private interest, nor charity, nor self-help is adequate to do this work of evening up conditions. The State, inspired by strong moral purpose, must act a bold and positive part in this programme." § 26. State insurance a matter of German origin.— State insurance was long an economic and social theory before it became a fact, and the general principles to which the theory appealed for its sanction were used in 4 Fourth Special Report, p. 23. Austria, France and England with frank acknowledgment that Germany had originated the idea out of which it all grew.5 * § 27. Basis of compulsory insurance. These ideas, respecting the duty of the State to the weaker members of society, point to the same conclusion as are deduced by Chief Justice Waite in Munn v. Illinois, 94 U. S. 113, in which he announced the conditions under which a public interest arose in the property of a person or corporation owing to the manner in which the property was used and consequently when and to what extent the State through the exercise of its police powers had a right to exercise its taxing power to take private property and to interfere with private contracts for the protection of the health, safety and general welfare of the public. To a greater extent can this be done by the government of the Dominion of Canada, under the British North America Act, Section 92, paragraph 13. The views of Wagner in this report are set forth in the following paragraphs: "Public revenue to be so raised as to allow of the 'communistic' character of public bodies, above described, being developed wherever decided objections, consequent upon the peculiar circumstances of the case, do not exist. This 'communistic' character to be strengthened in favor of the poorer and socially weaker classes, with whom the economic and social struggle for existence and for social advancement is severest, by means of a system of administrative measures calculated especially to benefit them, yet the cost of which shall be defrayed by the general revenue and taxes; but this 'communistic' character of State activity to be weaker where the interests of the well-to-do and richer classes 5 Fourth Special Report, p. 24. 6 Fourth Special Report, p. 25. |