to suppose that very generally the women are replacing men. In addition to the fact that industry has been socialized, is the further fact that new employments have arisen, such as typewriting, which have given new work and increased the number of working women, without taking work which was formerly performed by men.

One of the most important topics under the protection of employees relates to employers' liability. Attention is called to the unsatisfactory condition of the law in the United States, and it is shown that not only very few workingmen of the United States receive compensation for accidents but that the number tends to decrease, unless the common law is supplemented by statutes. One great obstacle to the recovery of damages is the doctrine of fellow servant, by which the employer escapes liability for the negligence of his agent in case the injured workingman is a fellow employee of the agent. There is also the further doctrine of contributory negligence, which relieves the employer, although the larger part of the blame may be his. There is also the further doctrine that the employee assumes risk if he was aware of the danger and did not call attention to it, although to have called attention to the danger might have resulted in his discharge. The most instructive part of this portion of the final report is that which establishes the fact that to an increasing extent we have to do in industrial accidents, not with blame attaching either to employee or employer, but with an industrial risk which is part and parcel of modern industrial methods. The ideal then is to make the industry carry the industrial risk rather than to attempt to place the responsibility upon individuals, whether employees or employers. This is the general principle which has received acceptance in Germany in the insurance scheme which provides for employees who suffer from industrial accidents. The difficulty of reaching this ideal in our country is described, and the English employer's liability act is recommended as the present ideal. The English act places the responsibility in a general way upon the employer and prevents contracting out of the liability.

The fourth main section, dealing with labor on public works, is a short one and can be dismissed with a few words. The advantages and disadvantages of public works are discussed. It is shown that in the case of federal public works, production is usually far more costly than in private works, but it is denied that, generally speaking, this is due to defects inherent in public undertakings. So far as this increased costliness is due to better labor conditions it appears to be favored. In a general way it is recommended that government should be a model employer, while maintaining the highest possible degree of efficiency.

Turning now to the formal recommendations of the commission, the reader must again be reminded that these are distinct from the final review, or any other reviews. The recommendations of the commission are the formal official action, whereas the other parts of the report are largely the work of the experts employed by the commission. The commission, first of all, recommend a regulation of the hours of labor in industrial occupations. Uniformity among the states is emphasized as especially important. The opinion is expressed, however, that limitation of the hours of labor should be restricted to persons under twenty one, except in special industries where employment for too many hours becomes positively a menace to the health, safety and well being of the community. It is recommended that no children should be employed under the age of fourteen, and that accompanying labor legislation there should be educational restrictions providing that no child may be employed in factories, shops or stores in large cities, who cannot read and write. In all public work it is recommended that the length of the working day should be fixed at eight hours. It is recognized that this discriminates between public and private employment, but the hope is expressed that private employment may be brought up to the level of public employment in this particular. It is further recommended that the federal government should regulate the hours of labor of employees engaged in interstate commerce.

It is recommended that the states should provide for cash payments and should legislate against company stores.

The careless use of injunctions is pronounced reprehensible, and blanket injunctions against all the world, or against numerous unnamed defendants, as well as the practice of indirectly enforcing the contract for personal service by enjoining employees from quitting work, should be discouraged not only by popular sentiment, but by intelligent judicial opinion. There should be no unnecessary departure from the time honored principle that the contract of personal service can not be specifically enforced, because to do so entails a condition of practical slavery.

Turning to intimidation, the New York statute relative to railway labor is recommended for general adoption. The New York statute, protecting the political rights of laborers, is also recommended as a model.

The practice of giving a preferred lien to employees for debts due for wages and salaries is approved and its extension recommended.

The subject of convict labor, which is treated in a separate volume, is referred to in the recommendations of the commission. In this separate report the New York plan, in accordance with which convicts manufacture goods for the use of state institutions, seems to meet with approval, so far as it is practicable. It is recommended that in all cases the punishment and reformation of the prisoner be placed above revenue considerations, and that a system be devised which should give all prisoners employment in productive labor, with the least possible competition with free labor. In the recommendations of the commission, it is said to be clear that congress should legislate to prevent the importation and sale of convict made goods from one state into another, without the consent of the state into which the goods are imported or where they are sold.

The factory acts of Massachusetts and New York are recommended, as well as the sweat shop laws of New York, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania and Ohio.

The enactment of a code of laws for railway labor is considered to be within the province of congress, as it falls under the interstate powers. It is especially recommended

that in such a code there should be a careful definition and regulation of employers' liability and of the hours of labor.

The protection of trade union labels is recommended. It is further recommended that conspiracy should be defined and limited. Laws against blacklisting and the use of private police detectives are approved.

The commission finds that the laws of the states with respect to conciliation and arbitration have been found effective for purposes of conciliation, but that so far as arbitration, strictly defined, is concerned, they have not accomplished any large results. Further efforts in the direction of conciliation and arbitration are recommended, and the commission believe that whoever inaugurates a lockout or strike without first petitioning for arbitration, or assenting to it when offered, should be subjected to an appropriate penalty. It is recommended also that arbitration should not be restricted to a public board, but that the parties to the dispute should be permitted to choose arbitrators if they prefer.

Finally it is recommended that all the states not now having them should establish labor bureaus, and that their duties should be extended, and that they should co-operate with the legislative bodies of the states and with congress in legislation by means of their recommendations.

These recommendations are signed by eleven members of the commission. Another member of the commission cordially endorses them in a supplementary note. Four commissioners dissent from the report. The theory of those who dissent seems to be based upon the eighteenth century philosophy of individual liberty, and to have as its direct, practical purpose the interests, real or supposed, of southern manufacturers. Two of the dissentients are large cotton mill owners, one of them one of the most prominent operators in Charlotte, N. C., and the other the president of the milling corporations of Pelzer, S. C. The former, however, recommends ample school facilities, with compulsory education, cooperative savings institutions under state laws, and the establishment by the United States government of postal savings banks, and finally, liberal provision for the incorporation of labor organizations.

This review of the portions of the Industrial Commission report dealing with labor, although it has gone beyond the length originally contemplated, is inadequate. This is necessarily so, on account of the largeness of the subject, and the proportion of space devoted to it. It is, however, hoped that what has been said will give an idea, which is correct so far as it goes, of the excellent work which has been done by the commission, and of the character of their report upon the subject of labor.

In a general way it may be said that the report deals with labor in its static rather than in its dynamic aspects. The idea of evolution in labor conditions is suggested here and there, but not consistently developed, and perhaps to do so would not have been in harmony with the character of the work assigned to the commission. The report leaves here, as elsewhere, an unlimited quantity of work for scholars, but the report must be a point of departure for further scientific work concerning labor in the United States. It is a mine of information, and it is also a practical guide for the legislator. It is the most notable achievement of the kind in the history of the United States, and it will compare very favorably with any similar investigation undertaken in any country. Credit must be given to the good sense and judgment of the commission, and especially to the experts they employed.

Perhaps in the whole report nothing is more noteworthy than the extent to which, along with many differences, agreement could be reached in important particulars. Here, as elsewhere, it is seen that ignorance is a cause of dissension, and knowledge a cause of harmony.