mainly on account of the condition of trade, than others; hence in the final draft, group I was bisected. At the same time the wage classes were expanded from three to four. The dues to be paid by the insured have likewise been modified. At first the sums payable weekly ranged from a minimum of 20 centimes in the lowest wage class of group I to a maximum of 60 centimes in the highest wage class of group II. By successive steps, the minimum has been lowered to 2.5 centimes and the maximum to 50. As the contributions of the employers have remained constant at 10 centimes for the less irregular trades, and 20 for the others, it has been found necessary to increase the subvention of the state, in addition to the office expenses, from 25,000 francs per annum to 30,000. The weekly contributions due from the insured may be summarized as follows:

The weekly allowance to which the insured are entitled in case of loss of work has not been modified except as far as it was necessary to adapt the rates to four wage classes instead of three. In each of these wage classes, however, the amount varies according to the supposed needs of the individual, and is, therefore, graded according to the size of the family. To avoid needless detail, it will suffice to state, that three such family groups are recognized, the type of group A being the single man without dependents; of group B the man with a wife and one child, or the widower with children, under fourteen; of group C, the man with a wife and more than one child, under fourteen. The following table shows the weekly allowance in detail:

No one is allowed to receive help for more than seventy days (in the first draft ninety-one days) in one fiscal year, and it goes without saying that in general the loss of work must be involuntary, and not caused by some fault of the worker. To specify what circumstances shall in a concrete case cause the forfeiture of the allowance is not so easy, and several changes have been made since the

first draft. The reasons which deprive the insured of the right to an allowance are enumerated as follows in the law as passed:

(a) If the unemployment is the result of strike, as long as the strike lasts.

(b) If it is the result of voluntary withdrawal, except when a reason exists which justified an immediate withdrawal;

(c) If the unemployment is the result of behavior on the part of the insured which would, according to law, have justified his immediate dismissal;

(d) If the unemployment is the result of sickness or accident, as long as they last;

(e) If the insured has not fulfilled the conditions of sections 4 and 38 (providing in substance that he must have kept up his membership for a year or, in the case of one who has resided a year previously in the canton, for six months.)

(f) If the insured refuses without weighty reasons an opportunity for work.

The last four of these points have been the same substantially in all of the drafts, a mere change in the phraseology having been made in (e). The changes have occurred in the first two. In the first draft, the loss of the allowance was to follow in the case of "disputes regarding wages." In the new phrase strikes only, not lockouts, carry the penalty. In view of the difficulty of determining what the dividing line between a strike and a lockout is and of the fact that one can often by clever diplomacy be made to appear like the other, it seems as if this amendment would not tend to make labor disputes less bitter. Under (b) the last clause was added in the draft of 1899. The vagueness of the exception would seem to make it easy for a lax administration to nullify the whole section, if so inclined.

It was estimated by the commission in its last report, that, taking as the cost of administration 45,000 francs, the funds would be supplied in the following proportions by the several coöperating agencies:

According to this estimate, the insured are expected to contribute but a little over one-half of the amount actually spent on benefits, and about 39 per cent. of the annual receipts.

The tendency in all such legislation is to grow more and more liberal towards the laboring man, and this tendency has marked most of the changes made in the original bill. The dues of the beneficiaries of the law are a much larger fraction of the total than in Bern, but it is clear that the ordinary principles of insurance do not apply to this kind of legislation, and that, as long as a subsidy is necessary to balance the accounts, there are neither mathematical nor economic reasons for making the amount borne by the insured. one-third rather than one-seventh. The amount must depend entirely upon the readiness of the voters to lay taxes.

The Concentration of German Industries. The results of the census of occupations taken in Germany in 1895 have been published, and can now be compared with the results of the similar statistical inquiry of 1882.1 An immense amount of highly interesting material is thus put at our disposal. Much light is thrown upon the important question of the concentration of German industries. The number of persons engaged in gainful occupations in 1882 was 7,341,000, in 1895 it was 10,269,000. This increase of 39.9 per cent. went hand in hand with an increase of industrial establishments of only 4.6 per cent. These establishments are divided into three classes according to the number of persons engaged in each establishment: the small ones with five or less persons; the medium establishments with between six and fifty; and the large ones with more than fifty. While the small establishments increased but 1.8 per cent. in number and 10 per cent. in the size of their personnel, the medium ones increased 69.7 per cent. and 76.3 per cent. respectively; and the large ones 90 per cent. in number and 88.7 per cent. in size of personnel. The establishments conducted by single persons and without steam or other power fell off 8.7 per cent. in the thirteen years. Evidently there is a marked movement toward relatively fewer small and relatively more large industrial establishments. The factory has grown, the household industry has declined. This concentration into large factories has been most marked in the textile industries, in which the number of those engaged in factories with ten or less employees has actually fallen

1

1 Allgemeines statistisches Archiv., 5ter Band, 2te Halbband, Tübingen, Laupp'sche Buchhandlung, 1899, S. 545 & ss., 634 & ss

off, while those in large factories have increased, the increase being greatest in the largest factories.

The metal industries show similar results to those in the textile factories.

The building industries indicate a less extensive concentration; apparently the maximum efficiency being attained in establishments with less than two hundred employees.

Those engaged in commerce and trade are still to be found chiefly in small establishments. But here, as elsewhere, there is a noticeable tendency toward large establishments, though not as pronounced as in the above cases of the textile and metal industries. The department store has only recently made its appearance in Germany, and the small store will long survive.

In the industries attaching to hotels and restaurants we should not expect any great change during the years 1882-95. But we find a marked concentration going on here, the smallest establishments actually falling off in numbers, and among the others the rate of increase rising with the growing size of the establishment. There has evidently been an enormous increase in the number of inns and restaurants during the thirteen years, but, as in the case of the department store, the small "Biergarten" is eventually to be superseded by the large resort employing fifty or more persons.

Nationalökonomisk Forening.' A Congress of Political Economists was held in Copenhagen, commencing Nov. 23, 1899. The first meeting was the occasion of an address on the lockout of 1899,2 by Professor Harald Westergaard, followed by a discussion of the same. Professor Westergaard is less disposed to blame the laborers than are some of his colleagues; he says the employers have been acting for years in a way that could only irritate the laborers. He says that the committees appointed to bring about, if possible, a peaceable solution of difficulties, performed its functions in an awkward and ponderous manner. Publicity should have been given to complaints through the press. The employers were quite undiplomatic and obstinate, and, worst of all, neither party could understand the other's train of thought. The general lockout was declared with undue haste, and nowhere was a disposition evinced to 1 Nationalökonomisk Tidsskrift, 1ste Hefte, 1900.

See YALE REVIEW, vol, viii, No. 4, p. 453, for a discussion of this lockout.