238 INSURANCE 



ance. The people of the United States have thus far shown little 

 inclination towards an extension of state functions comparable to 

 the functions exercised by European states. Except within certain 

 well-defined limits such an extension may not, at present at least, 

 be in the interest of the population at large, whatever the future 

 may bring and irrespective of contemporary symptoms indicative of 

 a possible change regarding public sentiment upon certain phases 

 of this problem. If it is in the interest of the whole population that 

 every head of a family and every one who aspires to become such 

 should consciously and systematically make provision for the uncer- 

 tainties of life, then it becomes the function of the state to work for 

 this end, for no arbitrary considerations can limit the functions of 

 the state, which are coextensive with human welfare. While the 

 state cannot say to the citizen, " You must insure in this company, 

 and for such an amount," it can say to him, " You shall insure some- 

 where, and for a minimum amount." The general welfare clauses 

 of our constitutions provide an adequate foundation for such man- 

 dates. Under existing conditions, compulsory insurance would 

 mean insurance in established private companies or companies still 

 to be organized. Most men find ample choice among the many 

 excellent companies. Compulsion implies all men, and for those 

 who, for one reason or another, might refuse to take out insurance 

 in an existing company the state would obviously be obliged to 

 provide the facilities for insurance. Admit the principle of com- 

 pulsion and direct state action must be accepted as its corollary. 

 In other words, compulsory insurance means state insurance for 

 those who refuse to take out the legal minimum in existing institu- 

 tions. This is compulsory insurance, but not insurance compulsion, 

 which would coerce every eligible citizen into a specific organization. 

 The German law expresses this difference admirably in providing 

 for Zwangsversicherung, but not Versicherungszwang. Compulsion 

 is generic, and the limited state action just suggested is specific for 

 that part of the population which requires specific treatment. 

 However divergent men's views may be with respect to the extent 

 of state functions, there can scarcely be much difference of opinion 

 regarding the necessity of some degree of state compulsion if we 

 admit the universality and inclusiveness of the principle of insurance. 

 This necessity exists, and for proof of its existence one may point 

 to the swollen figures of charity and relief societies. There is scarcely 

 a community which has not its poverty-stricken mothers and children 

 left unprotected when the breadwinner was stricken down. Every- 

 where about us we see the evidences of want and poverty resulting 

 from accidents for which no one may have been directly responsible, 

 but which, nevertheless, cripple and annihilate homes. Whatever 

 the scope of compulsory action may finally be, it must, above all, 



