SCIENCE. 



FRIDAY, MAY 37, 1887. 



COMMENT AND CRITICISM. 



Dr. Albert Shaw of the Minneapolis Tribune, 

 always a writer worth reading on economic sub- 

 jects, prints in the current issue of the Contempo- 

 rary review a very practical article, entitled ' The 

 American state and the American man.' The 

 article was suggested by an incidental remark 

 made by Mr. George J. Goschen, now chancellor of 

 the British exchequer, to the effect that laissez- 

 faire is the practical rule in the United States, 

 and state interference the rare exception. Dr. 

 Shaw discusses and combats this assumption. He 

 says, first, that Mr. Goschen's opinion is not only 

 generally entertained in England, but will be al- 

 lowed to pass unchallenged by the vast majority 

 of intelligent Americans. To begin with, laissez- 

 faire is in harmony witii our independent, self- 

 reliant character as a people. It is the doctrine 

 imbibed by the young men of the country in 

 school and college. But while professing to hold 

 laissez-faire doctrines, the American does not 

 fashion his practice in accordance with them. 

 " He studies his political economy in a text-book 

 of abstractions, and not in the history of nations 

 or the concrete conditions about him. Conse- 

 quently he manages to keep his economics and his 

 practical politics as separate as some men do their 

 religion and their business, and he is just as naive- 

 ly unconscious of it." Two further observations 

 are preliminary to Dr. Shaw's main discussion. 

 We cannot properly estimate the extent of state 

 interference in a western state by checking off 

 correspondences on a catalogue of the various 

 functions that have been assumed by the British 

 government. Circumstances must be considered 

 in estimating the extent to which the state in- 

 vades the domain of the individual. And, sec- 

 ondly, it is not the functions of the general gov- 

 ernment, which touches the average citizen in so 

 few points, that should be taken as the basis of 

 computation, but rather those of the state and 

 local governments. 



session of 1885. The number of laws that may 

 be classed as instances of state interference is not 

 only astonishingly large, but the laws themselves 

 deal with the greatest variety of subjects. Prom- 

 inent among them are the ' granger ' laws con- 

 cerning railroad and elevator supervision and 

 control. Then come state loans of seed-grain to 

 farmers whose crops had been ruined by grass- 

 hoppers. Agricultural fairs were subsidized and 

 one hundred thousand dollars appropriated for a 

 state fair-ground. Liberal exemption laws enable 

 the farmer to avoid the payment of a portion of 

 his debts. Dairy laws protect the butter-makers 

 against artificial products, such as butterine. New 

 laws regulate almost every detail of the cattle 

 industry. Even brands are registered and pro- 

 tected by the state. Logging codes of minute 

 detail regulate the lumbering trade. Insurance 

 companies, savings banks, pharmacy, medicine, 

 dentistry, and the oil trade are supervised and 

 controlled. The fish and game laws are minute 

 and exhaustive. One enactment specifies the 

 maximum toll to be exacted by a custom mill for 

 grinding wheat ; another states when a dog may 

 be slain with impunity ; another prescribes in de- 

 tail the character of the waiting-rooms which all 

 railway companies must maintain at their stop- 

 ping-places. The part played by the state in the 

 matter of education is too well known to. need 

 mention. A bill was introduced, and found con- 

 siderable support, which actually went so far as 

 to forbid persons of opposite sex to skate together 

 in a skating-rink, or even to be on the floor at the 

 same time. 



Dr. Shaw then examines the legislation of the 

 Minnesota state legislature during the sixty -day 



No. S25 — 1887. 



Dr. Shaw emphasizes the fact that bills of this 

 character are passed by men who profess ad- 

 herence to laissez-faire principles. But no con- 

 nection exists between their political philosophy 

 and their votes. The proper cure for this anomaly 

 the writer finds in unlimited state interference. 

 " Let it be understood that it is within the legiti- 

 mate province of the state to do any thing and 

 every thing." The result would be more scientific 

 law-making. Each new proposition would be 

 carefully scrutinized, and would have to stand or 

 fall on its own merits. Whether Dr. Shaw's pro- 

 posed remedy is the best and speediest may be 



