racy are at present, being carried on. This group of islands is comparatively small, having an area about that of Colorado or Nevada. Its population, all told, is slightly over a million, not so many as may be found within the borders of Connecticut. The chief occupations of its people are farming and grazing supplemented by manufactures and mining. It has its commerce and is in close touch with its neighbors in Australia, twelve hundred miles away, and with the mother country, which by the prestige of its flag shields its offspring from many international complications and burdens. In this remote corner of the earth, freed from the fear of hostile attack, with natural riches and a population over ninetyeight per cent British by birth or descent, with the suffrage in the hand of every adult man or woman, and a virtually autonomous government, English individualism is free to work out democratic activities which, if they prove successful, will become a sort of pattern for other democracies.

The Domestic Policy of New Zealand.-Without commenting on the success or failure of its numerous experiments in legislation, in respect to which references for reading will be found in the Bibliography, attention may be directed to the democratic system of government and the functioning of the newer democracy. Adult suffrage is allowed a free hand by careful provisions for free nominations, the Australian alphabetical secret ballot, effective Corrupt Practices Acts and a halfholiday for workers on election day. Civil service rules, non-partisan politics, and official responsibility help toward honest administration. The government owns its railroads, manufacturing its own cars and locomotives; it owns steamship lines, telegraphs, telephones, coal

mines, and savings banks, a parcels post, a national bank, and a loan office which lends money on easy terms and low interest to the citizens. There is a government insurance company competing with private insurance companies and a governmental management of trust estates. All these and other similar undertakings illustrate the bewildering variety of activities carried on by the state. It arbitrates disputes of all sorts, guaranties land titles, simplifies law, furnishes legal advice and service free or at low rates, serves as tourist agent for travelers, establishes model farms, and teaches scientific farming. It uses the probation system for juveniles, colonizes its unemployed, starting them in business as farmers, provides pensions for the aged, and is seeking to abolish abject pauperism altogether. It serves as agent for its farmers, keeps their goods in cold storage when necessary and sells them in London, charging only commission at cost. It aims to establish a minimum wage, a shorthour day and has eliminated sweat shops; it carefully regulates the labor of women and children, has efficient sanitation laws for manufacturing establishments and shops, and has a remarkably low death rate. It directly employs its own force in the construction and maintenance of public works, and stimulates industry on the part of its workers by coöperative methods. It is abolishing the slums by inducing urbanites to move toward the outskirts and into the country, and by helping workingmen to build homes by loans at low interest. Its cities are attractive with parks and playgrounds and private residences vie one with the other in adorning their homes and grounds. Education is emphasized and is for the most part free. There is no state church, and no state aid is given to any religious body. The govern

ment seeks to equalize opportunity for all, to diffuse wealth, and to discourage the rise of millionaire fortunes. Its ideal is a land of plenty without pauperism or excessive luxury, where healthy bodies and well trained minds may become normal and furnish the basis for continued prosperity.

Whether this experiment in democracy will succeed is still a problem. Certainly the economic and racial conditions of New Zealand are favorable, and its safety from international complication seems assured. If its government continues to plan wisely on the basis of a carefully prepared and well balanced budget, and strengthens in every possible way the morality and intelligence of its citizens, there seems no inherent reason why it may not become "Newest England" in a large and prophetic sense.

This social legislation was enacted chiefly during the period from 1884 to 1910. Little progress has been made since, if any, owing to the setback of the Great War and to a growing antagonism between labor and capital, the latter of which naturally resists vigorously attacks on profits or on the growth of capitalism. The inhabitants of New Zealand themselves are by no means convinced that they live in paradise and sometimes look longingly towards the seemingly better clover fields farther on. Their social legislation did not come as the result of broad visions, working constructively towards a carefully planned program. In fact, it is surmised that their outlook is provincial and because of that fact they simply sought to eliminate from their little Dominion the harsher aspects of life, to work together coöperatively as near neighbors, and also followed the natural British tendency to "clean up" and have an attractive home,

socially, economically, and from the standpoint of solid comfort. Its experiments, before they can be considered successful, should stand a generation or two, and when transplanted to larger nations must be able to show adaptability to a rapidly changing environment. Yet after all is said, the legislative experiments of New Zealand and of the kindred Dominion of Australia are furnishing extremely valuable suggestions to the larger democracies of the Americas and Europe.

CHAPTER XXII

GROWTH OF DEMOCRACY

The People.-If by the term people is meant the collective mass of population domiciled within a state, the relation of these to the state is obvious; they are its subjects, owing it obedience and allegiance. But they are not mere subjects; they are citizens also, for they have rights as well as obligations. After all, the only justification for the existence of a sovereign state must be found in its helpfulness and utility to its people. It owes to its citizens protection and aid in their struggle for betterment in life. Every citizen may demand that much from his state, and should rightly feel aggrieved if it fails to do its part. Yet the failure of the state to do its part has been the problem of the ages and will probably remain so for many years to come. States do not satisfy the demands of their subjects in these respects, and indeed governments have seldom admitted that they were in duty bound so to do. The reason for this difference of opinion is not far to seek. Governments have regularly been aristocratic in the sense that the power of the state, has rested in comparatively few hands. The members of this ruling class always assume that they have a sort of inherent if not divine right to rule, either because of the quality of their birth or their wealth or their intelligence. As rulers, they also assume that they are entitled to the best and largest share of