THE PROBLEM OF POVERTY 349
systems form the respective types. In the one case it assumes the form of a control, accompanied by the power of compelling, by government authority, the adoption of measures of improvement. In the other case there is simply a supervision, with the authority of exercising advisory powers solely. In some states the author- ity is intrusted to several boards. Thus there exist in Massachu- setts a State Board of Charities; in Maryland and New York, besides this, a special Commission in Lunacy. In regard to the question of the supervision of private charities, the fact must be taken into consideration that here voluntary contributions are in question, and that as a rule everyone must be allowed to spend his means in his own way. Yet it is only right to remember that, just as the state interferes in the management of insurance, banking, and manufacturing, from the standpoint of the welfare of society, so also the welfare of society is concerned with certain spheres of private charity. This is especially the case in the care of children and the housing of sick, old, and helpless people in institutions. The movement toward such a conception of the matter, however, has received a severe check through the decision of the supreme court of New York, which denied that the State Board of Charities in New York had the right of supervising the measures of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children. As an actual fact, in consequence of this decision more than half of the charitable societies have been withdrawn from the supervision of the board.
In the countries of the Old World this question receives very different answers. While in Germany again the supervision of private charity is only a part of state supervision in general, in England charitable endowments in particular are assigned to charity commissioners, whose influence, however, is rather limited. In France the very vigorous fight over this question keeps pace with the fight over the bounds between church and state. In Italy, on the contrary, the powers of supervision of the state authorities have been greatly widened by the law of 1890, and by the institution of the new central boards of control already mentioned. All these measures point to where the highest impor- tance lies. This is not simply in a supervision which shall secure
