4l6 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY
by it the entire nation, or all humanity for a given epoch. Kidd, on the contrary means a group of specialists. All authors, in reality, admit a mass of some kind, whatever they may call it, upon which genius depends. Another question has pro duced the greatest confusion. This is the value of the acts of single individuals. Daily experience shows that every social work is realized by the initiative of one or more individuals ; and when this individual is absent, though the mass represented continues to exist, the work falls and dies. But the necessity of representation for the mass, it must be remembered, tells us nothing of the autonomy of the individual, of his originality and independence of the mass. Upon all the questions we have con- sidered depends another of immense practical value : Given a man of genius, who exercises a special function in history and an undeniable influence, what is the cause of the efficiency of his action ? Is it the energy of his personality which acts irre- sistibly on the mass ? Is it a certain preparation which the mass has acquired for his efforts, which enables it to second his efforts, without which support his action would be unstable ? The importance of such a question is enormous for practical life, and especially for law, for it involves the question ; '* Can one impose any idea, any action, upon a mass, holding it as amorphous, indifferent ; or must one continually count on its psychological condition ? "
If we proceed seriously, as science demands, we must believe that neither the state of social psychology nor of history permits us to give a definite answer. The question will be cleared up only after a minute and absolutely rigorous historical study. The problem is purely one of observation. Each people and each individual must be carefully studied. — Rafael Altamira, Revue internationale de sociologies June.
The Recent History of the Living -Wage Movement. — In the early eighties the working classes were divided into three groups: (i) those whose wages were governed entirely by the law of supply and demand applied to the labor market ; (2) those whose wages were determined in some fixed ratio to the price of the product ; (3) an aristocracy of labor whose organization was so powerful, and whose strategic position in the labor market, owing to the possession of special skill, was so strong, that it was able to command a high rate of wages and to utilize the fluctuations of trade to its advantage. The great depression of 1886-87 coincided with an out- burst of enthusiasm for social reform and economic inquiry, and the first great achieve- ment of the new spirit was to determine that wages should be independent of competition in the labor market. The next point fought for was the principle that wages should not depend upon prices. As competition among workmen had been set aside, so competition among employers has ceased to be recognized as a reason for reduction of wages. Public opinion now concedes that wages should be a first charge on production.
The question of a living wage does not appeal directly to those workmen whose remuneration is high enough to enable them to dispense with care for the minimum limit of comfort. Their principal aim is to bring the backward districts up to the same wage level as the better-organized centers, and to protect the standard of life from attacks by machinery and from the pressure of the unemployed. The regula- tion of overtime and of machine labor are their burning questions, and the method of settlement will be found in the establishment of joint committees of employers and employes, with independent umpires. The minimum living wage must in any case be fixed by the workmen, and experience shows that public opinion will back up the workers. The claim constantly put forward by employers, that they have the right to manage their own businesses without outside interference, has been in every case set at naught ; and the contrary principle has been established, that the community has the right to intervene in any dispute between capital and labor. — Henry W. Macrosty, Political Science Quarterly, September, 1898.
The Relation between Parents and Children among the Nature Peoples.
— Unfortunately the relation of facts is always less simple than we think ; the demand of our intellect for unity is often a little too strong. Especially in the realm of social science hasty conclusions are still the order of the day. One assumes something, not because it is so, because one has actually so observed it, but because it would agree so finely with something else. This is all very unscientific, but it suits our best thinkers
