ence of the brotherhoods indicates that the compulsory plan is practi cable after the organization has become large and strongly intrenched in the favor of its members, but that a young and small organization may find that compulsory insurance makes it more difficult instead of easier to secure new members. Even among the members of the large brotherhoods there is some opposition to compulsory insurance, but the number so opposed is apparently small.

There are advantages gained by making insurance compulsory. From the standpoint of the brotherhood as a whole, the benefit consists in the greater stability that the society possesses, because its members are bound to it by stronger ties. The holder of an insurance certificate must feel that his brotherhood stands to him for more than it would if he were not insured, and he will be less disposed to sacrifice his membership when placed under the stress of unfavorable circumstances. The advantages accruing to the insurance organization from the compulsory plan are those which accompany a larger membership. Compulsory membership enables the insurance department to perform more completely the insurance and relief work that it exists to accom plish. Viewed as an agency for the promotion of the material welfare of railway employees, the adoption of the compulsory feature seems altogether desirable. The brotherhoods are voluntary fraternal organizations, no employee being compelled to join them; consequently their compulsory insurance feature is not open to the objections that are often raised against compulsory State insurance as it has been developed on the continent of Europe.

In one particular the brotherhood plan of relief needs further devel opment. The field of death and disability insurance is well occupied, but the relief work is not organized in all divisions. Many divisions have excellent relief organizations, while others make only those provisions for the care of members that are usual with fraternal organizations. It should be the aim of the brotherhoods to round out their system of affording relief and insurance by bringing about the estab lishment of a local relief organization in connection with each division or lodge. Whether this could be accomplished better by general regu lations adopted by the grand conventions or by means of agitation carried on through the official journals and through discussions in the divisions and local conventions of the divisions is something to be determined by those whose experience in the management of the brotherhoods has taught them how a plan such as the one here proposed can be carried out most satisfactorily.

I can not close this section of the report and the report as a whole more appropriately than by quoting a paragraph recently penned by the grand chief conductor of the Order of Railway Conductors:

"These brotherhoods have never been in a better condition. They have been tried as if by fire during the past few years. Their unswerv ing devotion to their fundamental principles and their manifested deter

mination to stick by their laws and the right has inspired a confidence in them on the part of their membership as well as on the part of the employers of that membership and such of the public as have taken the trouble to look into the subject. I consider their future prospects bright, and I have as abiding a faith in their permanency and success as I have in the eventual triumph of the right."

These words of hope and confidence bespeak a certainty as to the future that is based on a successful past. There is every indication that the brotherhoods of railway employees are destined to enjoy a large development in the future. No feature of their organization will contribute more to their progress than the departments which they have so successfully maintained for the relief and insurance of their members.

THE NATIONS OF ANTWERP.

BY J. HOWARD GORE, PH. D., COLUMBIAN UNIVERSITY.

Antiquarians have sought to show that even in the origin of its name the commercial importance of Antwerp in the early ages is confirmed. They declare that the word in its primal form was aen 't werp, the port, and they assure us that it was neither chance nor caprice that caused the Saxons to establish the camp which is now the site of the maritime metropolis of central Europe.

In the coat of arms of this city the three hands perpetuate the legend of the cruel Druon who caused to be cut off the right hand of each captain who essayed to steer his boat up the river past his castle without paying the demanded toll, while the term Hand werpen (Antwerp) indicates the destination of the severed member. So both history and legend bear testimony to the fact that Antwerp has always been what it is now a center of traffic and commerce.

In the first years of the twelfth century Antwerp passed under the dominion of the dukes of Brabant. The well-regulated government which it now enjoyed, together with special privileges accorded to men engaged in trade, were instrumental in bringing about a rapid growth of the city, and as early as 1315 the formation of the Hanseatic league, or association, was one of the results. The benefits of this society were so apparent that it was soon followed by the Hesse establishment, and with it the laying of the foundations for the largest banking houses ever known.

When Flanders came into the possession of Charles V it monopolized the attention of his subjects even in other lands, and in a short time the merchants of the Mediterranean were making Antwerp their port and located within its walls their enormous warehouses. It was evidently this congregation of peoples of different nationalities, with the clannish instincts that hold related people together and unite them in their competition against others, that suggested to Jan III the advisability of organizing the merchants of Antwerp and Brussels into natie or nations. At first this racial division coincided quite closely with a classification by trades or by line of commerce pursued, but the former breaking down by intermarriage and other causes before the latter was subjected to much change the word "nation" became applied to persons engaged in handling like articles of trade.

Under the favorable conditions already referred to the merchants outgrew a single line of trade and a classification upon such a basis was no longer possible. But while pursuing restricted channels of commerce their workmen had acquired a particular aptitud handling the goods in which their employers dealt, and as the

pass

over to new lines of activity as rapidly as the merchants could they took up the discarded cognomen of "nations" and differentiated labor found its beginning. That this is a correct hypothesis can be seen in the fact that in a few years the nations at Brussels died out altogether although the number of merchants continually increased in number there, but there was not a corresponding addition to the number of workmen, as was the case in Antwerp, where large quantities of merchandise passed in transit.

From this time on the nations were regarded as a sort of guild, with this important difference: The guilds sought by a variety of means to improve their methods, having in view the turning out of better products. Their membership was made up of craftsmen. On the other hand, the nations were mere laborers united for self-protection rather than to stimulate one another in increasing their effectiveness, and the membership was made up of the nontechnical class. They were in no sense dealers, and it was not until 1787 that it was deemed necessary to stipulate that such a lax organization might be regarded as collective owners of property, either personal or real. This stipulation came as an imperial edict, and lent emphasis to the societies then in existence. Just how many there were at this time is not known. The first statement of a statistical character is that of 1829, when it is mentioned incidentally that there were thirty odd nations in Antwerp; but there is a record in the city's archives that in 1668 rules for the guidance of the nations were drawn up, and again in 1802 they appear to have been amended. In 1820 the city, in recognition of their importance, granted them certain privileges and facilities for carrying on their work. As there is no mention of any subsequent modification of their plan of organization, it is likely that they are now observing rules which were then in force.

The nations, as we now find them, are the results of unrestricted growth-that is, uninfluenced by governmental interference or legisla tion; hence they may be regarded as the normal outcome of the efforts of groups of laborers seeking to protect themselves without endangering others, and to enjoy privileges that do not transgress the rights of fellow-men, and at the same time to reap the benefits of their own strength and intelligence.

A nation may now be defined as an organization of workmen forming a limited society in which every member is a shareholder. The word "limited" does not signify a limitation as to the responsibility of each member, but a restriction as to the function and number of members. While each share represents a member, and vice versa, still it is possible to increase both at will. When a new member is taken in, if the capital does not need replenishing, the money he pays for his share is divided pro rata among the members already forming the society, the amount paid being determined by dividing the estimated capital, counting good will as an asset, by the number of members. From this it

will be seen that no one would seek membership in a nation whose treasury is so low as to be in need of a member's share, and likewise it will be apparent that a member of a nation which is known to be paying poorly would find it difficult to dispose of his share. Such a member is obliged to retain his holding, hoping for a fortunate turn in the affairs of his nation.

The restricted function referred to is a survival of the circumstances which surrounded the formation of the nations-that is, each nation occupies itself with the handling of a certain line of merchandise, either in loading it upon vessels, unloading it, or transporting it from boat to warehouse or to the cars. In later days the restriction goes still further that is, the particular merchandise must come from a certain country. Thus several nations will unload wool, but one will discharge a cargo of wool from Buenos Ayres, while another would have to be called upon if the wool came from Australia. This differentiation has resulted from the fact that in the early days the nations were the official, or at least the recognized measurers, weighers, or inspectors, and hence the men who were competent to serve in such capacities upon the products of one country might not be able to act when similar articles came from another land. Then, again, the nation would become familiar with the methods of stowing employed at a certain port, and thus be able to discharge a vessel from that port more quickly than could be done by any other nation.

In time the nation would become possessed with the implements needed for the ready handling of such articles as came within its line of work, so that a newly organized nation would find it difficult to displace one already established, and consequently would be obliged to select some unoccupied field. This field would naturally be limited and the character of work correspondingly specialized. From this it can be seen that the elaborate differentiation of labor here in force is the natural outcome of the way in which the nations came into existence, and it is evident that its continuance is assured, because a society with restricted lines of work can become proficient in those lines, can acquire the best implements and appliances for their performance, and thus give to their employers the best possible service while securing for its members the greatest remuneration. This naturally suggests a train of monopolies with the attendant opportunities for extortionate charges, since there is no limitation as to the prices that may be deman 'ed. But on the other hand there is no statutory limit as to the number of nations that may be formed. Any overprosperity on the part of one would soon call competing societies into existence or cause a shipper to appeal to a nation whose line of work was so closely related to his that it could profitably to both undertake the contract in question. There is, therefore, this possibility of calling upon competitors that keeps the prices normal. It may be suggested that the same would be true of individualized labor. Then wherein do the nations possess merits that have