the courts the claims of those who refused to compromise.  When the courts awarded damages, large or small, a large part of the proceeds went for legal expenses.  But a small proportion of the total costs to employers came as benefits to the victims of accidents.  It appeared in an extensive investigation of the business of the large industrial insurance companies that but 28 per cent of the premiums paid by employers were paid to workmen as indemnity.

Between 1911 and 1916 the laws have been changed to some extent in their application to selected occupations in at least 34 states and territories of the United States, and covering nearly all but some of the distinctly agricultural states.  This remarkable development has been largely actuated and guided by a comparatively small group of socially minded nonworking class citizens rather than by either employees or organized workers.  It is an encouraging example of what can be done by skilful methods, when conditions are ripe, in furthering righteous social legislation without the use of money or of corrupting influences.

Sec. 8. #Standards for a compensation law#.  The standards which, in detail, in one jurisdiction or another, have already been attained, and which are the provisional ideals now sought by reformers, may be briefly stated as follows.[2] All employments should be included, altho, as yet, there are various exceptions, such as farm labor and domestic service, employers with but few employees (the number excepted being one to five), and nonhazardous employments.  Compensation should be granted for all injuries, suffered in the course of employment, that cause disability beyond a definite waiting period of three to seven days.  Compensation should include medical attendance for a limited period, and two-thirds of the estimated loss of wages for disability, either total or partial, during its continuance; and, in case of death, funeral expenses, and from one to two-thirds of the estimated wages, to the widow (or dependent widower) and children, or to other dependent relatives.  To secure the full benefit of the plan it must be made the exclusive remedy, replacing entirely the old remedy of suits for negligence.  The employer should be required to insure his risk, and general sentiment is moving rapidly toward the plan of a state insurance bureau as the exclusive agency.[3] For the administration of the system an accident and insurance board should be created in each jurisdiction.  Experience shows the importance of careful attention to numerous other details, and many amendments will be made as the needs become manifest in practice.