Page:Harvard Law Review Volume 32.djvu/1018

982 982 HARVARD LAW REVIEW esting principle to a lawyer who is considering whether a college can abandon the sectarian requirements in its charter. On the other hand, charities ought to bear the responsibiUties of an ordinary corporate enterprise, including liability for the torts of their servants. "A negligently administered charity may aim at inducting us all into the kingdom of heaven, but it is socially essential to make it careful of the means employed." ^ The same duty of meeting its just obli- gations rests on the greatest association of all, the state.' Thus the author, Uke Maitland and Gierke, regards the state as a large group, surrounded by other independent groups, which share in its sovereignty. This is a novel conception for American law, which has always failed to "recognize fully the existence of social groups and group relationships," ^° especially that important group, the unincorporated trade-union. Mr. Laski points out that the state can only secure the loyalty of the unionist until he thinks that in the given situation the union has the superior claim. He may believe that the object of a railway strike is worth the temporary industrial dislocation it causes, just as a statesman is willing to involve the country in the sacrifices of war for purposes he considers good." We may not approve the workingman's choice of class welfare over public welfare, but it does impose at least a practical limitation on the power of the state. Courts of Conciliation, as in Australia," might reconcile the conflict of loyal- ties, but Mr. Laski proposes an entirely diJBferent scheme. He considers that pro- ducers must take a direct part in the control of production, and not merely min- gle in the general mass of electors. The govenmtient can never deal adequately with the interests of the trade-unions, for it naturally represents the whole body of consiuners, whose position is irreconcilable with that of the producers. The state may yield an occasional industry to the strikers to» secure the public supply of necessities, as a Russian sleigh-driver flings a baby now and then to the wolves, but eventually the electorate will force the government to use its powers to keep down the high cost of living. Of course, the workingman is also a consumer, but not on a large enough scale to outweigh his interest as a producer. The higher wages to be obtained by striking are tangible and im- mediate; the lower prices to be gained if nobody strikes are too uncertain to influence him. Consequently, Mr. Laski conceives a duplex organization of society. Men will continue as individual consimaers to elect the government which will supervise the supply of their needs. On the other hand, the trade- unions, representing men as producers, will choose an independent legislature and executive to regulate remuneration and working conditions. This pro- ducers' system, like the hierachy of the Roman Catholic Church, will be outside the state. It is a functional federalism, which will derive much help from the experience of federalism in the United States. And when the interests of pro- ducers and consumers conflict, a sort of Supreme Court will decide between them.^^ The difficulties of this plan seem enormous, but there will probably be ample time to consider them before the scheme is adopted. It certainly emphasizes factors which must enter into any system that is ultimately estab- lished. Not only is there danger that the state may become unduly centralized, but the same is true of the churches and the trade-unions. The life of Lamennais is a strong argument for federalism within the Roman Catholic Church, and it is rumored that autocracy is not wholly unknown in the American Federation ' Pages 105-07. " Hoxie, Trade Unionism in the United States, 216. " Laski, op. cit., 83, 84. 12 H. B. Higgins, "A New Province for Law and Order," 29 Hasv. L. Rev. 13; 32 Harv. l. Rev. 189. " Laski, op. cit., 85-89.
 * Pages 102-05.