348 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY
boards of management, and to interfere in their action ; while the intention is that the functions of the central board should be more of an advisory nature. In the new laws of certain Swiss cantons and of the Austrian crown lands the institution of inspectors of poverty has been recently introduced. In Germany there is no such central authority in charge of poverty. The supervision of poverty here forms a part of the general government supervision whose duty it is to guard against all pernicious measures, whatso- ever they may be.
In the United States, of late years, public opinion has taken a very lively interest in this question, from the point of view as to whether such supervision is desirable and permissible. One must place over against this the institutions of the Old World, where the old absolutism exercised a strong influence on self-govern- ment, from which in modern times it seeks to free itself. The exact opposite is the case in the United States, where from first to last constitution and government are based on democratic prin- ciples. The result is that an encroachment here on the part of central government authorities would be viewed beforehand, from the standpoint of political freedom, with much greater distrust. At the same time, it is universally agreed that the government authorities have the right to remedy public evils and abuses from the standpoint of state protection, and to exercise supervision over state institutions proper. The problem becomes more diffi- cult when the question is raised concerning the supervision of the remaining public institutions, and those which receive aid from public funds; and still more difficult when purely private charity comes to be considered. The question has been answered in the United States, both theoretically and practically, in very different ways. First of all, a " State Board of Charities " was founded in Massachusetts in 1863. New York and Ohio followed in 1867. They bear very different names. Thus the above-mentioned State Board of Charities is in Washington and Wisconsin designated the " State Board of Control ; " in Iowa, " Board of Control of State Institutions;" in Maryland, "Board of State Aid and Charities ; " and so on. Already in the names which they bear the essential difference makes itself felt, for which the Ohio and Iowa
