Whether state taxes are apportioned locally on the basis of assessed value, or on the basis of income or expenditure, central supervision is necessary. If the purpose of home rule is wholly to relieve the local unit of state supervision, and at the same time to permit the state to get its revenue in whole or in part from local sources, it cannot be supported, for such an arrangement is as undesirable as it is impossible. Even segregating the state's sources does not allow of such total divorcement, since, by whatever method it chooses to tax its state-wide properties, it must, in order to tax them fairly with other property in the state, have some supervision over taxation in local jurisdictions. If, on the other hand, home rule is designed for the purpose of allowing local units to tax and to exempt properties as they deem expedient, it may be wise to adopt it for certain districts, but only then with the understanding that the way is left open for the superior units, in which the lesser ones are included, to tax properties within their jurisdictions, either to secure additional revenue, or to insure equality of tax burden between the various types of properties in the state. But such limited adoption is generally precluded by the arguments of those who support unconditional home rule, and it is particularly these with whom we take issue.

6. TENDENCY TO EXCESS IN STATE EXPENDITURE

The declaration that home rule tempts to excess in state expenditure is not capable of statistical demonstration. Yet it is undoubtedly true that the ease with which taxes are imposed upon corporate property, especially when it is the accepted opinion that certain types of corporations are not paying their fair share of the cost of government, and particularly when corpora

tions as such are looked upon as legitimate objects from which the public may extract the uttermost farthing, have tended in part to explain the enormous increase in public expenditure. Irrespective of the legitimacy or the illegitimacy of such expenditure in the past, it seems certain, since all taxes by whomsoever paid come out of the available net income, that due caution must be taken not to divert unnecessarily the attention of the local taxpayers from the objects and purposes of state expenditures. It is clear beyond measure of doubt, that with total divorcement close scrutiny of state expenditures would not be the rule.

7. THE CASE SUMMARIZED

Recapitulating these considerations, it may be said that distinction should be made between absolute and partial home rule. The former is undesirable and impossible of general application; the advisability of the latter problematical. The appropriate political unit for the adoption of home rule is conditioned by the different properties assessed, and by the tax claims upon the owner of property, at his place of residence, and upon the property itself at its situs. For all property, the owners of which reside in different districts, coöperation in assessment is imperative and distribution of revenue necessary.

Taxation should constitute a system. The causes of property values are complex and over-lapping, the obligations to pay are not marked off by arbitrary political boundary lines, and the benefits from expenditure are not restricted to their local incidence. Neither the benefits from the activities of the state nor the causes of the values which give ability to pay can be blocked off into separate segments to be surrounded by

Chinese walls. Coördination and coöperation are always necessary to realize equality.

So long as a State collects its revenues in whole or in part from the general property tax, complete divorcement is impossible. This is as true when the state burden is distributed on an income or expenditure basis, as it is when distributed on an equalized value basis. The actual amount of the income received or expenditures made and the content of the same must be known in order that equality may maintain between districts. Indeed, the force of many of the reasons for complete and thoro-going supervision would be increased under such conditions. Separating the sources of state and local revenue does not alter the necessity of taxation being a system. The tax burden for supporting government a unitary thing - should be borne equally whether separation exists or not. This question, it is shown, is complicated by the necessity of readjusting the security for local loans already issued and for protecting local credit for subsequent loans. Such an adjustment has been made in California, where separation is most nearly complete.

Home rule offers possibilities for the adoption of little more than a negative program. Exemptions may be applied to properties peculiarly difficult to assess, and heavier rates may be applied to other properties supposedly benefiting from local privileges, but this only with the danger of introducing heterogeneity as between districts, and of contributing to inequality within districts. The reasons for making exemptions are not of universal application, and the actual burdens of taxes are frequently different from those caused by their immediate incidence. Moreover, there is little reason to suppose that assessment difficulties in respect to the most tangible of property will be removed by relieving

one type of property from taxation and by breaking loose from the supervision of the state as a unifying and tax-coördinating force. Efficient supervision may be assigned as the most direct and potent cause for the approach to full value assessments of property in states which approach such a condition, and it would be clearly a step in the wrong direction to do anything to retard the well-defined movement toward central supervision. To advocate unconditional decentralization in tax matters, so far as to exclude central supervision, is tax heresy.

The fact of partial or complete separation of sources has undoubtedly been a potent contributing cause to excessive state expenditure, and home rule, involving a complete divorcement of state and local tax matters, would only add fuel to the fire. Whatever may be the need for increased expenditure, the only guaranty against waste is to insure an intimate interest in and control over it by those who have ultimately to pay the bills.

To summarize: home rule, even within narrow restrictions, may be supported as a tax policy only when it allows for close and intimate supervision of local tax matters by a competent and responsible centrally appointed administrative body at the same time that it grants to local units measures of tax autonomy.

HORACE SECRIST.

NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY.

THE LITERATURE OF SCIENTIFIC

MANAGEMENT

SUMMARY

Introduction, 506.-1. Development and Theory of Scientific Management, 509. Earlier discussion, 510. The successive publications of F. W. Taylor, 511 ;- of Gantt, 514. - Essentials of Taylor's system, 518. - Various other publications, 521. — Emerson's books, 527.2. Scientific Management in Operation, 530.3. The Railroads, 533.-4. Methods; general articles and books, 538. — Time study, 540. - Motion study, 541. Other questions, 543. 5. The Personal Factor, 547. — Bearing on larger social problems, 551. — 6. Relation to Organized Labor, 553.

ANY discussion of the literature of scientific management is confronted at the outset with the question, What is scientific management? The development of the factory system brought with it many new problems connected with the organization and management of labor, the structure and equipment of factories, and the technique of production. By successful manufacturers these problems have always been solved in a way to make manufacturing at a profit possible. Early solutions, however, were necessarily crude and roughshod. With the enormous increase in demand for manufactured products, in the investment of capital, and in the number of men engaged in the business, with the consequent development of ever-keener competition, the early methods have been found insufficient. Especially within the last twenty years a degree of skill and technical training has been brought to bear upon the solution of factory problems which has made modern factory management a thing much more elaborate, refined, and effective than ever before. A series of