questions as the disposition of the railroads, the formulation of a shipping policy and the development of commerce and industry, and the whole series of problems centring about labour, including the relation of labour to capital and industry, the control of immigration, matters of public health and welfare, and the new direction of education.

No general or systematic preparation had been made for facing or solving the problems of readjustment. In the fall of 1918 two plans were proposed in Congress, neither of which came to a vote; one of these plans called for the appointment of a Congressional Committee on Reconstruction, the other provided for a Federal Commission on Reconstruction to be appointed by the President. The latter, which was understood to have the tacit support of the Administration, called for enquiries into such problems as the financing and development of the merchant marine, the development and direction of foreign trade, the readjustment of industries to normal production, the redistribution and employment of labour, the advancement of technical education and industrial research, the supply and distribution of food-stuffs and raw materials, the conservation and development of natural resources, the organisation of the railroads, telegraphs and telephones, and the reorganisation of the governmental departments and bureaus.

Questions which in the early fall of 1918 seemed not to be pressing came, however, to the front when Congress assembled for the new session on Dec. 2. It had been expected that the President would present a more or less definite programme of reconstruction, but the programme was indefinite, even to the point of vagueness. With regard to readjustment in general he appeared to deprecate the idea of any systematic and comprehensive survey or treatment of the many problems involved:

'So far as our domestic affairs are concerned, the problem of our return to peace is a problem of economic and industrial readjustment. That problem is less serious for us than it may turn out to be for the nations which have suffered the disarrangements and the losses of war longer than we. Our people, moreover, do not wait to be coached and led. They know their own business, are quick and resourceful at every

readjustment, definite in purpose, and self-reliant in action. Any leading-strings we might seek to put them in would speedily become hopelessly tangled, because they would pay no attention to them and go their own way. All that we can do as their legislative and executive servants is to mediate the process of change, here, there, and everywhere as we may. I have heard much counsel as to the plans that should be pursued and personally conducted to a happy consummation, but from no quarter have I seen any general scheme of "reconstruction" emerge which I thought it likely we could force our spirited business men and self-reliant labourers to accept with due pliancy and obedience.'

By way of justifying this view, the President proceeded to point out that there were already many agencies in existence, such as the Council of National Defence, the War Industries Board, the War Trade Board, the Food and Fuel Administrations, the Departments of Labour and Commerce, which had, during the war, been the centres of unified and co-operative action; and that, by reason of their special knowledge of conditions, they were better able than any newly created organisation to mediate the process of change' in their respective fields. Furthermore, the President remarked that already, during the period of three weeks that had elapsed since the signing of the armistice, there had been rapid progress in the return to a peace footing, a progress that 'promises to outrun any enquiry that may be instituted."

Probably the President was correct in his estimate of the situation. A comprehensive enquiry, like that conducted by the British Ministry of Reconstruction, if undertaken as a preliminary to demobilisation and readjustment, would undoubtedly have served a most useful purpose, but by December the return to normal conditions was already well under way, and the existing agencies were endeavouring, not without a certain degree of success, to cope with the situation. It is worth while to review rapidly the process of this return during the first six months following the armistice.

The plan formulated by the War Department of the United States for the demobilisation of its armed forces differed from that followed in Great Britain and in

France, in that it was based chiefly on military considerations. The moment the armistice was signed, all draft calls were cancelled and drafted men en route to mobilisation centres were, so far as possible, returned to their homes without having been mustered in. Certain classes of troops, starting with the Development Battalions and including the conscientious objectors, the industrial furlough men, the Students' Army Training Corps, the Officers' Training Schools, the Spruce Production Division, the railway troops, depôt brigades, and replacement camps, were designated for immediate discharge. The return of troops was begun at once, many transports being turned back in mid-ocean.

The General Staff set as the maximum rate of demobilisation, to be attained as soon as possible, the return from over-seas of 310,000 per month, and the discharge of 30,000 men per day, until the army should be reduced to a temporary force of 500,000 men. By Jan. 1 over 670,000 men had been discharged, and 123,000 of the expeditionary forces had been returned to the United States. At the end of six months more than a million men had returned from France, and a total of 2,101,000 men had been discharged.

In order to mitigate such industrial disturbance as might arise from the rapid release of so many men various measures were taken. In the first place, men (such as coal-miners) urgently needed in industry or required to relieve distress in their families were given priority in discharge. On the other hand, men who had no employment in sight were allowed to refuse discharge until such time as they were assured of positions. A bonus of $60 was paid to each man upon leaving the service, and he was allowed to retain and wear his uniform. Of especial importance, however, were the efforts of the Federal Employment Service in the Department of Labour, aided by the Council of National Defence, the State Councils of Defence, and municipal agencies, to secure employment for discharged soldiers. Special employment bureaus were established in industrial centres, and representatives of the Federal Employment Service were maintained in all the demobilisation camps, where they rendered direct and effective aid to the men about to be discharged. Thousands of men who had left

their positions but a short time before the armistice were able to return to them, the Federal Government, in this respect, setting the example by reinstating former members of the classified Civil Service. Efforts were also made to provide 'buffer' employment. The Government on Nov. 19 ordered all work on Federal buildings to be resumed; and the States, counties, and municipalities took up again the programmes of building and construction that had been interrupted by the war. In this way the winter passed without developing an alarming situation, although in January and February unemployment increased over a rapidly extending area.

The demobilisation of war industries and of war material proceeded even more rapidly than that of the armed forces. All Sunday or overtime work on Government contracts or in Government-controlled plants was at once stopped. The War Industries Board immediately removed or modified the restrictions that had been placed on a great variety of materials, especially those used in building, construction, and agricultural operations. The War Department had outstanding thousands of contracts aggregating over $5,000,000,000, and a huge accumulation of supplies and materials which would not be needed after the cessation of hostilities. In order to terminate the contracts without disturbing conditions they were grouped in three classes: those that should be carried through to completion, those that should be tapered off, and those that should be cancelled at once. Contractors were called upon to prepare statements showing raw material on hand, work in process, finished articles ready for delivery, and special cost items. These statements were checked by the War Department's Central Boards of Contract Review, and were then referred to the local or district boards, composed of representative business men, engineers, and legal and cost experts, whose function it was to reach a fair settlement with the contractors. In case of disagreement between a local board and the contractor, the latter could appeal to the Board of Contract Adjustment of the War Department in Washington, and in case of further disagreement he could have recourse to the United States Court of Claims. Provision was made for immediate payment to the contractor of seventy-five

per cent. of the minimum agreed upon, in case such payment was necessary to enable him to switch his plant over to peace work. By the end of May over ninety per cent. of the contracts had been terminated.

On the whole, it must be acknowledged that the transfer from war work to peace work took place with a minimum disturbance of labour conditions, notwithstanding the large amount of unemployment during the winter months already referred to. The Federal Employment Service acted for those discharged from war work as it acted for those discharged from military service. During January and February it referred nearly a million workers to positions, and most of this number were definitely reported as placed. The fact that the winter was one of the mildest on record, with a correspondingly early spring, facilitated the process. Many factories, notably those of the automobile makers, which had been turned over very largely to war work, switched at once to peace work, and were in urgent need of labour to enable them to deal with the large accumulation of private orders.

The disposal of nearly 2,000,000,000 dollars' worth of surplus supplies and materials was undertaken by the Surplus Property Division of the General Staff, created for that purpose. Vast stores of surplus supplies were sold to foreign Governments; large amounts, especially of building materials, were requisitioned by other departments of the Government or were sold to State and municipal institutions. Such materials and supplies as were placed on public sale in the United States were, after conferences with the industries or businesses most concerned, offered in such quantities and under such conditions that they were readily absorbed without having an unfavourable effect upon the market or upon production. By the end of May one-eighth of the surplus had been disposed of at prices representing eighty-eight per cent. of the cost.

Restrictions and regulations of all sorts affecting daily life, business and manufactures were removed as speedily as possible. A week after the signing of the armistice, the food and fuel regulations respecting wheaten bread, sugar, and 'lightless nights' had been withdrawn, and the voluntary press censorship agreement