to control their management, but it has also given greater assistance to the General Assembly, both in regard to appropriations and in legislation for these institutions, and still further it has given the general public more definite and reliable information as to the purposes and work of the State charitable institutions.

Other illustrations of the tendency towards a more concentrated organization may be seen in the Game and Fish Conservation Commission, established in 1913, which has combined two closely related services; and in the Public Utilities Commission of 1913, which has united the functions of the former Railroad and Warehouse Commission with similar powers over other public utilities. The State Aid Road Law has also established an administrative organization for connecting the work of the State Highway Commission with the local highway officials by means of the new county superintendents of highways.

In Other States.

This tendency toward a more efficient and concentrated administrative organization is also to be seen in most of the other states; and in many states it has already gone much further than in Illinois. More than half of the states have consolidated the management of their charitable or correctional institutions; and in many states both of these classes of institutions have been united under one control. A number of states have reorganized their educational authorities, consolidating the management of state institutions. Many states have a more concentrated organization of agricultural authorities than in Illinois; and several states (New York, Ohio, and Washington) have in recent years established a comprehensive and consolidated department of agriculture. Several states (New York, Ohio, Kansas, and Wisconsin) have combined the various labor authorities into a single department. About two-thirds of the states have concentrated their tax administration under the control of a small appointive tax commission.

Such reorganization and consolidation has thus far, for the most part, been accomplished in particular branches of state administration; and has been urged by those interested in each field, apparently without any conscious effort at a general reorganization of state administration. Nevertheless, the tendencies have been more marked in some states; and in those there has perhaps been some interaction and inter-relation between those at work in different fields.

New York State, the largest and with the most extensive administrative organization, has perhaps done most in this direction. During the past ten or fifteen years there have been organized in that state comprehensive departments of education, agriculture, labor and health. Ohio has established consolidated departments of agriculture, labor and charitable and correctional institutions, and has gone further than any other state in centralizing tax and finance administration. Wisconsin has consolidated the administration of labor laws, charitable and correctional institutions and state revenues. Many other states have established consolidated departments in one or more fields.

Efficiency and Economy Commissions.

Within the past two or three years a more definite effort has been undertaken in this and a number of other states to plan and work for a more comprehensive reorganization and consolidation of state administration; with a view to greater economy and efficiency. Commissions or committees for this purpose were established in Massachusetts and New Jersey in 1912; and in New York, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, and Iowa in 1913, as well as in Illinois; and the problem has also been attacked in a less official manner in California, and perhaps in other states. With these active efforts, all aimed in the same general direction, the isolated tendencies have begun to develop into a distinct movement for a general reorganization of state administration.

The Massachusetts and New Jersey Commissions have each issued several partial reports, proposing the consolidation of several groups of related bureaus. The most important of these has been the plan of the Massachusetts Commission for the reorganization of the administration of charitable and correctional institutions. The New York Committee, appointed by Gov

ernor Sulzer, proposed a consolidation of the prison authorities, and urged the need for reorganizing the management of the charitable institutions in that state.

In Iowa and Minnesota much more comprehensive plans have been prepared. The investigators employed by the Iowa Legislative Committee have submitted a report proposing a radical reorganization of state government, including constitutional as well as statutory changes. In general this proposes a small number of executive departments each with a single official at the head.

The Minnesota Commission, appointed by Governor Eberhard, has also prepared a general plan of reorganization, limited, however, to those changes which can be made by the legislature. This, like the Iowa plan, is based on a limited number of departments, for most of which there is proposed a single salaried director and an unpaid advisory board, but there are some modifications from this general plan. A Board of Civil Service and budget system are also included in the general scheme. This plan will be presented to the Minnesota legislature in January, 1915, in a single bill for a civil administration code.

Municipal Administration.

Recent developments in the reorganization of municipal government in the United States also show a strong movement towards the more systematic and efficient organization of the administrative services. This general tendency can be seen in nearly all of the various new forms of government proposed. It can be seen in the city charters and general laws which concentrate authority in the mayor, as in the Cleveland "federal plan" of 1891, the New York law of 1898 for cities of the second class, and in the more recent charters of Cleveland and St. Louis. In the various types of commission government for cities, the most common feature is the organization of municipal services in a small number of departments (generally five, sometimes three or seven) each under the direction of a single commissioner. The still more recent city manager plan of municipal government provides for the same organization of administrative services under a few department heads responsible to the city manager.

The United States Government.

The National Administration of the United States Government has been organized from the beginning on a more systematic plan than that of the states. There are now ten executive departments, each dealing with a more or less closely related group of services; and together looking after substantially the whole system of national administration, which in magnitude, importance and expense far exceeds that of any of the states. The head of each department is appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, and these department heads form collectively an unofficial cabinet of advisers to the President, which meets regularly for consultation on matters of special importance and common interest, and in which there is discussed the larger questions of administrative and legislative policy. These departments and their chief officials are as follows:

Department of the Interior.
Department of Commerce.

Department of Labor.

Secretary of State.

Secretary of the Treasury.

Secretary of War.

Attorney General.

Postmaster General.

Secretary of the Navy.

Secretary of the Interior.

Secretary of Commerce.
Secretary of Labor.

This organization as a whole stands in marked contrast with that of the State administration in Illinois and other states; and there can be no doubt that the greater efficiency of the national administration than that of the states is in large measure due to the more systematic organization, the more definite correlation of related services, and the more effective supervision of the various bureaus and divisions by the department officials.

Foreign Countries.

Practically all of the civilized governments in the world have likewise organized their public administration in a limited number of important departments, each under a single official, who has supervision over the various related services in his department. This general plan is followed in the central government of all of the most important countries, as in France, Germany, Great Britain, Russia, Italy, and Spain. It is followed in the various states in the German Empire, and in the large British selfgoverning colonies as in Prussia, Bavaria, Saxony, Canada, Australia, and South Africa; and in the British Dominions it is also used in the several Australian States and Canadian Provinces. It is also the plan of organization adopted in the less important countries of Europe and in South America as in Switzerland, Holland, Belgium, Portugal, Brazil, Argentine, and Chili.

For example, in France, the highly centralized administrative system is organized under the direction of a cabinet of twelve ministers, as follows: Foreign Affairs, Justice, Interior, Finance, Public Instruction and Fine Arts, Public Works, War, Marine, Commerce, Agriculture, Colonies, and Labor.

Even in Great Britain, where there is a good deal of the same tendency as in the American states towards the multiplication of separate authorities, the central administration is under the general control of a cabinet of twenty ministers; and many of the offices commonly supposed to be independent are under some supervision by the Treasury or one of the other important departments.

GENERAL PRINCIPLES AND PURPOSES OF THE COMMITTEE'S PLANS.

Proposed Departments.

In order to secure efficiency and economy in the executive organization, the committee proposes to apply to the State services, so far as can be done under the present State Constitution, the general principles followed in the organization of the executive departments of the United States Government. These principles are also followed in the administrative organization of all the important governments in the world, in the recent plans for the reorganization of State and municipal governments in this country, and in large private business enterprises. To secure this result will involve the reorganization and consolidation of the more than a hundred separate State offices, boards and commissions into a limited number of executive departments, the chief authority in each department to be appointed by the Governor, with the advice and consent of the Senate, and to be responsible to the Governor for the conduct of the department.

The proposed departments and their principal divisions and bureaus, with their chief officials, are as follows:

Department of Finance, under a State Finance Commission, to consist of a State Comptroller, Tax Commissioner, and Revenue Commissioner, to be appointed by the Governor and Senate, with the Auditor of Public Accounts and State Treasurer ex-officio. Each of these officials will be in charge of a particular division, with the finance commission exercising specified powers of supervision over the whole system of finance administration. The comptroller will be charged with the preparation of a budget, and with supervision over expenditures and the installation of accounts of State officers. The tax commissioner will deal with the assessment of property for taxation; and the revenue commissioner will administer the inheritance tax, automobile licenses and perhaps other State revenues. The auditor and treasurer will in the main continue their present functions, with the auditor's auditing powers increased.

Department of Charities and Corrections, to include the present Board of Administration for charitable institutions, a Board of Prison Administration for the penitentiaries and reformatory, and the Charities Commission with powers of inspection and recommendation over both classes of institutions.

Department of Education, to include the State Superintendent of Public Instruction, a single Normal School Board, the board of trustees for the University of Illinois, the State Library, a commission on natural resources,

and a general board of education with advisory powers to coordinate and harmonize the several educational agencies of the State.

Department of Public Works and Buildings, under a Public Works Commission of three members, one to be Commissioner of Highways, one Commissioner of Waterways, and one Fish and Game Commissioner; with

bureaus for each of these services, and also other bureaus under the Superintendent of Buildings and Grounds, the Superintendent of State Parks and the State Art Commission.

Department of Agriculture, under a Secretary of Agriculture, with bureaus under a Superintendent of the State Fair, a Director of Farmers' Institutes, a Live Stock Commissioner (who should have supervision over the State Veterinarian, the board of veterinary examiners, the humane agents and the registrar of pedigrees) and the Inspector of Apiaries and Nurseries.

Department of Public Health, under a salaried Health Commissioner, and an unpaid State Board of Health, with a food inspection bureau under the Food Commissioner (or inspector), with examining and licensing boards for physicians, pharmacists and dentists.

Department of Labor and Mining, under a Commissioner of Labor and two deputies, who should act as a board in adopting rules and regulations and in deciding appeals, with bureaus of statistics, employment, inspection and compensation, and a mining division under the State Mining Board.

Department of Trade and Commerce, to include bureaus under a Commissioner of Corporations, a Commissioner of Banking, the Insurance Superintendent and the Public Utilities Commission-the Chairman of the Public Utilities Commission to act as head of the department.

Department of Law, under the Attorney General, with provision for counsel and attorneys for particular departments to be appointed by the Attorney General with the consent of the Governor.

Department of Military Affairs, continuing the present organization of the State militia.

The several election boards now provided by law should also be consolidated into a single board of elections; and this with the Secretary of State and Civil Service Commission will be outside of the main executive departments above outlined.