The Waterbury Democrat., 1931-09-15
NEA Service Writer

washington-The two greatest nations of the world are more or less upset about something known as the dole"
 A proposed 10 per cent cut in Great Britain's weekly dole" to her unemupoyed has caused a po- litical upheaval.
 Some of our own statesmen are using the term as a scareword to describe any federal appropria- tion which Congress might make this winter toward relief of the hungry and destitute.
 The dictionary describes a dole as that which is distributed, or a limited portion, especially a gift of charity.
 The British "dole" is the un- natural outgrowth of nationa. unemployment system established before the World War, under which payments to the nnem- ployed now amount to a large proportion of the national budget, Forces in this country opposed to federal relief intimate that Brit ian's dole" has aggravated her economic troubles and that con- gressional appropriation to re- lieve distress would have a sinii- lar effect and would saddle simi- lar system on this country.
 At least two fundamental diff ferences have to be recognized. First, those who urge federal re- lief this winter are not pressing for an unemployment insurance system but a sum of money which would be distributed where most needed by the Red Cross or other agency. Second, British law-but not American law - provides for maintenance of the destitute un- der the poor relief system. When some 100000 Britons became employed by 1921 their govern ment had to decide whether these workers and their families should be cared for by the poor law ma chinery or whether the set-up of the unemployment insurance sys- tenn should be utilized to provide the maintenance. Among reasons for choosing the latter alternative were fear that local taxes would often be inadequate for the emer- gency, realization that great num- bers of persons would be humiliat- ed although unemployed through no fault of theirs and belief that the emergency would prove tem- porary.
 England, in 1911, became the first nation to adopt compulsory contributory employment insurance law. It then covered about D. 250,00O workers. For each person so insured the employer paid into the benefit fund 5.1 cents weekly, the employe 5.1 cents and the ex- chequer 34 cents. Benefits of $1.70 weekly were started in 1913 to such unemployed as had con- tributed to the fund for six. months. months.
 The system was experimental and had no chance to work out because the war came. Pre-war and wartime employment were good and at the end of the war the fund had an undistributed bal ance of $79.000,000. There was little call on the fund because England was paying special postwar out-of-work allowances amounting to some $300.0O0, ,000.
 In 1920, with unemployment only around 500,000. the system was extended to nearly all but agricultural workers, covering Ill., 000,000. Employers and employees each paid 8 cents a week. the government cents. Benefits were raised to s3.65 for men and $2.92 for women. The scheme was still held on an actuarial basis. with benefits claimable definitely relat- ed to contributions paid in. Par liament still holds the theory that England will return to that basis and that eventually it will be pos sible to stop using the system as an instrument of general relief.
 Requirements for previous con- tributions frons beneficiaries have been thrown off since 1921-the