Some of the foregoing statements deserve attention when compared with like statements made in the Annual Report of 1896. The total number of all orders issued this year as the result of 32,170 inspections, investigations, etc., is 48,329 against 85,500 orders in a total of 27,428 inspections, etc., in 1896. Again, in 1896, the Department instituted 59 prosecutions for violations of the law, while it was found necessary to take but two cases into court for settlement during 1897; of the 59 actions brought in 1896, 21 cases were acquitted, while 6 were pending when the report closed. The number of accidents reported during the past year is 1,234 against 710 in 1896. This increase in the number of accidents reported does not mean that more accidents occurred this year than last, but it does mean that the inspectors have been more thorough in their work, and, in consequence, employers are more prompt and careful about reporting casualties to the Department. This is very clearly shown in the character of the causes given which resulted in accident. The number of fatal accidents is the same as last year, but the percentage is much less for the total number of persons found employed. A marked decrease is shown in the employment of children under sixteen years of age. A total of 11,174 children under sixteen years of age was found employed and reported in an aggregate of 623,697 employes, or 1.78 per cent. against 2.25 per cent. for 1896, the totals being 12,100 children under sixteen years in an aggregate of 537,702 employes for that year. A marked decrease will also be noted in the employment of illiterate children, and likewise in the employment of children under 14 years of age. And, if these statements are compared with the results set forth in the report of the Department for 1895, it will readily be noticed that the

work of the bureau grows more complete and thorough with each

Last year we found it necessary to depart somewhat from the arrangement of the report tabulations of former years, owing to great increase in the volume of work. This year, again, we are obliged to make further changes in the arrangement of the tabulated report in order that we may be able to set forth all the transactions of the bureau in a single volume. The changes made last year seemed to meet with general approval and we trust those wrought in the present report will receive like favor.

COMPLAINTS.

There is not perhaps a single item in all the thousands of transactions of the Department which occasions so much annoyance and loss of valuable time as the one matter of complaints. Not one complaint in every hundred received by the bureau gives specific or even correct information. In cases where the complaint is specific relative to the matter complained of, very seldom is it signed by the person making the complaint. Upon investigation of a complaint, we often find that the whole basis of the charges made is malice. This is true even of persons who send in complaints in the name of some organization or union of employes. Some complainants make their charges general, implicating every person in the locality engaged in the particular calling or trade against which they are making complaint. The following is one of this character sent to the Department from Middletown, N. Y., by a person or persons signing the communication "The Bakers."

"Mr: O'Leary,

"Since the last call you made around Middletown and vicinity I haven't seen any improvement with the bakers. The hours are from 70 to 90 a week in all the shops. One baker employs a boy

2

under 14. Another forces his employes to work 80 to 90 hours per

week. Please attend to this at once, and oblige.

"Yours respectfully,

"The Bakers."

We sent an inspector to Middletown with request that he carefully investigate the complaint and report. The report of the inspector which was made after careful inquiry failed to sustain a single charge contained in the complaint. The boy mentioned was found to be eighteen years of age and employed with his father in a bakery. Another instance was an unsigned complaint about the failure of a company to pay its employes regularly each week as required by law. Upon receipt of the complaint we wrote the firm calling their attention to the matter, and a prompt and courteous reply was received from them in which the complaint was acknowledged to be true, and reasons given why it was true, and also giving assurances that the matter would be corrected within a very short time. Each week following we received an additional complaint bearing on the matter and also charging the Department with neglect of duty. We could make no reply for the simple reason that we did not have the name or address of the person making the complaint. Finally we were threatened with having the matter reported to the Governor and given to the public press. We could do nothing but await the fulfilment of the agreement of the company in the matter. We were advised that the agreement had been lived up to by the company and of course the annoyance from complaints ceased. In our remarks on this subject last year we made the following suggestion: