102 MINIMUM WAGE LEGISLATION IN VARIOUS COUNTRIES

tain extent, because the agricultural products of Uruguay have to be
exported and wages over a certain limit might endanger the competitive
 power of Uruguayan agriculture, there is no reason to believe
that the wages come anyways near that upper limit. Considerations
as to the guaranty of a minimum of existence (living wage) may
have played their role, but from the general prosperity of Uruguay
it may be concluded that wages are considerably above the lower
limit.
It seems that another principle, not applied elsewhere to a large
extent, has been of prime importance in Uruguay—the comparative
political strength of the various parties in Parliament, especially the
political power of agricultural laborers. The wage problem thereby
becomes a political question.

Results

[FROM personal observation by one of them on some large agricultural
 enterprises in Uruguay, Percy A. Martin and Earl M.
Smith conclude that the law has proved a distinct success.’® The
workers seem to be well aware of the terms of the law. Reports are
miversally kept, the inspectors check up on the application of the law,
and employers are forced to observe it. During 1926 there were 139
violations where fines were collected. One particular fraud consisted
 In underpayment of the workers although these workers signed
receipts for the higher regulation wage.
The average -wage of agricultural workers has gradually risen to
18 pesos a month, the amount fixed by the law as the minimum for
medium-sized enterprises. The general objective of the law therefore
 seems to have been attained.

HUNGARY

AN agricultural wages order of February 24, 1921, provided
maximum wages in agriculture, according to the kind of work
and the season. The order states that workers shall not “in virtue
of any contract claim wages more than the wages so determined.”
Sec. 2.
! An A for the establishment of minimum wages was passed on
May 28, 1923.2 When the daily wages of agricultural laborers, paid
in money or kind, in any district are so low (taking into account
seasonal changes and agricultural conditions) that these wages constitute
 an “ excessive and unjustifiable exploitation ” and are insufficient
“for the maintenance of the worker and of his family,” anyone may
petition the Minister of Agriculture to interfere. (Art. 2.)¢ The
minister shall, after ascertaining the views of the competent chamber
of agriculture, issue a decree fixing minimum wage rates.

* Monthly Labor Review, October, 1927, p. 14: “Labor legislation in Uruguay,” by
Percy A. Martin and Earl M. Smith,
© Burns, IB. M.: Wages and the State, London, 1926, p. 113.
2 International Labor Office. Legislative scries, 1923—Hungary 3: Act No. 25 of
1923, respecting the prevention of the unjustifiable exploitation of the labor of agricultural
 workers, dated May 28, 1923. Geneva, p. 5. .
¢ Ungarische Reichsgesetzsamlung fiir das Jahr 1923, authentische Ubersetzung. Budapest,
 p. 296,