(Reprinted by permission from the Journal of the American Institute of Architects, June, 1919)] Interesting suggestions on this point are to be found in the two articles, to which prizes were given by the American Institute of Architects in the June and July, 1919, numbers of their journal. There is much experimentation yet to be done, as the question of the separate house with its separate plot of ground is by no means a settled one. It is particularly desirable that the interest of the foreign born be enlisted, both that they may contribute to the solution of the question and that they may become acquainted with all the possibilities of access to the land which are being worked out. In spite of some defects and the need for further experimentation along the lines suggested above, there is no doubt that the projects of Massachusetts and of the Federal government mark a very real advance. The most pressing need is to construct a sufficient number of these houses so that they may be available for immigrant groups. One means of doing this is by the employer's building houses for the workers to buy or to rent. Although this has sometimes been found to help solve the housing situation, factors may enter that limit its usefulness. The industrial relationships between employer and employee may be such that subsidy for housing by employer would hinder rather than help. Where a community is largely comprised of one industry it may be very unwise for the industry to go so far toward the control of community affairs. Labor unrest in the northern iron ranges can be traced in part to such company provision of housing and sanitation. The limited dividend company, organized not for profit, and operating under the careful supervision of a governmental department, is another solution. This agency has been particularly successful in Massachusetts under the stimulus as well as under the supervision of the Massachusetts Homestead Commission, and is undoubtedly capable of further development. GOVERNMENT BUILDING LOANS Another possibility is that the local or state government advance the money and enable the worker to buy his own home. That is the plan adopted by the Massachusetts Homestead Commission in its experiment at Lowell. It is also one of the policies adopted by the Canadian government, which will loan money to provincial governments to be advanced for building houses on land owned (a) by the provincial or municipal government, (b) by the limited dividend company, (c) by the workman himself. This latter plan would probably commend itself most readily to the foreign-speaking groups.