THE RATIONALES FOR A GOVERNMENT OPERATED PROGRAM FOR THE COMPENSATION OF CRIME VICTIMS ARE FIRST REVIEWED. THE FIRST RATIONALE HOLDS THAT THE STATE HAS A DUTY TO PROTECT ITS CITIZENS FROM CRIME, AND THAT IF THE STATE FAILS TO DO SO, IT THEREBY INCURS AN OBLIGATION TO INDEMNIFY THOSE WHO ARE INJURED. A SECOND THEORY SAYS THAT SINCE THE STATE IMPRISONS OFFENDERS AND THEREBY MAKES IT ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE FOR THEM TO COMPENSATE THEIR VICTIMS IN TERMS OF FINANCIAL AID, THE STATE SHOULD THUS BE RESPONSIBLE TO HELP OUT THE VICTIMS. THE THIRD AND MOST WIDELY-ACCEPTED THEORY FOR ADOPTION OF A COMPENSATION PLAN IS THAT THE STATE SHOULD AID ALL UNFORTUNATE VICTIMS OF CRIME AS A MATTER OF A GENERAL WELFARE POLICY. AFTER A REVIEW OF THESE THEORIES, THE ARTICLE EXAMINES COMPENSATION PROGRAMS IN SUCH AREAS AS NEW ZEALAND, GREAT BRITAIN, NEW YORK, CALIFORNIA, MARYLAND, AND MASSACHUSETTS. FINALLY, THE BENEFITS AVAILABLE TO CRIME VICTIMS UNDER THE 1974 CALIFORNIA VICTIMS OF CRIME COMPENSATION PROGRAM. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED)