Part 6

Asiatic Turkey is blessed by fine agricultural land, yet Turkey instead of exporting wheat has to import flour. During the war while I was in Constantinople half of that city was without bread for a day and a half on one occasion. The soldiers brought over from Asia Minor were without food and they were plundering the bakeshops in the city.

In 1908 when Austria annexed Bosnia and Herzegovina, the young Turks invited all the Moslem population of these regions to migrate to Turkey and promised them money and lands. Thousands responded but they were disappointed and were saddled on the Christian population of Macedonia. This started a natural hatred towards the Moslems, and when the war started these immigrants wisely flew towards Asia Minor, the promised land. The government is shipping them to Asia Minor and Armenia at the rate of 1,500 a day. What will become of the Armenians on whom is already saddled twice more than they can endure by the Asiatic horde of Turks and Kurds?

The war was renewed because Turkey did not wish to have a few Mosques in Adrianople under the Christian rule. Yet the Turk did not think anything about the ancient churches in Asia Minor that were defiled and ruined by the Moslem hordes, nor of the bodies of the clergy which were mutilated in time of peace.

What kind of government can one expect from a race that has no such thing as home and family in the civilized sense of domestic conduct, laws, sincerity and happiness? And what kind of laws and ruling can be expected for the infidel and subject race to the above government? Yet Europe will content itself believing that the Turk will be good hereafter and will enforce the traditionary promised reforms in Armenia.

Y. M. KAREKIN.

New York City.

THE SEATTLE CONFERENCE

TO THE EDITOR:

THE SURVEY of April 12 announced the appointment of the new committees of the National Conference of Charities and Correction, stating that pursuant to the recent amendment to the by-laws Frank Tucker, the president of the conference had requested the committees to begin their work immediately. It was pointed out in your article that the Committee on Organization has been in many respects the keystone of the national conference and that its duties have been difficult and arduous.

Under the revised by-laws the duties of this committee are simplified. It is no longer obliged to make its report within a few days of its appointment. There are, however, certain disadvantages in the new plan from the point of view of members of the conference who desire to have a voice in its organization. Under the old plan, in spite of the fact that the committee was thrown into the turmoil of conference politics, the active members of the conference were all there and had an opportunity to be heard by the Committee on Organization. Under the new plan the committee is expected to have its work practically done by the time the conference meets. Unless the committee adopts a procedure which is democratic it may properly be open to the charge of making conference politics worse instead of better.

As chairman of the committee, therefore, I desire to announce through the columns of THE SURVEY that it is the desire of Mr. Tucker and myself, in which I am sure the members of the committee concur, that all interested members of the National Conference of Charities and Correction will have ample opportunity to express their views in reference to matters with which the Committee on Organization is concerned. There will be a number of open meetings both before and after reaching Seattle at which all those interested in the conference will be welcome.

It is my desire that this committee shall truly represent the wishes of the conference with reference to all matters of organization. Inasmuch as the president is anxious that this committee shall have a tentative report ready soon after the conference opens in Seattle I wish to urge all readers of THE SURVEY who are interested in the national conference to submit their suggestions as early as possible. We especially want your suggestions regarding the following:

1. Topics for discussion.

2. The names of the committees.

3. The membership of the committees, the committee chairmen and vice-chairmen.

The following dates have been set for open meeting: Friday, May 16; Tuesday, May 27; Friday, June 13.

These meetings will be held at 4 P. M., in Room 214, United Charities Building, 105 East 22nd Street, New York city. Kindly put the dates on your calendar. If you cannot come send your suggestions to the undersigned at the above address.

JOHN A. KINGSBURY.

[Chairman Committee on Organization, National Conference of Charities and Correction.]

New York City.

ANOTHER CASE OF RED TAPE

TO THE EDITOR:

During the year 1912, the Domestic Relations Court of Brooklyn, established in 1910, disbursed through the Department of Charities, which maintains a branch office in the court building, $101,660.45. That amount was made up of small payments ranging from $1 to $10, which the delinquent husband and father was ordered by the court to pay toward the support of his wife and children.

The method of disbursing the money is crude and archaic. The women are paid in cash at the cashier’s office in the court, thus necessitating the expenditure of time and carfare. The office of the cashier in the Brooklyn court is open from 9 A. M. until 3 P. M., except Saturday and Monday. Saturday the office closes at noon. On Monday only is there an evening session from 7 P. M. to 10 P. M. In Manhattan conditions are worse, for there banking hours are closely observed, and there is no evening session, though many of the women work during the day. Collection of the week’s money thus involved the loss of a half day’s work.

Mrs. A made nine trips to collect a total of $8, and from that must be deducted at least ninety cents for carfare, loss of time not being considered. Mrs. B is very old. Mrs. C is an invalid, Mrs. D has a very young child and four older children to look after. Mrs. E lives a long distance from the court. Her carfare is always twenty cents and frequently it is necessary for her to take the two youngest children with her. Mrs. F works during the day and goes to school at night. These are only a few of the many reasons why the present plan of payment should be abandoned.

Philadelphia disburses about $200,000 a year on cases of this kind. The money is paid by checks sent by mail. We are informed that no case of fraud has occurred. Chicago has a similar system that works equally well.

It was not to be expected that the originators of the Domestic Relations Court idea would construct a perfect machine, and efforts are being made to correct this defect by an order to the effect that any woman who can prove to the satisfaction of the Department of Charities that it is a great hardship for her to go to the court, can have her money sent by mail. Unfortunately, there is a lot of red tape in some of our city departments and often it is very hard to prove things to their satisfaction; so it is to be hoped that this order, which is a step in the right direction, will soon be stretched into a big, manly stride, long enough to cover all cases.

CLYDE N. WHITE.

[Brooklyn Bureau of Charities.]

Brooklyn, N. Y.

HOMES FOR WORKING GIRLS

TO THE EDITOR:

In your issue of April 19 the splendid article on The Housing Problem As It Affects Girls, by the president of the Chelsea House, has greatly interested me. May I add a few words on the subject and the names of other cities where such houses are already started or are under consideration?

There is a splendid though small Girls Friendly Lodge in Washington, D. C. In Cincinnati the Anna Louise Home accommodates about 150 girls, and Bishop Frances of Indiana has converted his spacious school Knickerbocker Hall in Indianapolis into a boarding home for young girls. This, I suppose, is the most complete and pretentious house of its kind. It has a gymnasium, swimming pool, almost entirely single rooms, and will accommodate nearly one hundred girls. In Louisville besides the Girls Friendly Inn, there is the Business Woman’s Club which meets the needs of a better paid class of young women, and the Monfort Home which like the Inn meets the needs of a girl earning a more moderate wage.

I have had letters from all parts of the country asking questions relative to starting such homes, and know that the subject is under consideration in Denver; Watertown, N. Y.; Lexington, Ky.; Minneapolis; Memphis; and Mobile.

The cherished hope I believe of all such houses should be to make them self supporting. No self respecting girl wishes to be even a partial object of charity. From the starting of the Girls Friendly Inn we have aimed to make the house self supporting, and with the exception of the interest on the mortgage, the house mother’s salary and coal, the weekly income meets all the expenditures. As soon as we can enlarge the house it will be entirely self supporting. I find this a great help, in securing the co-operation of the girls and in preventing waste in light, water and so on. The dominating thought is to make the inn a normal home and with this in view there are almost no rules. No one but those close to the young working girl knows what it means to her to be able to entertain her “gentlemen friends” in a quiet and home-like living room or to be able to give a party or entertain her Sunday School class in an attractive room.

The problem of sickness is an important one. Girls must often struggle along half sick because they can not afford a doctor or medicine or because they are afraid of losing their position. The inn has an endowed bed in the Norton Infirmary, and the services of some of our best physicians, also a discount of 25 per cent on all drugs and prescriptions. I find a word from the house mother is always received kindly by the employer and in my experience of eighteen months I have never had a girl lose her work on account of sickness.

JOSEPHINE M. KERMM.

[Housemother Girls’ Friendly Inn.]

Louisville.

SOCIAL ETHICS

TO THE EDITOR:

The following is a remarkable illustration of the advance in our conception of social obligations to unfortunates:

The president (of the Chicago Medical Society, December 13, 1867) “appointed a committee to consider the wisdom of the members of the society signing a petition requesting that the physician who was then imprisoned (Dr. Mudd) for caring for the wounds of Lincoln’s assassin should be released. The members of the society were of various opinions in regard to the ethical position of the unfortunate doctor.”[2]

Footnote 2:

Chicago Medical Recorder, April, 1913, p. 238.

JULIA I. FELSENTHAL.

Chicago.

THE BACK FENCE

TO THE EDITOR:

One of the greatest disfigurements to the landscape as one looks out the back window of the average house is the row after row of unsightly wooden fences which rigorously mark off each twenty-five or thirty feet of land and constitute a barrier of exclusiveness very chilling in its effect on one’s friendly disposition. Of course one does not want his neighbor’s children to tramp unceremoniously over his little flower or vegetable garden, but could not the same results he brought about by a simple wire division covered with virginia creeper, grapes or clematis? Think of the beauty of such an outlook, and the aesthetic humanizing effect such a display of floral wealth would have on the minds of young and old! It might possibly result also in breaking down some of that proverbial coldness and hauteur which is said to characterize city neighbors. Life is short at best and sufficiently lacking in familiarity and cordiality to warrant some attempt to reform the wooden back fence out of existence.

J. J. KELSO.

Toronto.

THE OTHER OTHER HALF

TO THE EDITOR:

“We want to know ‘how the other half lives.’” This was said fifteen years ago, and we are saying it today. But it is the _other_ half that we now have in mind. Library shelves are filled with books about the one half. Sociologists have studied it; health officers have examined it; sanitary boards have considered it; laws have been made to regulate it. Juvenile courts, protective leagues, visiting nurses’ associations, social settlements, charity organization societies, have been bringing us day by day information as to how _that_ half lives. Now we want to know how the _other_ half lives.

Recently there has been a great investigation of one special phase of the life of the poor. Great business firms have been asked how certain sums of their earnings were distributed as wages to the poor, and the wage-earners have been asked what use they made of these wages. How much do working girls receive and how much does a working girl need to live decently? These are the questions that have been asked. “We want to know more of the life of the working people,” has been the cry.

But wait. Now we want to know how the _other_ half lives: Society is a whole, not a half. These great questions are questions of society, and they can not be answered by investigating _half_ of society.

Yes, we want to know about the $2,000,000 that was paid in wages; to whom it went, and how it was spent, but we also want to know about the $7,000,000 that was paid in dividends. To whom did _it_ go, and how was _it_ spent? How much did the dividend receivers need a week on which to live? Were they judicious in their expenditures? These questions also ought to be investigated by a commission.

What do we know about the occupations, the health, the morality, the family life of the very rich?

If we are suspicious that the home life of the children of Mrs. Zambrowski of Mulberry street is not all that could be desired, we send a juvenile court officer to investigate. If there is evidence that the father is not honestly employed, if there is disease in the household, some officer is on hand to see what is the matter. What do we know of the home life of the Van Astor children? Is Mr. Van Astor an industrious bread earner? Are the home conditions of the Van Astor children morally healthful?

We want to know more about these excursions to Europe. Are they always cultural? We want to know more about the life of Mrs. Astorbilt in her Paris home. We want to know more about the employment conditions of the “Four Hundred.” Perhaps a law should be made in the interests of health limiting the number of continuous hours spent in certain social activities. We want to know more about the lives of boys and girls in wealthy boarding-schools. We desire to find out just how a working girl spends $8 a week, but we also wish to learn just how the dividend receiver spends $800 a week. The poor need visiting housekeepers to instruct them, but may not the wealthy need visiting home-keepers?

The unexplored continent of sociology is the life of the wealthy. It is to the interest of the health and well-being of society that a careful and dispassionate study be made of this subject.

CLARENCE D. BLACHLY.

Chicago.

A CALL FOR LEADERSHIP

TO THE EDITOR:

There is a widespread opinion among social and industrial workers that the unequal conditions existing in human society are going to be levelled: that equality of opportunity and the more equitable distribution of the necessities of life are to be accomplished by a system of “passing it on.” In this way, the social burden, instead of resting where it does now, on the lowest stratum of the population, will be placed on broad shoulders better able to bear the load.

Do not such solutions as employers’ liability, workmen’s compensation, the minimum wage, reduced hours of employment and better occupational conditions all mean an increase in the cost of producing the necessaries of life? Do they not tend to make more grave one of the vital problems of the hour?

There seems to be a feeling abroad, of which many are possessed, that there is somewhere a great fund of capital on hand, which only needs equitable distribution to allow all now engaged in industry to live in comfort, with only a moderate amount of exertion.

This is the result, probably, of seeing large rows of figures, stated as the wealth controlled by financial institutions, or in the possession of individuals. Most of these figures refer to pieces of paper, either evidences of debt, or titles to ownership of lands, factories or other tools of trade. Not one of these is available for furnishing the necessities of life, _without human labor_ applied at the right time and place under competent direction.

There is produced, by direction, foresight and toil, in any given year, hardly more of any stated necessity of life than the current needs of the people. It is probably true also that it is the thrift of the few; the foresight of the so-called capitalist; the enterprise of the manufacturer, builder or railroad man, the wise ventures of the merchant and trader; that keep up the present standard of wages and living—low though it may be in comparison with our wishes or ideals.

A large number of those engaged in business enterprises fail to succeed at all. The profit of the more successful, though often imposing, averages a very small percentage counting both good and bad years. It is easily turned into a loss, by dull times, trade changes, or careless management.

To quote Ray Stannard Baker (not writing in behalf of the mill owner) in his article on the Lawrence strike: “If one were to divide all the surplus of profit in the textile mills today—figure it out for yourself! It would increase their wages and improve their living conditions almost inappreciably.”[3]

Footnote 3:

The Revolutioners Strike. _American Magazine_, May, 1912.

So it is evident that if employment is to continue and a larger share is to be given to those who perform the manual labor, while at the same time the conditions under which they work are to be improved, some means must be devised whereby the present margin of profit can be increased. Otherwise those who plan and carry on these industrial undertakings will be discouraged.

Of course many believe that capital, or business enterprise, has had too much attention already. Now that the capitalist “class” (mostly made up of men formerly poor) has shown the way to the accumulation of wealth, they think it is simply necessary for “society” or “the workers” to do the same thing themselves, and pocket the results. But how this is to be done has not yet been shown.

How can the employer treat his working force more generously, without the fear of insolvency staring him in the face, when the books are balanced for the year?

One of the most hopeful solutions was promised in the new “efficiency” discoveries. These seemed to indicate that a larger output by the worker could bring about a greater reward for himself, together with a corresponding increased profit for the employer.

But, so far, the attitude of “labor” seems to be opposed to anything like an increase either of efficiency or production. Reduction of hours and minimum of output, seem to be favored. The false idea is that more “work” is thereby created, although the amount of the absolute necessaries of life which their labor produces is thereby curtailed. Their idea is that they do not get their share of the “wealth” they already produce; that a constantly increasing mass of it is kept out of their reach. They wish to seize part of it, not by earning, but by taking it from the present recipients.

So we are brought back to the original issue. How can it be brought to pass that the director of enterprise on capitalist, whose brains are the creating power of the world’s wealth, shall be filled with an altruistic spirit that he may spare and increase all benefits and comforts with his manual helpers? And how, on the other hand, can we inspire the worker, under his direction, with loyal energy to do all in _his_ power to support and carry on the wealth-producing enterprise, each emulating each with noble example and worthy sacrifice?

Here should come in the twin forces of education and religion. Enlightenment will be of no avail without a moral basis. The fundamentals of the Ten Commandments and the Golden Rule must have a place in our great educational system which should teach men that there is a higher element in life than the facts of science and material things.

This new social adjustment, if it is to come peaceably and not through anarchy, must find new and able leadership which does not resort to loud protestations of devotion to one class combined with denunciation of another, or to vague cries of “social justice,” or to illusory schemes for levelling inequalities that are imbedded in human nature itself. What is needed is a leadership founded in a love for mankind, wide as the race, broad-minded, hopeful, strong and sane, to help the new generation forward in progress that shall also be peace.

JOSEPH D. HOLMES.

New York.

MOTHERHOOD AND TEACHING

TO THE EDITOR:

“Motherhood and teaching”[4] was an issue in Minneapolis not long ago, and the school board decided against the employment of married women. The board was influenced according to report, by the fact that there were poor teachers who married and this was a comfortable way to dispose of them, regardless of the injustice to the good ones. I understand that in Kansas there is a state law prohibiting the employment of married women. Were this policy applied to men teachers it would be ridiculed. Marriage is a strong factor in developing permanence of interest in the vocation and in blending vocational interest with community interest.

Footnote 4:

See THE SURVEY, April 19, page 101.

The ability to teach is dependent upon qualities which are mental and temperamental. The hours and the character of the work of a teacher are such as are peculiarly adapted to the woman who may marry and who may have children; and her fuller experience in life should make possible a fuller understanding of the needs of childhood.

It is generally recognized that our schools have deteriorated. Would not a very simple remedy be the employment of mothers as well as fathers? Would not they understand better than others what the children need?

When education was in the home it was proper that mothers should be teachers. With the socialization of education as of industry, a celibate class has arisen to take the place of mothers. Mothers have become the parasites of society, while constructive work in social service has devolved upon a celibate class. We have reached the stage now when society needs every possible constructive factor and the latent possibilities for social work in the married woman should be encouraged rather than discarded.

GRACE PUTNAM POLLARD.

[President Liberal Union of Minnesota.]

Minneapolis.

JOTTINGS

HOSPITAL SHIP FOR SEAMEN

Representative Gardner of Massachusetts has re-introduced his bill for the creation of a hospital ship for the Gloucester fishermen. This bill reached only the hearing stage in the House of Representatives during the last session. All the witnesses who appeared before the house Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries spoke for it.

INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE BILL

President Wilson has assured Andrew Furuseth, president of the International Seamen’s Union, that the so-called involuntary servitude bill will be enacted at the present session of Congress. No hearings will probably be had, as Congress already has information on the subject from various angles. This bill passed the House of Representatives at the last session, but was so much altered by the Senate that the President vetoed it. This measure is one of the list of fifteen measures of social legislation the support of which was urged upon President Wilson by a number of social workers.

SAFETY CAMPAIGN AMONG CHILDREN