Brace Charles Loring
The Dangerous Classes of New York, and Twenty Years' Work Among Them
CHAPTER XXX
THE ORGANIZATION OF CHARITIES
The power of every charity and effort at moral reform is in the spirit of the man directing or founding it. If he enter it mechanically, as he would take a trade or profession, simply because it falls in his way, or because of its salary or position, he cannot possibly succeed in it. There are some things which the laws of trade do not touch. There are services of love which seek no pecuniary reward, and whose virtue, when first entered upon, is that the soul is poured out in them without reference to money-return.
In the initiation of all great and good causes there is a time of pure enthusiasm, when life and thought and labor are given freely, and hardly a care enters the mind as to the prizes of honor or wealth which are struggled for so keenly in the world. No reformer or friend of humanity, worthy of the name, has not some time in his life felt this high enthusiasm. If it has been his duty to struggle with such an evil as Slavery, the wrongs of the slave have been burned into his soul until he has felt them more even than if they were his own, and no reward of riches or fame that life could offer him would be half so sweet as the consciousness that he had broken these fetters of injustice.
If he has been inspired by Christ with a love of humanity, there have been times when the evils that afflict it clouded his daily happiness; when the thought of the tears shed that no one could wipe away; of the nameless wrongs suffered; of the ignorance which imbruted the young, and the sins that stained the conscience; of the loneliness, privation, and pain of vast masses of human beings; of the necessary degradation of great multitudes; – when the picture of all these, and other wounds and woes of mankind, rose like a dark cloud between him and the light, and even the face of God was obscured.
At such times it has seemed sweeter to bring smiles back to sad faces, and to raise up the neglected and forgotten, than to win the highest prize of earth; and the thought of HIM who hath ennobled man, and whose life was especially given for the poor and outcast, made all labors and sacrifices seem as nothing compared with the Joy of following in His footsteps.
At such rare moments the ordinary prizes of life are forgotten or not valued. The man is inspired with "the enthusiasm of humanity." He maps out a city with his plans and aspirations for the removal of the various evils which he sees. His life flows out for those who can never reward him, and who hardly know of his labors.
But, in process of time, the first fervor of this ardent enthusiasm must cool away. The worker himself is forced to think of his own interests and those of his family. His plan, whatever it may be, – for removing the evils which have pained him, demands practical means, – men, money, and "machinery." Hence arises the great subject of "Organization." The strong under-running current which carries his enterprise along is still the old faith or enthusiasm; but the question of means demands new thought and the exercise of different faculties.
There are many radical difficulties, in organizing practical charities, which are exceedingly hard to overcome.
Charities, to be permanent and efficient, must be organized with as much exactness and order as business associations, and carry with them something of the same energy and motives of action. But the tendency, as is well known from European experience, of all old charities, is to sluggishness, want of enterprise, and careless business arrangement, as well as to mechanical routine in the treatment of their subjects. The reason of this is to be found in the somewhat exceptional abnormal position – economically considered – of the worker in fields of benevolence. All laborers in the intellectual and moral field are exposed to the dangers of routine. But in education, for instance, and the offices of the Church, there is a constant and healthy competition going on, and certain prizes are held out to the successful worker, which tend continually to arouse his faculties, and lead him to invent new methods of attaining his ends. The relative want of this among the Catholic clergy may be the cause of their lack of intellectual activity, as compared with the Protestant.
In the management of charities there is a prevailing impression that what may be called "interested motives" should be entirely excluded. The worker, having entered the work under the enthusiasm of humanity, should continue buoyed up by that enthusiasm. His salary may be seldom changed. It will be ordinarily beneath that which is earned by corresponding ability outside. No rewards of rank or fame are held out to him. He is expected to find his pay in his labor.
Now there are certain individuals so filled with compassion for human sufferings, or so inspired by Religion, or who so much value the offering of respect returned by mankind for their sacrifices, that they do not need the impulse of ordinary motives to make their work as energetic and inventive and faithful as any labor under the motives of competition and gain.
But the great majority of the instruments and agents of a charity are not of this kind. They must have something of the common inducements of mankind held out before them. If these be withdrawn, they become gradually sluggish, uninventive, inexact, and lacking in the necessary enterprise and ardor.
The agents of the old endowed charities of England are said often to become as lazy and mechanical as monks in monasteries.
To remedy such evils, the trustees of all charities should hold out a regular scale of salaries, which different agents could attain to if they were successful. The principle, too, which should govern the amounts paid to each agent, should be well considered. Of course, the governing law for all salaries are the demand and supply for such services. But an agent for a charity, even as a missionary, sometimes puts himself voluntarily outside of such a law. He throws himself into a great moral and religious cause, and consumes his best powers in it, and unfits himself (it may be) for other employments. His own field may be too narrow to occasion much demand for his peculiar experience and talent from other sources. There comes then a certain moral obligation on the managers of the charity, not to take him at the cheapest rate for which they can secure his services, but to proportion his payment somewhat to what he would have been worth in other fields, and thus to hold out to him some of the inducements of ordinary life. The salary should be large enough to allow the agent and his family to live somewhat as those of corresponding ability and education do, and still to save something for old age or a time of need. Some benevolent associations have obtained this by a very wise arrangement – that of an "annuity insurance" of the life of their agents, which secured them a certain income at a given age.
With the consciousness thus of an appreciation of their labors, and a payment somewhat in proportion to their value, and a permanent connection with their humane enterprise, the ordinary employes and officials come to have somewhat of the interest in it which men take in selfish pursuits, and will exercise the inventiveness, economy, and energy that are shown in business enterprises.
Every one knows how almost impossible it is for a charity to conduct, for instance, a branch of manufacture with profit. The explanation is that the lower motives are not applied to it. Selfishness is more alert and economical than benevolence.
On the other side, however, it will not be best to let a charity become too much of a business. There must always be a certain generosity and compassion, a degree of freedom in management, which are not allowed in business undertakings. The agents must have heart as well as head. The moisture of compassion must not be dried up by too much discipline.
Organization must not swallow up the soul. Routine may be carried so far as to make the aiding of misery the mere dry working of a machine.
The thought must ever be kept in mind that each human being, however low, who is assisted, is a "power of endless life," with capacities and possibilities which cannot be measured or limited. And that one whose nature CHRIST has shared and for whom He lived and died, cannot be despised or treated as an animal or a machine.
If the directors of a benevolent institution or enterprise can arouse these great motives in their agents, – spiritual enthusiasm with a reasonable gratification of the love of honor and a hope of fair compensation, – they will undoubtedly create a body of workers capable of producing a profound impression on the evils they seek to remove.
It is always a misfortune for an agent of a charity if he be too constantly with the objects of his benevolent labors. He either becomes too much accustomed to their misfortunes, and falls into a spirit of routine with them; or, if of tender sympathies, the spring of his mind is bent by such a constant burden of misery, and he loses the best qualities for his work – elasticity and hope. Every efficient worker in the field of benevolence should have time and place for solitude, and for other pursuits or amusements.
DUTIES OF TRUSTEES
A board of trustees for an important charity should represent, so far as is practicable, the different classes and professions of society. There is danger in a board being too wealthy or distinguished, as well as too humble. First of all, men are needed who have a deep moral interest in the work, and who will take a practical part in it. Then they must be men of such high character and integrity that the community will feel no anxiety at committing to them – "trust funds." As few "figure-heads" should be taken in as possible – that is, persons of eminent names, for the mere purpose of making an impression on the public. Men of wealth are needed for a thousand emergencies; men of moderate means, also, who can appreciate practical difficulties peculiar to this class; men of brains, to guide and suggest, and of action, to impel. There should be lawyers in such a board, for many cases of legal difficulty which arise; and, if possible, physicians, as charities have so much to do with sanitary questions. Two classes only had better not be admitted: men of very large wealth, as they seldom contribute more than persons of moderate property, and discourage others by their presence in the board; and clergymen with parishes, the objection to the latter being that they have no time for such labors, and give a sectarian air to the charity.
It is exceedingly desirable that the trustees or managers of our benevolent institutions should take a more active and personal part in their management. The peculiar experience which a successful business career gives – the power both of handling details and managing large interests; the capacity of organization; the energy and the careful judgment and knowledge of men which such a life develops, – are the qualities most needed in managing moral and benevolent "causes."
A trustee of a charity will often see considerations which the workers in it do not behold, and will be able frequently to judge of its operations from a more comprehensive point of view. The great duty of trustees, of course, should be to rigidly inspect all accounts and to be responsible for the pecuniary integrity of the enterprise. The carrying-out of the especial plan of the association and all the details should be left with one executive officer. If there is too great interference in details by the board of management, much confusion ensues, and often personal jealousies and bickerings. Many of our boards of charities have almost been broken up by internal petty cabals and quarrels. The agents of benevolent institutions, especially if not mingling much with the world, are liable to small jealousies and rivalries.
The executive officer must throw the energy of a business into his labor of benevolence. He must be allowed a large control over subordinates, and all the machinery of the organization should pass through his hands. He must especially represent the work, both to the board and to the world. If his hands be tied too much, he will soon become a mere routine-agent, and any one of original power would leave the position. Again, in his dealings with the heads of the various departments or branches of the work, he must seek to make each agent feel responsible, and to a degree independent, so that his labor may become a life-work, and his reputation and hope of means may depend on his energy and success. If on all proper occasions he seeks to do full justice to his subordinates, giving them their due credit and promoting their interests, and strives to impart to them his own enthusiasm, he will avoid all jealousies and will find that the charity is as faithfully served as any business house.
The success in "organization" is mainly due to success in selecting your men. Some persons have a faculty for this office; others always fail in it.
Then, having the proper agents, great consideration is due towards them. Some employers treat their subordinates as if they had hardly a human feeling. Respect and courtesy always make those who serve you more efficient. Too much stress, too, can hardly be laid on frank and unsuspicious dealing with employes. Suspicion renders its objects more ignoble. A man who manages many agents must show much confidence; yet, of course, be strict and rigid in calling them to account. It will be better for him also not to be too familiar with them.
CHAPTER XXXI
STATE AID FOR CHARITIES
An important question often comes up in regard to our charitable associations: "How shall they best be supported?" – by endowment from the State or by private and annual assistance? There is clearly a right that all charities of a general nature should expect some help from the public Legislature. The State is the source of the charters of all corporations. One of the main duties of a Legislature is to care for the interests of the poor and criminal. The English system, dating as far back as Henry VIII, has been to leave the charge of the poor and all educational institutions, as much as possible, to counties or local bodies or individuals. It has been, so far as the charge of the poor is concerned, imitated here. But in neither country has it worked, well; and the last relic of it will probably soon be removed in this State, by placing the defective persons – the blind and dumb, and insane and idiot, and the orphans – in the several counties in State institutions. The charge of criminals and reformatory institutions are also largely placed under State control and supervision.
The object of a State Legislature in all these matters is bonum publicum– the public weal. If they think that a private charity is accomplishing a public work of great value, which is not and perhaps cannot be accomplished by purely public institutions, they apparently have the same right to tax the whole community, or a local community, for its benefit, that they have now to tax it for the support of schools, or Almshouses, or Prisons, or Houses of Refuge. In such a case it need not be a matter of question with the Legislature whether the charity is "sectarian" or not; whether it teaches Roman Catholicism, or Protestantism, or the Jewish faith, or no faith. The only question with the governing power is, "Does it do a work of public value not done by public institutions?" If it does; if for instance, it is a Roman-Catholic Reformatory, or a Protestant House of Refuge, or Children's Aid Society, the Legislature, knowing that all public and private organizations together cannot fully remedy the tremendous evils arising from a class of neglected and homeless children, is perfectly right in granting aid to such institutions without reference to their "sectarian" character. It reserves to itself the right of inspection, secured in this State by our admirable Board of Inspectors of State Charities; and it can at any time repeal the charters of, or refuse the appropriations to, these private associations. But thus far, its uniform practice has been to aid, to a limited degree, private charities of this nature.
This should by no means be considered a ground for demanding similar assistance for "sectarian schools." Education is secured now by public taxation for all; and all can take advantage of it. There is no popular necessity for Church Schools, and the public good is not promoted by them as it is by secular schools. Where there are children too poor to attend the Public Schools, these can be aided by private charitable associations; and of these, only those should be assisted by the State which have no sectarian character.
Charities which are entirely supported by State and permanent endowment are liable, as the experience of England shows, to run into a condition of routine and lifelessness. The old endowments of Great Britain are nests of abuses, and many of them are now being swept away. A State charity has the advantage of greater solidity and more thorough and expensive machinery, and often more careful organization. But, as compared with our private charities, the public institutions of beneficence are dull and lifeless. They have not the individual enthusiasm working through them, with its ardor and power. They are more like machines.
On the other hand, charities supported entirely by individuals will always have but a small scope. The amount of what may be called the "charity fund" of the community is comparatively limited. In years of disaster or war, or where other interests absorb the public, it will dwindle down to a very small sum. It is distributed, too, somewhat capriciously. Sometimes a "sensation" calls it forth bountifully, while more real demands are neglected. An important benevolent association, depending solely on its voluntary contributions from individuals, will always be weak and incomplete in its machinery. The best course for the permanency and efficiency of a charity seems to be, to make it depend in part on the State, that it may have a solid foundation of support, and be under official supervision, and in part on private aid, so that it may feel the enthusiasm and activity and responsibility of individual effort. The "Houses of Refuge" combine public and private assistance in a manner which has proved very beneficial. Their means come from the State, while their governing bodies are private, and independent of politics. The New York "Juvenile Asylum" enjoys both public and private contributions, but has a private board. On the other hand, the "Commissioners of Charities and Correction" are supported entirely by taxation, and, until they had the services of a Board carefully selected, were peculiarly inefficient. Many private benevolent associations in the city could be mentioned which have no solid foundation of public support and are under no public supervision, and, in consequence, are weak and slipshod in all their enterprises. The true policy of the Legislature is to encourage and supplement private activity in charities by moderate public aid, and to organize a strict supervision. The great danger for all charities is in machinery or "plant" taking more importance in the eyes of its organizers than the work itself.
The condition of the buildings, the neat and orderly appearance of the objects of the charity, and the perfection of the means of housekeeping, become the great objects of the officials or managers, and are what most strike the eyes of the public. But all these are in reality nothing compared with the improvement in character and mind of the persons aided, and this is generally best effected by simple rooms, simple machinery, and constantly getting rid of the subjects of the charity. If they are children, the natural family is a thousand times better charity than all our machinery.
The more an Institution or Asylum can show of those drilled and machine-like children, the less real work is it doing.
Following "natural laws" makes sad work of a charity-show in an Asylum; but it leaves fruit over the land, in renovated characters and useful lives.
THE MULTIPLICATION OF CHARITIES
One of the greatest evils connected with charities in a large city is the unreasonable tendency to multiply them. A benevolent individual meets with a peculiar case of distress or poverty, his feelings are touched, and he at once conceives the idea of an "Institution" for this class of human evils. He soon finds others whom he can interest in his philanthropic object, and they go blindly on collecting their funds, and perhaps erecting or purchasing their buildings. When the house is finally prepared, the organization perfected, and the cases of distress relieved, the founders discover, perhaps to their dismay, that there are similar or corresponding Institutions for just this class of unfortunates, which have been carrying on their quiet labors of benevolence for years, and doing much good. The new Institution, if wise, would now prefer to turn over its assets and machinery to the old; but, ten to one, the new workers have an especial pride in their bantling, and cannot bear to abandon it, or they see what they consider defects in the management of the old, and, not knowing all the difficulties of the work, they hope to do better; or their employes have a personal interest in keeping up the new organization, and persuade them that it is needed by the people.
The result, in nineteen cases out of twenty, is that the two agencies of charity are continued where but one is needed. Double the amount of money is used for agents and machinery which is wanted, and, to a certain degree, the charity funds of the community are wasted.
But this is not the worst effect The poor objects of this organization soon discover that they have a double source from which to draw their supplies. They become pauperized, and their faculties are employed in deriving a support from both societies.
By and by, one organization falls behind in its charity labors, and now, in place of waiting to carefully assist the poor, it tempts the poor to come to it. If it be a peculiar kind of school, not much needed in the quarter, it bribes the poor children by presents to abandon the rival school and fill its own seats; if an Asylum, it seeks far and near for those even not legitimately its subjects. There arises a sort of competition of charity. This kind of rivalry is exceedingly bad both for the poor and the public. There are evils enough in the community which all our machinery and wealth cannot cure, and thus to increase or stimulate misfortunes in order to relieve, is the height of absurdity. One effect often is, that the public become disgusted with all organized charity, and at last fancy that societies of benefaction do as much evil as good.
This city is full of multiplied charities, which are constantly encroaching on each other's field; and yet there are masses of evil and calamity here which they scarcely touch. The number of poor people who enjoy a comfortable living, derived from a long study and experience of these various agencies of benevolence, would be incredible to any one not familiar with the facts. They pass from one to the other; knowing exactly their conditions of assistance and meeting their requirements, and live thus by a sort of science of alms. The industry and ingenuity they employ in this pauper trade are truly remarkable. Probably not one citizen in a thousand could so well recite the long list of charitable societies and agencies in New York, as one of these busy dependents on charity. Nor do these industrious paupers confine themselves to secular and general societies. They have their churches and missions, on whose skirts they hang; and beyond them a large and influential circle of lady patronesses who support and protect them. We venture to say there are very few ladies of position in New York who do not have a numerous clientele of needy women or unfortunate men that depend on them year after year, and always follow them up and discover their residence, however much they may change it. These people have almost lost their energy of character, and all power of industry (except in pursuing the different charities and patronesses), through this long and indiscriminate assistance. They are paupers, not in Poor-houses, and dependents on alms, living at home. They are often worse off than if they had never been helped.
This trade of alms and dependence on charities ought to be checked. It demoralizes the poor, and weakens public confidence in wise and good charities. It tends to keep the rich from all benefactions, and makes many doubt whether charity ever really benefits.
There are various modes in which this evil might be remedied. In the first place, no individual should subscribe to a new charity until he has satisfied his mind in some way that it is needed, and that he is not helping to do twice the same good thing.
There ought to be also in such a city as ours a sort of "Board" or "Bureau of Charities," where a person could get information about all now existing, whether Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, or secular, and where the agents of these could ascertain if they were helping the same objects twice.
Lists of names and addresses of those assisted could be kept here for examination, and frequent comparisons could be made by the agents of these societies or by individuals interested. One society, formed for a distinct object, and finding a case needing quite a distinct mode of relief or assistance, could here at once ascertain where to transfer the case, or what the conditions of help were in another association. Here, individuals having difficult, perplexing, or doubtful cases of charity on hand would ascertain what they should do with them, and whether they were merely supporting a person now dependent on an association from such an office. Cases of poverty and misfortune might be visited and examined by experts, in charity, and the truth ascertained, where ordinary individuals, inquiring, would be certain to be deceived. Here, too, the honest and deserving poor could learn where they should apply for relief.
Such a "Bureau" would be of immense benefit to the city. It would aid in keeping the poor from pauperism; it would put honest poverty in the way of proper assistance; simplify and direct charities, and enable the "charity fund" of the city to be used directly for the evils needing treatment.
Both the public and benevolent associations would be benefited by it, and much useless expenditure and labor saved. Under it, each charitable association could labor in its own field, and encroach on no other, and the public confidence in the wise use of charity funds be strengthened.
In such a city as ours it would probably be hardly possible to follow the Boston plan, and put all the offices of the great charities in one building, yet there could easily be one office of information, or a "Bureau of Charities," which might be sustained by general contributions. Perhaps the State "Board of Charities" would father and direct it, if private means supported it.
In one respect, it would be of immense advantage to have this task undertaken by the State Board, as they have the right to inspect charitable institutions, and their duty is to expose "bogus charities." Of the latter there are only too many in this city. Numerous lazy individuals make lucrative livelihoods by gathering funds for charities which only exist on paper. These swindlers could be best exposed and prosecuted by a "State Board."