Rensselaer Semi-Weekly Republican, Volume 40, Number 75, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 22 May 1908 — RELIEF OF THE POOR [ARTICLE]

RELIEF OF THE POOR

Republican Reform laws Have Greatly Reduced Coat of Oat Door Relief In Indiana! ALSO IMPROVED CITIZENSHIP Legislatures of 1895, 1837 and 1899 Put a Stop to Abuse of Old System —Charity Now Managed on Scientific and Business Basis** The Republican party of Indiana prides itself on its business administration. Sinoe it came into power in 1894 both the legislative and executive departments of the government have been guided by safe, conservative business principles. In nothing is this more clearly shown than in the work of charity, in the management of the “outdoor poor.” Prior to 1895 township trustees administered the poor funds according to their own Judgment and "sweet will,’ and the oounty at large footed the bills. - Great and serious abuses grew up .under this system. TJiere was no careful or systematic supervision of any kind. Un4er that system anyone who had a “pull" with the township trustee could get help. The system was not only expensive to the taxpayers, hut it was • school for the training of paupers and dependents. Funds were wasted and aitteenshlp demoralised. A spirit of reform took possession of the people and the Republican party, true to ltft mission of following the best public sentiment <m public questions, passed laws regulating and controlling outdoor help to the poor. The legislature of 1895 passed a law requiring township trustees to file with the county oommlssibners and the state board at charities a report, giving a record of the name, age and dgte of giving aid to each applicant The legislature of 1897 passed another reform measure on this subject It shifted to each township the burden of oaring for its own poor not to pubHo Institutions. Prior to that time all hills for outdoor poor relief had been paid out of the bounty treasury and all townships taxed alike for the expense Incurred. These two laws worked well ’-§0 far as they went, but there was still need of a carefully drawn law on a scientific, businesslike basis. And snob s law was passed In 1899 and exports said it was the' most tfdvanoed piece of legislation for official poor reOaf cm the statute books of any state. Xt provided tor the investigation of each case; tor giving transportation to so one unless sick, aged, injured or artppled and these only in the dlreotfon of his legal residence; for cooperation with existing relief societies, and tor a report to the board of county commissioners when the aid given to a person or family reached sls or when relief extended over a period of three months, in order that the approval of the board might be had be- . rove additional relief was given. The results achieved under these reform measures have been more than cut in two. From 1890 to 1895 the amount paid out for cmt-door poor relief avermore than $590,000 annually. From 1897 to 1900 the annual average was $328,948.58. From 1900 to 1905 the average was $257,613.16. The following shows the expenditures for poor relief for the years (Torn 1895 to 1907: 1895 ...... ..$830,188 1896. 355,255 1898 375,206 i 1899: . „V.T.: . ..... 320,667 1900 209,956 1901 236,723 1902 266,876 1903 245,745 1904 281,105 1905 249,884 1807 227,304

The above table shows a reduction t>f taxation to each Inhabitant of the state from 29 cents in 189 R to less than 10 cents in 1907. Another means of measuring the reduction in the cost of poor relief is afforded by the rate at taxation in each township. The following table shows how the townships, where there was no levy at all, Increased from 64 in 1898 to 355 in 1107: No Under 5 cts. No. of Tear. levy. 6 cts. and over. Tps. 1198 64 516 436 1,014 1899 60 607 367 1,014 1800.....146 644 226 1,016 1801 154 620 240 1,014 180* 181 611 223 1,016 1808 233 617 165 1,015 1804 224 649 144 1,017 1801 289 581 146 1,018 1808 317 69| 106 1,016 180 T 333 608 ' 78 1,016 The above figures put the stamp at approval on these reform laws. The Old system encouraged pauperism. With public support cut off many dependents became self-supporting and better eltisens. In commenting on this new system the secretary of the state board of charities, Amos W. Butler, mti: "The township trustees, who are exodDdo overseers of the poor, have reported to the board of state Charities • total of 87,784 persons as having been aided by them during the year 1808. The United States oentus estimates Indiana’s population In 1806 to MW# b iAtk 1,¥10,898. Using this as a basis the number of persons aided last y«Mr 1* equai to one tn every T» Inhabitants of the state. *Ta MM banner yearn. notwMb

| I Standing the fact that Indiana had a j considerably smaller population than now, the trustees reported a much greater number of persons aided from public funds; in 1897, for example, 82,235, or one In every 31 Inhabitants of j the state. . . J “The reform measures of 1895, 1897 and 1899 are responsible for this remarkable reduction. Thqy require the overseers of the poor to investigate the .aotual needs before aiding those who apply for help; to assist those able to work In finding employment; to refuse help to able-bodied non-resi-dents except for some form of labor; to co-operate with local charitable societies; to tax their own constituents for the money they spend and to report fully to the board of county commissioners and to the'board of state Charities their use of the public funds. Under these Ibwb there has been a notable weeding out of unworthy pensioners on the public treasury, more adequate relief of those in real need, and a decided reduction in the amount quoted for this purpose by taxation.**