No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Modern Attitudes toward Charity and Relief
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 03 June 2009
Extract
The question that Mr. Tierney calls the perennial problem of poor relief, whether eligibility should be determined by need alone or by other considerations, has not yet been settled. It is true that once eligibility for certain types of aid has been established, we no longer inquire into the moral character of the recipients, or attempt to fix an order of preference among them. But the fact that some categories of need are recognized by law, while others are not (or at least are less fully recognized) indicates that we still regard some of the needy as more deserving of assistance than others. Helping the poor, however, is by no means the only aim of modern benevolence. Our social agencies engage in many activities and offer numerous services that have little to do with the economic situation of those who benefit from them; and both public and private decisions concerning welfare are influenced by factors other than need or worthiness.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Society for the Comparative Study of Society and History 1959
References
page 378 note 1 See, for example, Mather, Cotton, Magnolia Christi Americana; or, The Ecclesiastical History of New England (2 vols. Hartford, Conn., S. Andrus and Son, 1853–1855), I, 102–3Google Scholar.
page 378 note 2 A host of authors and works might be cited in support of this point, but it will suffice to note just one authority: Coolidge, Calvin, “Discriminating Benevolence,” in Foundations of the Republic. Speeches and Addresses (New York, Charles Scribner’s & Sons, 1926), pp. 169–72Google Scholar.
page 378 note 3 FinleyDunne, Peter, “The Carnegie Libraries,” in Dissertations by Mr. Dooley (New York, Harper & Brothers, 1906), p. 179Google Scholar. Carnegie stated his views on almsgiving in “Wealth,” North American Review, CXLVIII (1889), 653–64Google Scholar.
page 378 note 4 See, for example, the discussion of the charity organization movement in Warner, Amos G., American Charities A Study in Philanthropy (New York, Thomas Y. Crowell and Company, 1894), pp. 372–86Google Scholar.
page 379 note 5 Thoreau, Henry David, Walden (Concord ed., Boston and New York, Houghton Mifflin Company, 1906), p. 84Google Scholar.
page 379 note 6 Schneider, David M., The History of Public Welfare in New York State, 1609–1866 (Chicago, The University of Chicago Press, 1938), p. 61Google Scholar.
page 379 note 7 For typical comments see Franklin, Benjamin, “On the Laboring Poor” and “On the Price of Corn, and the Management of the Poor,” in The Writings of Benjamin Franklin, ed. by Smyth, Albert Henry (10 vols., New York, The Macmillan Company, 1907), V, 122–27 and 534–39.Google Scholar
page 380 note 8 McConnell, John W., “Welfare,” in J. Frederic Dewhurst and Associates, America’s Needs and Resources (New York, The Twentieth Century Fund, 1955), p. 430Google Scholar.
page 380 note 9 Andrews, F. Emerson, Philanthropic Giving (New York, Russell Sage Foundation, 1950), p. 43Google Scholar.
page 381 note 10 See, for example, Cohen, Wilbur J., “Social Insurance,” in Social Work Yearbook, 1957. ed. by Kurtz, Russell H. (New York, National Association of Social Workers, 1957), pp. 537–47Google Scholar.
page 381 note 11 Problems encountered in the administration of poor relief in one of the more progressive states are outlined in Ohio Legislative Service Commission, Public Welfare Administration in Ohio (Columbus, Ohio Legislative Service Commission, 1957), pp. 24–26.
page 381 note 12 Residence requirements for assistance in the different states are summarized in Dunn, Loula, ed., The Public Welfare Directory, 1958 (Chicago, American Public Welfare Association, 1958), pp. 395–402Google Scholar.
page 381 note 13 Smith, Adam, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, ed. by Bullock, J. C. (New York, P. F. Collier and Son, 1909), p. 150Google Scholar.