The Helena independent. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1875-1943, 1891-09-01
What the Porter Census Shows
About P%auperism In the
United States
According to It There Are Loss
Than 100000 in the Coun-
try's Almhouses.
The Evils OF Almsgiving rs shown by the
Methods Praotioed In n Der Of
New England Towns. r

ber is said to be about $4,000, and as this Is
the ~"total," or "aggregate." number, the
showing is very gratifying, tho ratio in 1880
having been / to 75s, whilc at present 1t is ]
to S57. But as some inaccuracies have
been detected in the work of the present
census, it may be worth while to give these
figures a little scrutiny before adopting
them. Shortly after this bulletin WAS
issued the secretary of the state of New
York made his report upon paupers, and
upon examining this We find that it con-
tains figures wholly inconsistent with those
Of the census bureau. Thus according to
tho census bulletin the number Of paupers
in almshouses in the state of New York
was 1922. According to the score
tary of the state there were received In the
poor houses during the year 1890 1854 per-
sons, there being ut the beginning OF the
year 20, 800 enjoying the hospitality of these
institutions. At the beginning OF the pres
emit fiscal year their inmates numbered
17,647. The total" or aggregate" nu,m-
Der relieved seems to be therefore about
5000, a number which. il the report Of the
secretary of state is to be trusted, would
indicate an unusual divergency from fact
even for the present census.
In this total, however, there were I'M
doubtedly many persons counted more than
once. The constant population of the aims
houses would seem to average from $4,000
to 20, 600, and it VIC regard this number as
expressing the total or aggregate, the dis
crerDhcy between the figures of the state
and of the United States would not be SO
extreme, the latter figures being about hall
of the former. We fear that the
presumption is against the accuracy of
the census in this matter, and the blunders
OF this bureau have been SO gross in other
respects, that it hardly seems worth while
to look into the reports from other states
in order TO demonstrate the uutrustworthi-
ness of this bulletin. 1t has been not I'M
probably manufactured as a political docu-
ment intended to show how little "pauper
labor" exists under our protective regime
compared with the free trade policy OF
England. Fortunately we are furnished
. with some more trustworthy statistics from
another quarter.
The attention OF the public was some
time since directed to q report made BY a
committee of citizens of Hartford, Conn.,,
upon the manner in which the nlms-Riving
of that town was conducted. Some OF
the features of this report were OF q
picturesque and startling character and
were brought to public attention by the
INCW i ! IA q So
ever, is a document of very great and
permanent value and deserves q much wild
or circulation thar 1t seems likely to re-
cei5e. If it could be placed In the hands OF
every officer in the country charged with
the administration of poor relief, the bene-
tit would 10 very great. In one sense there
is nothing novel in the report, for the evils
that it describes have arisen at all times
and in every country whore alms-giying has
been n practice. but the extent of these
evils and the precise nature OF their causes,
as w0ll as their comparative prevalence IN
this county and Others, are set forth with
so much clearness and established with 80
much care as to put the Investigations on
the same rank with the classical English
report of 1884.
trammslied by official red tape is some
subject. ii opens with two quotations
that indicate the principle established
by very prolonged and palnfu! expert
ence. One is the opinion of Benja-
way of doing good to tho poor is not max
ing them easy in poverty. but leading or
driving them out Of it, The other ia from
Richard Whately: "The relief offered to
cripples, idiots, blind or deaf n dumb
does not tend to increase those evils. The
= tonds to increase that evil" The authori-
ties of the town of Hartford, however. have
proceeded upon the principle of making
the poor easy in poverty, and of otferlna
relief to mere want as want with the fol-
Lowing results: Taking the year 1885 for
the expenditure per head of population in
Hartford for poor relief was $2.O7. The
nearest approach to this rate in Connecti-
cut was in Norwich, where the rate was
$1.b4, the next highest rate being that of
New Haven !. 100. The average rate of twelve
w.. .A,,o ,-ur % 90 Hive rjfiao nf
Massachusetts. including Boston, Worcester
md Lowell, averaged $1.16. Tho city of
Providence, commonly reputed to DO the
richest city in the country, with the pos
sibls exception of Hartford, expended six
teen cents whore Hartford spent 1907. The
great cities of New York state, New York
and Brooklyn, had rates respectively OF "a
and Al cents. Philadelphia and Baltimore
each had the same rate, &c cents.
More extended comparisons are made by
the report, the expenditures OF the princi-
nal cities and countries of Europe being
tabulated, but we cannot give these results
in detail, nor are we satisfied that in all
cases there is enough similarity III the con.
ditions to make comparison Instructive. II
may be stated, however. that the cost OF
this relief is greater in Hartford than in
many foreign cities. As to the percentage
ford is much worse. Tbs ratio in Hart
ford is 6.2 to 100. In Berlin it is 3.8, il
London it is 2.46. In France thu
ratio is h.34 per cent in Eng
gland md Wales, 2.7a per cent. In sew
enteen European countries every thlrtletl
person is a pauper; in Hartford every six.
teenth, and if we inquire into the rate o!
inc ease, both of panper population and
expenditure, we find Hartford probably OK
ceiling most other communities of it's size
And what ia true OF the living is even more
true OF the dead, for of every five bufials al
urr,f,,I ~, 10 u,bpIly ~ rotflv at rnhlif