The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1895-02-05
pennsylvania POOR laws
The Most Unequal System Of Any OF
the States.
OUR DISGRACEFUL METHODS
Ill Conditions that Are Fostered by the
Lack OF Uniform System-Example Of
Monroe Couuty-Petty Officials
Fatteu Oh Poor Tax.
Special to the Scranton Tribune.

Special to the Scranton Tribune.
Harrisburg, Feb. 4.-Pennsylvania
IS declared to have the most unequal
system of poor law government of any
OF the states; open to many abuses, and
aggravated by constant litigation that
Is often more expensive than the actual
care of paupers. Almost every county
and in many instances the several
boroughs and townships of a county
has different method of adminstra-
tion. Unfortunates are put up for
maintenance to the lowest bidder, who
very often happens to be little better
OF than the pauper. To remedy these
conditions and bring the state under
uniform system, Representative L.
+. Gould, of Erie. eX-president of the
Association of the Directors of the
Poor and Charities of Pennsylvania,
has introduced a bill in the legislature,
which is now in the committee on Ju-
dietary general.
The act provides that each county
shall constitute separate poor dis
trict. to be governed by three direc-
tors elected by the people. and they
shall at once take steps for the es-
tablishment of a county poor house.
Actual residence of one year is made
essential to such 4 settlement as will
entitle to relief. and 4 number of spe
cial and local acts are repealed.
Present System Disgrace.
In explanation of the provisions of
his bill Colonel Gould recently said to
Philadelphia newspaper man: I'm
nine counties of the state the entire
county constitutes a single district and
Is governed, so far as the poor are con-
cerned, by the county commissioners,
who act also as directors of the poor.
AS directors they levy the poor tax
and make acquisitions for its dis
bursement upon themselves as COM
missioners.
Twenty counties are regulated upon
the township district plan, governed
by overseers. They make the assess
ment and disburse the tax collected.
There is no appeal from their levy. 1t
is a fact to the great disgrace of this
commonwealth that in some of these
overseer districts the paupers are put
up at auction and their maintenance
let to the lowest bidder Very often
the successful bidder is little better
off than the pauper, and the pittance
ucslShtu LII lAAC 9upPOll VI Ollt ilsiS
to do service for two, and infrequently
more.
TT is almost impossible to remedy
the existing evils. Nearly every dis
trict is governed wholly or in part by
local or special laws. Hence, the only
cure for the unfortunate conditions is
a general law. Such a law, If its pro-
visions act as a repeal of the special
laws of the districts, WILL of course,
meet opposition. Nearly every ply
sician. lawyer and others who receive
fees from the poor funds will siren
uously urge it's defeat. Nearly all of
them are politicians in a small way,
and will employ every influence TO pro-
tect their small jobs
Some Enlightening statistics.
Colonel Gould has compiled informa-
ton relative to the workings of the
poor laws throughout the state, and
finds that in 290 districts the auction
system prevails, and that 12S dis
tricts favor the county system-of
these thirty-seven because it would
be more economical, twenty because it
would decrease pauperism; ten because
1t would lessen litigation; seven be-
cause it would be more humane, and
nineteen because 1T would equalize tax
alton.
Corroborative of the Ill conditions
fostered by the lack of a uniform
system are the statements of a num-
Der Of poor directors themselves. Mon
roe county seems saddest off in this
respect. Samuel Keiser, of West Buff
falo township, Union county. said: II
favor the county system. We board
our paupers with the lowest bidder.
They cost about 81 a week. Yes,
sometimes an overseer will take a man
to his own home and make little
out of his boarding. They are gen.
orally taken, though, by the laboring
class"
Martin Yetter, an overseer of Smith
field, Monroe county, said: I'VE tried
ten years ago to get a county poor
house. We have to board our paupers
out. While we do not auction their
maintenance, We try to put them where
the price Is lowest. We regard the auc-
tion system as an outrage. I favor
the abolition Of the township for the
county system, with county poor
house supported the same as our Jail
and court house"
Monroe County Sins"
George Becker, Of East Stroudsburg
township, an overseer with six years
experience, said: an my opinion we
should have a county house. / think
1t would reduce pauperism and pre-
vent litigation about settlements"
Emory Price. Of Price township. said:
"Our rule is to put our poor with the
lowest bidder. A county poorhouse
would greatly simplify matters and
save money"
Charles Smlnk, Of Stroud town
chip, said: Monroe county sins in not
having home for its poor. 1t would
save the payment of costs to thirty
two overseers, thirty-two justices of
the peace, and q lot of constables.
Every one of them gets slice of the
poor tax"
Lackawanna county also has the
township system. Judge Archibald
of Scranton, said: "The question of
settlement Is very vexatlous and
expensive luxury. uniform county
system would cure this, and besides
being more efiicacious in real relief
would not be so costly. Frequently
hundreds OF dollars have been ex.
pended in ascertaining the proper set
tlement OF pauper when the expense
of maintaining him in q poorhouse
would not have cost more than $1O"