The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1899-12-16
Z. THE HOME IN ITS RELA-
TON TO THE STATE


ultimate test OF it's soundness. On the one
hand good conditions here are the absO-
lutely necessary prerequisites OF good So
cial conditions generally. On the other
hand happy home conditions are the init
mate object of most human endeavor.
James Russell Lowell says in one OF his
delightful letters: You say that life
seems 10 be a struggle after nothing in
particular. But you are wrong. IL is a
struggle after the peaceful home OF the
soul in a natural and loving state OF life.
Men are mostly unconscious OF the object
OF their struggle, but 1t is always connect
ed in some way with this. II they gain
wealth or power or glory II is always to
make up for this want which they feel
but scarce know what II is
Nevertheless, when so much is said in
a general way OF the Importance OF the
home remarkably little attention seems 10
be paid TO II in the concrete. Whenever
the need is felt Of doing something"
whenever a want is detected. any agency
rather than the home is resorted TO. Edu-
cation must be made more complete, and
the school Is instituted. The little child
must be taught TO occupy itself, TO OBJ
serve, to adapt itself to others; happy and
wholesome moods must be made habitual
TO II, and the kindergarten takes in the
little one. Religious training must he
as as pOSSlDle, anu lHe
Sunday school spreads over the land and
in large measure substitutes itself for
home teaching. There is felt to be a lack
Of means OF recreation. and sociables and
girls and boys clubs and other organized
schemes are started. Mothers no longer
find time TO read as they did-let them
form reading circles and read together,
or clubs and study and debate together.
From religion to whist, the tendency is
to organize groups Of persons. selected
for their common interest In some
one matter. to exercise or indulge
themselves together in a special direction.
meeting on only one side Of their lives
themselves more or less all OF one class
and with a corresponding narrowness of
experience 10 be got from one another.
All this is the direct opposite OF the
conditions Of home life. where a small
number OF persons Of both sexes, unlike in
age and generally in tastes. but united by
close personal ties, meet, not for one spe-
calized kind OF activity. but in the multi
farious undesirable activities OF home
life.
1t IS obvious that the tendency 10 or
ganize in groups. cutting across the family
group, is natural and inevitable. II is also
obvious that II brings about very great
advantages. 1t is equally obvious that IL
tends TO take from the duties and activi-
ties that find their place within the fam
ily circle, TO lessen the scope OF the family
life. which is the object Of so much en-
thusiasm.
This change. II is interesting to notice,
is quite in accordance with the trend OF
the development OF the family as far as
we know its history. In early Rome the
state was essentially federation OF pa
triachaIly organized family groups. Each
family contained not only the immediate
family. as we understand II. but much
more extended circle Of relatives-uncles.
cousins, married sons and grandchildren
besides the slaves. These were bound to-
gether by the common and absolute
authority Of the patriarch head of the
family (paterfamilias), who had the right
TO even kill his children or 10 sell them
as slaves This group was bound togeth-
er. too, by the worship OF it's ancestors
and the sacred ceremonies OF the hearth,
which gave II its chief sanctity and i'm
portance.
Many OF these features reproduce them
selves more or less exactly In the most
diverse nations and diverse times. lne
natriarchal family OF the early Hebrews,
the Chinese family to-day. with It's an
cestor worship and intense filial piety, are
examples.
Such a family may be studied from
MANY different aspects. as body or Kim
dred as a household, as an economic COM
munity. as a religious group or as po IT.
zeal unit whether independent. as a clan
or an imperium in imperio' state within
the state).
In all these aspects the tendency has
been simllar-to reduce the family group.
10 simplify It, 10 give over its various
functions. as they develop, TO be carried
on in new ways and In a more highly or
ganized form outside the family. The
tvnical family comes to contain only the
parents and unmarried children. The rites
of religion are observed not mainly with
in the family. but in public worship The
family authority not only extends over a
smaller group, but its scope is constantly
lessened by the growth or pubic author
ity. Of law, of the state.
This family law had two sides-the au-
thority of the family, vested in its head.
over it's own members. and. secondly, the
duty OF the family TO protect its own
members from outside aggression. The
origin OF our own penal law is in the tribal
codes of retributicn whereby one family
could exact from another damages for in
Jury inflicted by one OF its members, In
Mace of the otherwise obligatory evenge
with the endless counter revenges OF
blood feud thereby entailed. 1t rested also
with the fomily to punish its own offend
ing members. whether for injuries with
in it's own circle or for injuries TO out
siders entailing general cost TO the group.
1t was a momentous change when the
state took from the family land from the
individually the right Of revenge and the
responsibility for defense and undertook
to preserve order by public rules and by
public power-a step in civilization which
is not yet accepted, 10 our shame. in all
parts OF our country, whether among
Georgia lynchers or Kentucky feud fight
ers
Equally momentous was the other side
OF this change when the state took from
the hand Of the father the right to punish
the grown son. thus bringing about the
direct relation between the state and the
individual citizen which characterizes
modern civilization.
Nowhere, perhaps, has the disintegra-
ton OF the family gone further than in
this country, where children so early seek
independent lives, where parents are so
little disposed TO exert authority.
Some radicals not only prophesy but
desire a further movement in this direc-
ton. They criticize family life as econ
omically wasteful and unsatisfactory. as
dwarfing and stultifying 10 the individual.
as breeding a family selfshness which is