The weekly examiner., 1901-03-16
ORGANIZED CHARITY.
ITS METHODS ARE WRONG AND ITS RESULTS HARMFUL.

What the Poor Generally Need Is
 Justice, Not Charity-Give Men a
 Chance to Work and Don't Rob
 Them of Their LabOr's Fruits.
 The Arena for March contains an in- teresting and sensible article on "Or- ganized Charity" from the pen Of Charles B. Patterson. Following is an extract from the article:
 Society, the state and the nation are responsible for the existing order Of things. There are in this country tens of thousands of ablebodied persons out of employment. These masses must be
 fed in one way or another. If they could obtain work, the labor would help to strengthen their physical bod ies and also develop their minds, but if they have to live on what they receive from charity organizations or private individuals, then there is little hope Of
 civic progress. An unholy system that makes it possible for certain persons
 to own thousands of times more of this
 worlds goods than they need or can
 possibly use carries within itself ab-
 ject poverty. One extreme begets the
 other-the millionaire is father to the
 tramp. Then let society and the na-
 ton, who are responsible alike for the
 wealth and the poverty, find some way
 whereby the poor shall have an oppor-.
 tunity to work and shall receive sufh-
 cient compensation at least to hold
 soul and body together. Let our social
 leaders and legislators cease making
 slaves or beggars of people through
 their unrighteous charity. Let them
 not heap up judgment and condemna-
 ton upon themselves, but rather try ar
 least to do something that will make
 human existence for countless thou
 sands less of struggle for bread.
 This nation has been hkeped to a
 great family of which the highest and
 lowest members form equally impor
 tant parts-a republic in which each
 works for all and all work for each. It
 is only so in name, however, as the
 statement is a mere figure of speech.
 A family that would fail to care for its
 weakest members, one wherein the
 strong would prey upon the weak,
 would hardly be considered worthy of
 the name.
 A nation that allows Its sons and
 daughters to starve when it might pro vide them with sufficient work to in
 sure comfortable living and at the same time sends thousands of its wage earners to the distant parts of the
 earth to slaughter their brother men can hardly be regarded as having any of the paternal or maternal instincts awakened. "But," says some one, "pa- ternal government is infernalp' and our so called wise men take up the cry and harp upon it, attempting to show the dire injuries that would result to the nation in helping its own. 1t is
 right. 1t would seem, to take fathers and sons from their homes and give them employment in fighting men. but it is not right for the government to engage in any extensive operation wherein tens of thousands of men might be employed, not in a way that would carry distress or sorrow into the family life, as war does, but by which every participant would be benefited. Think of the great amount of good that could be accomplished by an army of peace-in building good roads, in de- veloping waste land and in doing many other things In which the government could proftably employ men! Such public enterprise would strengthen our country and develop our commerce in a way that neither war nor any other agency could ever approach. Organiz- ed charity would not thrive to the de- gree that it now enjoys, and nonpro- ducers would not draw fat salaries in dispensing it. There should be no need or tolera ton of nine-tenths of such or ganizations as now exist. If every one able to work were given an opportunity to do so, those unable to work might perhaps be cared for by organized charity, but in all probability they would be cared for by members of their own families, who would doubt less earn sufficient to support them selves as well as those unable to work. The organized charity needed by the world today is a righteous distribu- ton of it's wealth-not that it should be divided equally among all it's. people (because if 1t were it would not remain so for any length of tirne), but that the laborer is entitled, first, to work and, secondly, to fair proportion of what he produces, and if in his service to humanity he become infirm or unable to work then his past labor should en- title him to be cared for in some way other than by a charity organization. If the fear of future poverty could be taken out of the minds of people, a great burden would be lifted, because mans fears are often greater concern. ing the future than the present. If the apprehension of poverty were removed. it would tend to stop the mad scramble after wealth that causes many to lose the highest and truest aims in life.
 The thought of future poverty and de pendence stiles the vital energies and tends to make many useless members of society, but if one could be assured nf xxrork and of anonrh ma afarial means