The Columbia herald. [volume] (Columbia, Tenn.) 18??-1935, 1907-03-01
OF THE SPECIAL
POOR HOUSE COMMITTEE
Continued from First Page.

does not appear that cruel whipping
is done. unless whipping this class al
all Ia deemed cruel.
An Investigation into the cost OF
operating the Poor House" on the pres
ent plan was not among the duties
assigned as. However. as we feel Inn
perI0usly moved by a deep sense OF
duty 70 recommend that which We be-
lieve will make less intolerable the
lot of these unfortunates. the question
, Of relative cost between the present
and the system to be recommended
naturally arises.
When the present plan for caring
for the Countys poor or afflicted was
adopted, there probably existed cir.
cumstances or conditions that made
the plan seem necessary or expedient.
Whatever the case in that respect may
have been, it does not appear to US
as either necessary or expedient to
longer perpetuate it. Nor do we be-
lieve it to be economical. We are far
from implying wasterfulness; economy
is practiced to degree; but the sys-
tenn as such is wasteful.
The Superintendent informs US that
the County derives no benefit whatever
from the labor Of inmates in so far
as the farm is concerned The farm
could as profltably be run as a separate
business.
We are not prepared to assert that
the farm as such is Improbable, but
we can hardly understand how 1t can
possibly pay more than the interest
on the investment when mere farming
done by competent men. devoting their
entire time to the business, rarely
averages, one yaer with another, more
than six per cent. net above the ex-
pense Of cultivation. etc. As the once
of Superintendent includes that of
farm Superintendent and laborer, be-
sides that of Superintendent of the
Asylum, 1t is obvious that, as he can
not discharge these several duties
simultaneously, some Of them must
suffer neglect.
Then the maintenance of a number
of small houses scattered about is, for
several reasons, necessarily more ex-
pensive than would be the maintain
ance OF one or two houses OF equal
rooming capacity.
While economic considerations lend
weight to most questions, and we be-
lieve to the change to be recommend
ed, it must not be concluded that such
is the chief influence that induces to
urge another system. Much unavoid-
able suffering Is incident to the pres
emit system, as In the matter of serv-
ing meals, having washing done, adj
baths, Of supplying fuel,
ETC.. while the low mentality and physi- |
cal weakness of nearly all Of the in
mates make 1t an impossibility to free
the place of vermin, as the wood ceiled |
walls of the houses are infested.
Whatever the cost, within the |
bounds of reason, 1t would be neces-
sary to make radical changes II the
we owe ourselves as citi-
zens of an enlightened community be |
met.
1t may be objected that to make a
County Asylum comfortable will result
IN so many demands for accommoda-
ions, that the cost of maintenance will
be alarmingly increased. That argu-
nent Is beside the mark. II the Coun-
" is able to care but for a certain
number, 1t Is better to frankly refuse
ldmittance beyond that number, than
o perpetuate a system which is at
aimed with such repugnant conditions,
hat to accept its aid, is but to accept
! last resort but death.
Your committee desire to state, that
fter examining the present system,
hey are in no frame of mind to pro-
'oke Ill feeling by launching into a
trade against the present administra-
ion. Human nature is, on the whole,
much the same, with the same environ
nents. We doubt the possibility of