The Mathews journal. (Mathews C.H. [Court House]) 1903-1937, 1910-04-21
REGULATION
OF CHARITIES
Some Of the Dangers Of Rockefeller
Foundation Pointed Out

Mr.. Murphy's argument for a char
ter absolutely without limitations up
on the future management of the foun-
dalton undoubtedly has force In so far
rs the desire is to eliminate the power
! Of the dead hand in the centuries to
some. Leaving each generation OF
Trustees entirely free to expend the
Income as they choose would seem to
insure a benevolent Improvement be-
tween each new generation and the
dis'bursing power. But this very elias
ITCHY and freedom from restraint OPP
ems the door to all the possible evils
Of a monopolization of charitable
agencies which the great modern foun-
dations of syndicated philanthropy are
developing. 1t has hitherto been shown
howfsuch a fund as the Carnegie Foun-
datiOn tends to exercise control of ms
titutions which accept its financial aid
This far-reaching regulating, supervis-
ing junction is probably BOUND to be a
distinguishing characteristic of the
higher monopoly of dollar-making hui
man tarianism. In his remarks before
the senate committee, Mr.. Murphy re-
vealed precisely this characteristic in
the great foundation now projected
The Rockefeller Foundation, it is clear
is to have the power to make all of
its gifts to particular institutions
charities, and causes floating endow-
meats" if the wisdom of the trustees
so dictates. Wherever a floating en-
dowment may be enjoyed, the recipient
will be wholly at the mercy of the
foundation, since that agency will pos
sess an absolute power, from whicn
there can be no appeal, to declare the
work thus subsidized to be obsolete"
fa. N1n~N H.
negie Foundation for the pensioning OF
college teachers is a floating endow-
ment." Mr.. Rockefeller's plans en-
brace il. also. Is il not a serious Ques-
ton how far the floating endowment
idea should be allowed to fasten upon
the philanthropy of future generations
in this country? Consider it in con-
nection with the character of the men
who are likely to be chosen, in genera
ton after generation, as their success
sors by self-perpetuating body OF
trustees under the Rockefeller Foun-
dation.. To use a colloquialism, pcs
terity seems TO be UP against synG
Gated philanthropy with a string
1t. Ana therein turks a vast powei
of dictation in the hands of those who
may control the funds.
Mr.. Murphy disposed of the point
tual the Ire OF the proposed fOunda-
ton should be limited to fixed perioC
OF years by simply urging that the
Federal government could always be
depended upon TO protect the publ
interest against any abuse of trust
Further Congresses could be safely left
to deal with such a question. Tn,
editor of the Survey had suggested
that at the end or 100 years the prin-
cipal OF the endowment should be en-
urely expended. under the terms OF
the charter. The Republican has sug
gested 30 years as adequate Mr.
Murphy. however. is clearly asking
for charter that will not limit the
life of the fund. His argument about
future Congresses is not satisfactory,
II seems. The abuses i'm the admins
tration OF such an endowment would
need TO be very fragrant to persuade any
Congress to revoke the charter, In
spite of the influence that would sure
- be brought to bear from the many
lPeneficfaries OF the foundation
Springfield Republican.