The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1915-02-20
NEW PHILANTHROPY SEEKS TO REMOVE
 CAUSE OF POVERTY
It's Business to Help Poor Out of Poverty, Not In
 It, Says Lecturer

After Dr. George Hodges gave the closing lecture of the Chautauqua. yes terday afternoon, when he spoke on ''The Difficult Art of Doing Good" the Rev. George Brown, who presid- ed, said it was '+the best of the Chat ta.uqua series-'' The subject as pr. Hodges discussed it was an exp1ana- tion in detail of the kind of work which the Charity Organization So- ciety is doing in Bridgeport-he1ping poor people to help themselves.
 There are many serious difficulties in the way of doing good,'' Dr. Hodges said. ''It is simple matter in 8. small town where every one knows everyone else, and wi1sre train- ed social service is not necessary. But in the great cities where hundreds of thousands of dollars are given to charity annually, it is never wisely spent unless much consideration goes into the spending. The money must have more than good. intention back of it. It must have system. science and training back of it that it may be spent effectively. We cannot deal with fires by bucket brigades any more, but have trained firemen.
 Tn the cities we are confronted by real poverty, 8 poverty in which peo- pie have no chance. The art of do- 1 ing good is so difficult that we cannot deal with the industrial questions | which are bringing on bread lines.
 The new way of doing good today l is far different from the philanthropy of old days. The new way insists on both good intentions and good results. The new way takes a poor man by the hand and lifts him up. It is not to help the poor in poverty, bur to help them out of poverty. The Difference between old and new philanthropy is | %TA0 S7S T0%x an ion nd co-operation; it is the difference be- tween giving man a dollar and giv- i ing him a job. Giving the dollar does not reach the cause of his pow erty, for the dollar only eases the pain of poverty for a time.
 @''The new way of giving demands education on the principles on what I underIfes society. The prevention l idea is being applied to families that are overtakeh by distress and want. | The criticism of the new way of gtv- ing is due to a lack of understanding what it means. It criticises the new way because much of the money goes l to pay the. salaries of trained social workers. The critics do not consider l that the money is being spent in a
 new way. Cooperation and efficiency
 in charity must have trained people 1 to work these factors out. The paid
 social worker is like physician. He
 is paid for his wisdom not for his
 medicine It is not the business of l the Charity Organization Society to 1 give aims; but through its social | workers to considerlwhy 8 family is
 in distress and how to overcome thai l distress. Not alarms, but a friend
 that is the new philanthropy. The
 trained charity worker asks many
 questions, and so does a doctor. The ! social worker is seeking why a faTni-
 ly is in want that a cure may be ap-
 piled, just as a physician seeks an i'll
 to cure it's
 Dr. Hodges urged Bridgeport not to i undertake to do charity work among
 strangers and not to give aims to beg sgars who go from door to door. All
 of these, he said, should be referree Ito the Charity Organization Society which has trained workers to helI
 these victims of poverty. The danger l Of giving, he said, was in helping peo- ole who did not need help, while l through the Charity Organization So ciety the public could feel sure tha' only the worthy would receive assist