New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1916-10-28
A Reorganized Charities Board

A Reorganized Charities Board
Commissioner Strong's recommen-
dations for the reorganization of the
State Board of Charities, with ade-
quate power to do the work it is sup
posed to do, are amply warranted by
the testimony he brought out in his
investigation. That body had in its
own records, as Mr.. Strong points
cut in his report just made, evidence
Of incompetence and neglect. The
evidence stayed in pigeonholes. 1t
remained for Charities Commissioner
Kingsbury of this city. acting on re-
ports of his inspectors, to bring about
an exposure of conditions "such as
to be little less than public scandal
and disgrace"
"The State Board Of Charities
lacks power" says Mr.. Strong. at
lacks vision; it lacks drive. 1t does
not know its real job. 1t rs ailing,
and shows no sign that it knows
what is the matter with it." That
is even a more damning indictment
than his upholding of the truth Of
the Kingsbury charges. 1t is an in
dictment, though, Of the system on
which the present hoard is con-
structed and on which it operates,
rather than of the individual mem
bers of it. Some Of them, notably
President Stewart, have conscien-
tiously given their time and efforts
to the big problems they were called
on to solve.
The trouble has been that an hon
orary body of twelve members, meet
ing according to the convenience Of
the members, was almost inevitably
obliged to let the real work of the
great department fall into the hands
Of paid underlings. That is what oc-
Cured. The underlings performed
it in routine fashion, and abuses
sprang up on every side. Authority
to do many things which should have
been done was lacking. Power and
responsibility were diffused among
various bureaus, or actually lodged
in other departments of government.
Members Of the board were not spe-
cialists in the matters on which they
were supposed to pass. Out of such
a combination of elements, the sur
prising thing is that the institutions
under the state boards supervision
were run so well as they were, rather
than that some Of them were in de-
plorable condition.
1t is fortunate that the political
religious controversy which at one
period of the inquiry threatened COM
pletely to obscure the real point at
issue has died, so that Mr.. Strong's
report may be considered on its mer-
its, without partisanship. The in
quiry he conducted was not a drive
at the institutions or the methods of
administration of any particular
creed. 1t was a search after the
facts regarding the handling of the
states wards, whatever they were
The charges. and counter charges OF
investigators and institution heads
and the "wire-tapping" controversy
did not advance the search for facts
Mr.. Strong deserves great credit for
keeping a level head in a trying time
and for refusing to let his investiga.
tion be diverted into false channel
The facts proved that institution,
having the approval Of the state
board were being grossly mis-,
handled. They proved that the city
authorities had not endeavored tC
destroy these particular institution,
or to take God out Of the hearts oil
the children" or even to "founC
charity on morals and not on relig
ion" They proved the failure of th'
State Board Of Charities, despite tn,
frantic fight made by its secretary
since resigned, to discrcdit the loca
officials.
That failure being so conclusively
established, a reorganization of The
board along the lines suggested by
Mr.. Strong becomes imperative. Hi
scheme undertakes TO ccntralize il
the board itself the functions rela
tive TO supervising and administer
ing the institutions under its juris
diction. 1t requires that each mem
Der be a specialist in some field OF
the work Of the body, and provide;