Evening public ledger. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1914-1942, 1920-01-15
EVILS THAT ALL ADMIT
BUT NO ONE HAS YET CURED
Scandals Of the State Charity Fund Ad-
ministration Considered by the
Constitutional Revsers

| before the constitutional revision
- commission finishes its work the pres
| ent system of state aid for private char
tiles will have wholesome and needed
airing.
| About one-fifth of the revenues of the
state are appropriated to public, semi
| public and private charities. 1t has been
! charged that there are private charities
organized and maintained for the sole
purpose Of getting state money. If the
treasury could not be tapped in their be-
half it is said that they would not exist
at all.
Various members of the General As
sembly have their pet charities. Every
| two years they seek an appropriation.
The passage of the appropriation bill is
uniformly held up till the end of the ses-
sion and each member with a pet charity
carries himself circumspectly lest the
powers in control should deny to him the
money that he seeks.
The appropriation bill is a club held
over the heads of the legislators. Their
complacency is bought by the prospect of
a share in the public funds for their local
institutions.
This is the political side of the matter.
An incidental and subsidia ary abuse
arises out of the habit of the legislators,
after it has been decided what institutions
are to be taken care Of, to dicker with
/ one another about the amount to be set
apart for each institution. The appro-
| priations are not made on any recognized
system, though there may be some pre-
/ tense Of an equitable apportionment. In
practice the most expert. log-roller gets
/ the most money.
This is the efficiency side of the matter.
Two propositions are before the re-
vision commission each of which is in
tended to cure the abuses.
George Wharton Penrer has suggested
that the charitable appropriation he made
in lump sum instead of in s0ecific
amounts to specific institutions and that
a standard of service be fixed by which
the desert Of the different institutions is
to be measured. Then an administrative
authority would apportion the fund
| among the institutions qualifying accord
| ing to the standard in proportion to the
! service rendered. Every institution in
! the state which did not confine its bene-
| fits to adherents of a particular sect
would be eligible to participate in the
fund according to the Pepper plan
Judge James Gay Gordon, however, is
opposed to the appropriation of state
funds to private institutions, and he has
proposed that the constitution be so
amended that after 1927 no money shall
be appropriated save to institutions under
the complete control of the state. He
would not cut off the money at once, but
4
eral years to adjust themselves to the
impending change. He is persuaded that
the legitimate charities would not suffer
for the reason that those who now con-
tribute to their support would continue
their contributions and would enlarge
them. In fact, he is inclined to the belief
that the rich WOULD become more gener-
Gus than they have been in the past for
the reason that every dollar given to
charity reduces the amount of their in
come subject to taxation. But if the
private charities had to go out of business
when state funds were cut off they would
be proved really not private charities, in
the opinion of Judge Gordon, but public
charities. supported by public funds and
managed by private individuals under no
public control.
No conclusion has yet been reached by
the revision commission. 1t has thus far
done nothing more than develop the
anomalies in the present practice and
admit that there are grave abuses. But
this vas admitted long ago. For various
well-understood reasons no serious at
tempt has been made to better the con-
ditions. They can be bettered under the
present constitution whenever the Gen
eral Assembly is so disposed.
Certain members of the revision COM
mission, however, seem to wish to lay
down hard and fast rules in the constitu-
ton itself, which shall bind the Legisla-
ture. They do not seem to be able to
get away from the theory that the con-
stitution should contain large body Of
bylaws framed in distrust of the honesty
and efficiency of the legislators. 1t must
be admitted that there is some justifica-
ton for their position, in view of the way
the Legislature has exercised it's dis
cretion IN the past.
There are merits in both the Pepper
and the Gordon plans. Theoretically, the
Gordon plan is admirable. There can be
no disputing the soundness of the gen.
eral proposition that public money should
be spent only by public officials and for
public purposes only. Grants to purely
private institutions are indefensible.
The so-called private charities, how
ever, insist that they are engaged in sup
plementing the proper work of the state
in caring for the sick and the INDECENT.
The state does not provide adequate facil-
tiles and private charity intervenes in the
interest of humanity. 1t is argued and
plausibly, too, that these private insttu-
tions which do the work which the state
neglects should be compensated by the
state.
The Pepper plan provides for their
compensation by a system which would
eliminate favoritism and apportion the