Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1921-06-15


ject of State organization for these
purposes was considered was shall
the institutions be managed by indie
pendent boards with possible a single
supervisor, but in no sense a con-
troll borard, or shall all such insti-
tutions bep laced in charge of a.sin-
gle department or board of admin
istration or control. These We're the
two types of organization. Typical
states having Independent boards
were Massachusetts and Indiana.
of control or administration were
Wisconsin, Iowa and Kansas. In
diana and Massachusetts had super
visory boards in addition to the in
dependent boards. illinois and Ohio
had single boards of administration
with an advisory board in addition.
Now" to quote Robert w. Kelso.
formerly executive secretary of the
Massachusetts Board of Charities.
later commissioner of public welfare
of that State and now executive sec
rotary of the Boston Council of So
.cial Agencies, comes a tidal wave
which has been gathering in Ameri-
can opinion for q decade. 1t is the
demand for Capitalization in govern
mental machinery. 1t is not salts
fled with unpaid boards. They are
inefficient; it will have none of them
1t must have bureaus with paid ser
wants at the head. II must have
Capitalization in tho extreme. Ad-
iStn t,t, 81,
boards lacks teeth; there must be
the power to demand. Thus only can
results be obtained.
This growing doctrine in govern
ment presents reasons that are un-
answerable; it CLOSES dangers that
are not readily seen, It's greatest
danger down to the present is tho
state OF Illinois, with as perfect a
plan Of centralized departmental
administration as American genius
has yet developed---a machine that
affords tremendous advantages in
quick and efficient disposition of pub
lie business. subject to tremendous
dangers from the power it may some
day place in the hands of unscrupu-
lous officers"
Fortunately along with this grow
ing demand for Capitalization and
economy there has been an equally
insistent though perhaps not as wide
spread demand from groups of peo-
pie whose interest in social welfare
is keen that the lessons of the past
shall be recognized. To again quote
Mr.. Kelso, American experience
shows that the Jumping of public in
situations together under a single
board of control because they all hap
pen to be institutions serves to en-
phasize only those qualities which
they possess in common, such as
power plants, bricks, beans and
prunes. Those more fundamental
qualities, as for instance the educa-
tional value in sanatorium care for
the tuberculous. the outdoor camp for
long term convicts, the outpatient
clinic for the feeble minded, routine
mental and physical examinations for
all public Observation-Disclosures deeper
human questions cannot be divided
by the lowest common denomination;
they call for.special reasoning They
differ. They represent separate func-
tons in the administrative service.
When, therefore. they are thrown into
one receptacle, they are submerged"
The result has been that as these
desires for greater efficiency have
taken form in the several states we
now have five typical groups of state
welfare administration. In the first
group are the states which have little
or only partial coordination of well
fare agencies either financial or ad-
ministrative. In some of the smaller
states like New Hampshire each in
stitution is under separate and in
dependent board. In other states
there have been partial attempts at
grouping and consolidation. Some Of
them are logical as in Maine and
some of illogical as in New York.
In the second class are the states
whose welfare activities are grouped
along functional rather than admin
istrative or fiscal lines under a small
number of coordinated departments.
Massachusetts has the best type of
this organization. In the third group
are the numerous states in which all