The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1935-01-10
Relief

Relief was and IS our nrSt PROB
lem.
The facts reveal a startling pic
tlTe of public relief in Indiana dur
ing the last two years. The case
load has increased until today it
slightly exceeds 125 900 families,
more than half a million of our
people. approximately one out of six
Of the states inhabitants.
The last session Of the Indiana
General Assembly created the Gov
errors Commission on Unemploy-
ment Relief to deal with the prob
lem Of public relief, which had be-
come acute.
Prior to Jan. Q, 1888. seven politi-
cal subdivisions of Indiana counties
had found it necessary to borrow
funds for poor relief purposes total
ing S1,073, 22430 from the Recon-
struction Finance Corpora ton.
These funds were being expended
upon the authority and at the di-
rection Of the Governor. The Gov
ernor's Commission on UnemplOy-
ment Relief took over the admins
tration of these funds which, by
June l, 1888 had reached a total of
S5179.931. These loans we're cam
celled by Presidential authority and
the % counties borrowing the money
have no further obligation.
On May %. 1888 the Federal
Emergency Relief Administration
was created and the executive COM
mittee Of the Governors Commits
sion on Unemployment Relief was
appointed its Indiana agent. Funds
allotted to Indiana. exclusive of the
SD 800, 100 granted for the Civil
Works 40 listration, total S29-
157,254. I sc funds we're not
granted to t.c state without proper
Safeguards. These safeguards were
the rules and regulations requiring
better standards rather than limi-
tations. The funds have been dis
tributed by the Governors Commits
sion on Unemployment Relief (the
Indiana administration of the
FERA) on the basis of need in the
various townships of the state. 1t
was apparent that the taxpaying
ability of the people in many town
ships could not cope with the relief
expenditures. Other townships
were able to raise all the necessary
funds.
Poor relief is additionally a re-
sponsibility of the local unit How
ever. when tax rates become so high
that the law of diminishing return
becomes operative, additional help
must be given to maintain the credit
to obtain the required poor relief
orders. To meet such contingencies
the Governors Commission on I'm
employment Relief allotted funds to
the various townships from the
grant made to the state by the
FERA.
To insure free and available funds
for financing the cost of relief dur
ing the coming years. certain phases
of the present laws should be clari-
fed and strengthened and to some
extent expanded. Rather than tear
down completely the present system
Of financing poor relief, it is desir-
able to make present laws definite
and workable. Proposed changes
fall into three clasSifcations, as fol-
lows:
1. Make county poor relief bonds
saleable by making tax levies man
datory for interest payments and
retirement. In other words, remove
county poor relief bonds from the
tax levy limitation law.
?. Define into one unified whole
the respective duties and functions.
as to poor relief, of township and
county boards and officials. using
the decision of the Indiana Su-
preme Court of Sept. 9, 1888, in the
case of Wayne Township VS.. Brown
as a basis. This includes fixing the
responsibility on county officials of
providing free and available funds
for poor relief for the incoming
year so that there can be no failure
to provide for the poor
3. Provide a county or state poor
relief fund to assist those townships
unable to care for those on relief
because of low valuations and high
poor relief loads.