seer to manage the same. They also appoint a physician to look after the sick poor, and regulate his compensation. The commissioners are also authorized by law to furnish outdoor relief to the extent of twenty dollars to a person or family when temporary relief only is deemed necessary. In certain cases fifty dollars may be allowed. The general law contains also provisions relating to the liability of relatives of paupers, residence of paupers, the raising money by taxation for support, and other matters relating to the care of the poor.

There has also grown up in the state what is known as the "township system" of caring for the poor, and in about twenty counties the poor are made a charge upon the several towns and villages. This system has some advantages. Being under local supervision, much more discrimination is exercised in furnishing relief. It has also some disadvantages, inasmuch as the fund, also provided by local authority, is often limited in amount and readily exhausted, and sometimes insufficient to relieve deserving cases.

Under this system there is great temptation to ship paupers from place to place, and thus create a migratory class of paupers.

As demands frequently arise in certain communities for a change from county care to the township system, it was thought advisable to have a law passed, general in its character, and applicable to any county not already having a special law, and in 1889 a law was enacted, authorizing counties to change their system of caring for the poor. This law provides that when one-fourth of the voters shall petition for a change, the question shall be submitted to the State Board of Corrections and Charities for advice. If, after receiving such advice, the commissioners, by a majority vote, shall favor a change, then the question shall be submitted to the voters at the next election. In older communities, where the population is more dense, the town system works more satisfactorily than in sparsely settled districts. Of the twenty counties which at the present time care for their poor under this system, four-namely, Hennepin, Rice, Otter Tail and Winona-also maintain county poorhouses, a charge back being made on the several towns and villages for the cost of supporting paupers.

The principal weakness of the county system is lax supervision and carelessness in the administration of the poor fund. Applications for relief ought to be carefully scrutinized, a proper system of records should be kept by the county, and the pauper pension roll should be frequently revised and unnecessary relief cut off. Many counties publish annually the names of pensioners and others receiving relief. This is a wholesome check, and the mere fact of publication frequently operates as a check on would-be applicants.

Minnesota, being comparatively a new state, is not burdened with a large almshouse population. The total number cared for in all the poorhouses of the state (480 in 1897) would about furnish sufficient population for one almshouse in the Eastern States.

I have only attempted in my remarks to outline this subject. I see in the audience a gentleman who, from large practical experience, is very competent indeed to continue this discussion. I refer to Dr. T. C. Clark, and I suggest that Dr. Clark be called upon.

DISCUSSION.

DR. PRATT, Stillwater: The duties of the county commissioners is a larg subject, and there is not time to discuss it fully. Therefore I will conti myself to that part which has come under my observation as a physicianproper manner of giving our poor, in our cities more especially, the great amount of food and clothing for the amount of money appropriated for th purpose. And I wish to say in this connection that I have no fault to in with the board of county commissioners in this county. I believe we have good a board as could be elected in the county. They are men who are read and willing to do everything in their power for the good of the poor. Nere theless, at the best it is almost impossible to give our poor the necessary a tention and the food and clothing which they need. It is an established fac I believe, that every human being is entitled to a reasonable amount of food enough to make him comfortable and healthy. This idea is carried out in al the penal institutions of our own and other states. The inmates therein ar better fed and better clothed (and no fault can be found with this) than w clothe the poor widows and children in our cities. Our poor are not we cared for. The statement was made years ago, "The poor ye always have with you," and that simply means that we have them with us to care for.

Now, I am going to give my ideas of the best means of caring for the poor especially in our cities, so as to get the most good out of the money expended. It is a fact that the wealthy can always purchase everything a great deal cheaper than the poor. The millionaire rides for nothing, and the man who has his thousands goes to the store and gets his discount. Not so with the poor. They always have to pay the highest price.

My idea is this: Let the county commissioners, instead of issuing orders on some store, as is now usually done, furnish a storage-house, and in the fall of the year, when everything is cheap, store in it a sufficient amount of food to carry the poor through the winter or through the year. A great share of it'couli be made or raised on the poor farms, such as butter, potatoes and other vegeta bles, and perhaps a good deal of the meat. This could be done at a small ex pense, and without very much trouble. The first of each month those in need could come before the commissioners and give them a list of what they will need during the month. With some such scheme as this at least forty per cent of the amount now paid for feeding the poor could be saved. I am not making these remarks for the purpose of suggesting some way of saving the money of the county, so that the county shall have the benefit of it, but that we may be able to do more for the poor with the money we are able to appropriate for

their needs.

Now, in regard to the clothing. Let the commissioners appoint a com mittee of ladies to visit in an official capacity every poor family in the city say once in every three months, especially in September, and make a list of the clothing which the children and others in the house will require during the winter. This would rot prove as difficult a task as at first it would seem. for the commissioners could furnish the committee with the name, street and number of every needy family in the city. A woman can go into a house and tell what is needed much better than a man. Then let them make the pur chases. We all know that the ladies are better at making purchases than men. They more naturally attend to the shopping. My wife won't let me buy a pair of socks, even; she always attends to it herself. Such a committee could make these purchases probably at fifty cents on the dollar. We would thus be able to give the poor of our cities much better care, much better food and clothing, and more of it, than by letting them make their own purchases.

MRS. E. W. DUTCHER: With all due respect to the gentleman who has just spoken, I can see serious objection to giving out food to some poor families once a month, because I have labored a great deal among the poor, having a class of one hundred in a primary school in Minneapolis, and going and working among their people, and I have seen enough food thrown out in one day in some families to keep others a week. If you gave out food, say once a month, from this storehouse which the gentleman would establish, you should have friendly visitors to go to some of the families and deal out the

provisions; otherwise they would not last any time at all. How to care for the poor is a great question, but it seems to me that if we exerted ourselves to find work for every poor man so he could take care of himself and his family it would be the best thing we could do. I think the greatest charity we can do to any human being is to help him take care of himself. We must be careful and not make paupers by too much promiscuous giving.

DR. PRATT: I would like to ask what a poor woman is going to do to earn her own living who has five or six little children to take care of?

MRS. DUTCHER: Partly through a friendly visitor going in and showing her how to cook. Some of these people throw out things that I could make a good dinner out of. I have known some families in Minneapolis that were receiving provisions from four different associations until the associated charities' visitor came in, and she found they were throwing out enough to keep one family.

MR. GUTRIDGE, St. Paul: The gentleman from Stillwater talks as if the county commissioners know, in advance, exactly what families are to be aided. I think, Mr. President, that we should not take that ground. If we do our duty toward those needing aid this year, they will not all require help next year. Some of them will be self-supporting. In our work for the poor our aim should be to help them. The question is not how much we give them, but what we do for them. To simply provide abundantly for them is to enfeeble them, to destroy their capacity to provide for themselves. There is no reason why the money expended for the poor should not purchase as much as that expended by the rich, but the scheme of a storehouse seems to me to be a plan of inviting the poor to do nothing for themselves.

We should first find out exactly what they need and then help, as the lady from Minneapolis has said, in such a way as to develop their own capacities. Friendly visiting has been referred to. I will only say that the generally accepted meaning of the term is not that which has just been given to it.

Our system of out-door relief in Ramsey county has been held up in national conferences às approaching the ideal. The board of control there, having the same duties with regard to the poor that the county commissioners have in the smaller counties, has appointed as inspector a person who knows or thoroughly learns the needs of applicants for relief. He reports what, if anything, is needed. With this information the board is in a position to act wisely.

I cannot see why it should be necessary to purchase new clothing for the poor, because there is much more second-hand than they require, ready to be given away, if people only knew to whom it may be properly given.

REV. D. MORGAN, St. Paul: I think the suggestions of the doctor contain some good things that Ramsey county would do well to learn. I agree with him-that in the stores the poor never get except at the highest possible price the poor provisions that they get. I believe in the storehouse idea that has been suggested, but I think the doctor should amend it in one respect: Don't give out a month's provisions at one time, as we do in Ramsey county. That is a great curse to the poor, as the lady has said. I have a family in mind now that would have a high old time if they were to get a month's provisions. Most of it would go out to the chickens or be spoiled, and in five or six days there would be nothing left. If it could be supplied from the storehouse, say once a week, and under the direction of a friendly visitor, it would be very helpful, and I believe it would be a good idea for Ramsey county to adopt that plan and stop the store-order business. There they supply once a month, and I know some families that have a good time for four or five days and then they go begging the rest of the month.

3

PROTECTION OF PAUPERS.

BY JAS. F. JACKSON.

A BILL FOR AN ACT TO REGULATE THE BOARDING OF POOR PERS
BY COUNTIES, CITIES, VILLAGES, OR TOWNSHIPS.

Be it Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Minnesota:

Section 1. No county, city, village or township shall pay any persen the board of any pauper for more than three (3) months in any two ( secutive years unless such person shall have first received from the board of corrections and charities a permit to board paupers. Said shall prescribe the qualifications of the applicant and his premises, and cancel any permit when it deems necessary.

Sec. 2. When any person shall desire to board such paupers he notify the state board of corrections and charities of his desire to do so. thereupon it shall be the duty of the state board of corrections and charit either by a committee, or by its members, or by its secretary, or by agent as it may designate, to investigate the application, and if, in the jel ment of the state board of corrections and charities, said applicant is a su able person, and has suitable accommodations, they shall issue such pem otherwise not.

Sec. 3. Any county, city, village or township may make contracts persons who have such permit or with persons who are within the provisio of this act as aforesaid.

Sec. 4. Contracts may or may not provide for the county furnishing be bedding, and other furniture, but shall provide for the county, city, villag or township furnishing the necessary clothing for the inmates.

Sec. 5. The rate of board shall not be less than two dollars and twent five cents ($2.25) per week for adults nor less than one dollar and seventycents ($1.75) for children. Any county, city, village or township may provi in the contract for extra compensation for care of sick persons.

Sec. 6. Any person violating any provisions of this act shall be guilty a misdemeanor, and any county, city, village or township treasurer who shall pay any bill contracted for board furnished in violation of this act shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.

Sec. 7. This act shall take effect and be in force from and after June first (1st), eighteen hundred and ninety-nine (1899).

The above bill was prepared at the suggestion of a gentleman who has seen the need of it. My experience as secretary of the state board of cor rections and charities has not covered a sufficient time to enable me to give perfectly clear reasons for the passage of the above bill; therefore I present the same to this conference, asking that you freely discuss the same, and advise me whether or not I should present this bill to the state board of corrections and charities, asking their indorsement for its passage by the

coming legislature.

At the outset I herewith present letters from ex-Secretary Hart, and from Mr. Palm, who has for a number of years been a member of the board

of county commissioners of Nobles county:

Mr. Hart writes:

"Your letter of October 6th is received. I can see no reason why this is not proper legislation. I am perfectly aware of the fact that paupers are boarded out in families in every county of the state. The argument which is often effective in carrying the proposition to build a poorhouse is, that will do away with the necessity of boarding paupers in families, but in practice it does not do away with that necessity.

It is to be remembered that forty-five out of the eighty counties of the have no poorhouses whatever, and are compelled to board in families. exactly this practice of hoarding paupers in families which needs to be rvised. County commissioners are apt to be careless in this matter; etimes they board paupers in a family of relatives, and sometimes they d them where they can get it done cheapest. These families are often ote from centers of population.

'I do not think that the investigation of applicants would involve any it amount of expense; the inquiries with reference to these homes could made by correspondence. un suitable blanks, and I think the very fact a license was required would tend to keep unsuitable persons from apng for such paupers."

Mr. H. M. Palm:

"Yours of recent date, inclosing copy of proposed law 'to regulate the rding of poor persons, etc.,' came to hand in due time.

"I have looked over the paper very carefully, and do not see anything erein it could be improved. You have provided in the first section a sufent margin to cover all cases of emergency, and it is no more than right it in cases that go beyond the 'emergency' clause there should be a thorgh supervision in the matter. I think the proposed legislation will be a ve in the right direction, and would be very glad to see our legislature ake an effort to control this line of public work."

While visiting the poorhouses with Secretary Hart, prior to my assuming e duties of my present office, I found certain instances in which county arges were boarded out with families who did not give them proper care, id in each instance the matter was called to the attention of the proper uthorities. If these were typical cases of the care given to poor persons oarded out at public expense, I believe that this or some similar bill should e passed; but my observation has not been sufficiently extended to enable he to make such a statement of my own knowledge.

Brief discussion was had by Messrs. E. P. Savage, J. R. Parshall and Andrew Olson.

ALIEN AND NON-RESIDENT PAUPERS.

BY C. P. MAGINNIS, MEMBER MINNESOTA STATE BOARD OF CORRECTIONS AND CHARITIES.

One of the grave questions now before the people of Minnesota is, How shall we protect ourselves from alien or migratory paupers and vagrants of other states and countries, who come into the state, or are sent in by public officials, or who drift along with the tide of immigration, or, at times, respectable persons who come with the expectation of bettering their conditions and who fail, from sickness, the drink habit, or other causes, without friends or means to assist them when overtaken with misfortune? The numbers finding their way into our state and public institutions vary from year to year, but the number is always great. Some of these people come into the state in the hope of securing employment or making homes for themselves in some of the farming communities, but, failing in their expectations, are helpless; while some come in a perfectly helpless condition, and are sent to our hospitals, asylums, or poorhouses, there to secure treatment and care at the public expense.