View original document

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
JA M ES J. D AV IS, Secretary

CHILDREN’S BUREAU
G R A C E A B B O T T . Chief

'

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
AN INTERPRETATION OF DATA CONCERNING DEPENDENT
CHILDREN UNDER THE CARE OF PUBLIC AND
PRIVATE AGENCIES

BY

EMMA O. LUNDBERG
and

MARY E. MILBURN

Bureau Publication No. 140

WASHINGTON
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
1924


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

SINGLE COPIES OE THIS PUBLICATION MAT BE
OBTAINED FR EE UPON APPLICATION TO THE
c h i l d r e n ’ s b u r e a u , a d d it io n a l c o p ie s m a y

BE PROCURED FROM THE SUPERINTENDENT OF
DOCUMENTS, GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE,
WASHINGTON, D. C.
AT

20 C E N T S P E R COPY


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

3
U.«o^€-

$ >4°

CONTENTS.
Page.

Letter of transmittal_________________________
J_____
Vn
What child dependency means in the District and how it can be prevented1
The dependency problem______________
L(_3___ 1
The ratio'of dependency.._____ ____________ _____________
i
Factors in child dependency___________ ________'1_
____
3
The prevention of child dependency_________________ _____ ___ _
6
Adequate social investigation_____ _____________ __________
7
Child-study clinic___________________________________ f_____
8
Public aid to children in their own homes______ /__!___ 8
Rehabilitation of families_________________ 1___ ___________
10
The relation between public and private agencies___ __________ t_
11
Concerted action in the revision of child-welfare laws_____________
13
Standards of care for dependent children__ ___________ ____ _____
15
The Children’s Bureau study of child dependency in the District of Colum­
bia_________________ ______ __•___ ,____ __________________ P___ _
17
The purpose of the study and its definition___ _______
L
17
Children’s agencies and institutions studied_________________ 19
The Juvenile Court_________________
19
The Board of Children’s Guardians_____________________________ 20
'*
Institutions under private auspices_______________________ __
21
Statistical interpretation of the dependency problem__________
I
22
22
Children under care of the Board of Children’s Guardians_______ _
Basis of the study. ______________________________. . . . __ __
22
Wards of the board________________________
___
22
Minority and temporary commitments____________________
22
Reasons for commitment_______________ ,____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 2 4
Age at commitment, sex, and race__ _____________________ __
26
Localities from which the children came_____ ___ . . . _______
27
Parental status____________________
28
Custodians at time of commitment___________________ _____
31
33
Records of families and children_______ _________________ _
Contributions of parents to the support of the children ________
36
Comparison of the use of various types of placements_____ __ _
37
Physical and mental condition of the children_________ _____43
Conduct of children while under care of the board_____ ______
46
48
Wards discharged during one year________ _________________
Children under care of private institutions__________________ <
51
Institution population____________________________________ '
52
Age when received, sex, and race___________________ _ _______
53
Custodians of children before their entrance to institutions___ _ _ j 53
Parental status_____________________________
54
Contributions of parents to the support of the children_______
55
Children discharged from care during one year._____ ...______
55
Methods of the Board of Children’s Guardians__ _______________ ____
57
Departments of work______________________________
57
Investigation of dependency and neglect cases_____________ i ....__
57
The policy of the board in regard to placement._______ _______59
Placements of wards on June 30, 1923_________ ^__ ________
60
Similarity with methods of leading States__ ,__
60
Present policy compared with that of previous years ^_______
62
Family-home placements______________________________________
62
Method of selecting homes___ __________ __________________
62
Geographical distribution of homes____________
63
The use of boarding and free homes____________ ____________
64
Indenture discontinued_______
67
Policy regarding adoptions________
67
Homes for handicapped children________ __________________
67
Placement with own family____________________ In'________
68
Self-supporting wards____ ______
68
hi


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

IV

CON TENTS.

Methods of the Board of Children’s Guardians—Continued.
PageInstitutional care____________- — . __— ---------- ------------------------69
Number of children in institutions--------------------------------------69
Institutions under District control----------•---------------------------70
Private institutions used by the board — -----------------------------72
Institutional care of handicapped children--------------------------74
Hospital care and special treatment--------------------------------------75
The question of an institutional adjunct to the board----------76
81
Private institutions engaged in child-caring work----------__---------- —
Institutions for dependent children----------- — _-------------- — ;- - 81
Agencies concerned with dependent families and children. __ — -------83
Other agencies engaged in child-caring work____ — _— -----83
The development of a Catholic child-caring agency._—
— __
84
Protective work_________ :_ ------------------------------------------ - - - —
85
Stories illustrating the problems dealt with by the Board of Children’s
Guardians____________________________________ _________ _____86
Aid to dependent children in their own hom es.,---------------------------------96
•
The extent of the need in the District of Columbia.-------- ____'------96
Estimate of appropriation needed for the District of Columbia-------100
Essentials of a “ mothers’ pension” law-----------------------— -------101
Persons to whom aid may be given--------------- ---------------- -----102
Terms and amount of allowance-----------------------------------------105
Administration and procedure . . . — , . ----------- ---------------------107
109
Staff for administration of mothers’ pensions---------------- ------------. . .
Bills introduced in Congress providing for aid to dependent children
in their own homes------------ ---------__------------- -------------- - - - - —
109
Text of pending “ mothers’ pension” bill----------------— _— ---------110
The development of child-caring work in the District of Columbia--------142
The development of private child-caring work----- ------- ---------------112
The development of public child-caring work___ - - - - - — ------- .--116
The beginning of public supervision of charities--------------.------117
The origin of the Board of Children’s Guardians__________—
118
The first years of public child-caring work---------. . . --------------122
The problem of adequate support------------------------- -_•— __— 124
127
Increase in the work____________________ _________ -___.------Congressional inquiries concerning the care of dependent children---129
131
Joint Congressional Committee of 1896________ _______--------Report to Congress by the District commissioners in 1904-------135
The “ White House Conference,” 1909__ _______________ _—
138
Appendix A.—General tables----------- -------------------------- ...----------------143
Table 1.— Number and per cent distribution in various types of place­
ment at end of each fiscal year; wards of the Board of
Children’s Guardians under minority commitment.___
143
Table 2.—Number and per cent distribution in various types of place' ment at end of each fiscal year; wards of the Board of
144
Children’s Guardians under temporary commitment----Table 3.—Color and sex of dependent and delinquent children under
care of the Board of Children’s Guardians, May 16,
1920-May 15, 1921, by type of commitment--------------144
Table 4.—Institutions caring for wards of the Board of Children’s
Guardians on June 30 of each year ________--------------145
Table 5.—Age at time of commitment of children under care of the
Board of Children’s Guardians, May 16, 1920-May 15,
1921, by type of commitment_______— ------------------148
Table 6.—Age when received, type of commitipent, color, and sex;
children received by the Board of Children’s Guardians
during the year May 16, 1920-May 15, 1921----- ______
149
Table 7.—Type of placement, by color and sex and by age, of chil­
dren under care of the Board of Children’s Guardians,
May 15, 1921_________________________—4
150
Table 8.—Length of time under care of children who were wards of
the Board of Children’s Guardians at some time during
the year May 1 6 ,1920-May 15,1921, by age at discharge
or at the end of the year______ _______'J - — .-_------ —
151
Appendix B.—Laws relating to the Board of Children’s Guardians of the
District of Columbia________ _ — _____ — :------ -,--152
Appendix C.—List of references to material on the public and private
child-caring work in the District__________:_______----157

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

CO NTENTS.

V

CH ARTS.
P age.

Dependent children in the District of Columbia: Proportions cared for
by public agency and by private institutions_______________________
Proportions of white and colored children under care of the public agency
and private institutions and in the total population of the District of
Columbia____________ ___________________ ._______ ____________
Parental status of children under care of the public agency and private
institutions in the District of Columbia___________________________
Custodians from whom children were removed by the juvenile court and
committed to the Board of Children’s Guardians___________________
Placement at end of year of children under care of the Board of Children’s
Guardians_______________________________________________
Board of Children’s Guardians, District of Columbia: Number of times
wards were placed_________________________


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

18
25
30
32
38
42


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL.

U. S.

D

epartm ent

Ch

of

*La b o r ,
B urea

i l d r e n ’s

u

,

Washington, February 5, 1924.
S i r : There is transmitted herewith a report on Child Dependency
in the District of Columbia, by Emma O. Lundberg and Mary E.
Milburn of the social-service division of the Children’s Bureau.
Elva Dunkle, also of the social-service division, was of special
assistance in the preparation of material which has been incorporated
in the report.
This study was undertaken at the request of the Board of Chil­
dren’s Guardians of the District of Columbia and also of the Wash­
ington Council of Social Agencies.
Respectfully submitted.
G r a c e A b b o t t , Chief.
Hon. J a m e s J . D a v i s ,
Secretary of Labor.
VII


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT
OF COLUMBIA.
WHAT

CHILD DEPENDENCY MEANS IN THE DISTRICT
AND HOW IT CAN BE PREVENTED.

From dependency statistics a picture may be constructed of one
important phase of community life. Through them the types of
treatment used may be ascertained, and they furnish an indication
of the social intelligence and the skill of the persons charged with
the management of institutions and agencies.
The material presented in this report not only is of importance
as portraying the child-dependency problem that is dealt with at the
resent time by the child-caring agencies of the District of Columbia
ut should be'of some value as a basis for the determination of
future policy. In interpreting this material the emphasis should be
placed not on possibilities of reducing the financial burden borne by
the public treasury and by private institutions and agencies but
rather on what dependency means to each one of almost 4,000 chil­
dren who during each year, under present conditions in the District,
must be provided for by public or private agencies or institutions
because they have no homes or their own homes have proved in­
adequate.

E

THE DEPENDENCY PROBLEM.
THE RATIO OF DEPENDENCY.

The District of Columbia is almost entirely urban, with unusual
industrial conditions because of its position as the National Capital
and with a population that is very mobile.
The racial composition of the population is an important factor
in the child-dependency problem of the District.1
This factor gives rise to special problems in connection with hous­
ing, living standards, sanitation, health, and the care and protection
that can be afforded children under certain living conditions. While
it is generally conceded that the negro population of the District^—
which comprises 25 per cent of the total—is on a higher economic
level, on the *whole, than that of many cities or States where the
race represents a large proportion of the population, it is undoubtedly
true that the negro population of the District is economically a dis­
advantaged group in comparison with the white population.
On the basis of figures reported by the Board of Children’s
Guardians and the private institutions caring for dependent chil­
dren, compared with the census data for the population of the Dis1 The total population of th e District of Columbia under 21 years of age in 1920 was as follows:White,
95,680; negro, 36,518. (Fourteenth Census of the United States, Vol. I l l , Population, pp. 178, 180. U. S.
Bureau of the Census, Washington, 1922.)


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

2

C H IL D D E P E N D E N C Y I N

T H E D IST R IC T OF C O L U M B IA .

trict under 21 years of age, the interesting ratios shown in the fol­
lowing table are obtained for the years 1904, 1910, and 1922.2
Number of dependent children per 1,000 of the population under 21 years of age
in the District of Columbia.
Dependent children per 1,000 population u nder 21 year of age.
Year.

Under care
of Board of In private
Children’s institutions.
Guardians.

Total.

10
10
7

12
15
15

22
25
22

A number of District of Columbia children are placed in Maryland
institutions, but most of these are delinquent children; the number
of dependent children placed in institutions outside the District is
practically offset, so far as could be ascertained, by temporary place­
ment in District institutions of children who belopg in adjoinmg
States.
.
, ,.
Thus it is seen that there have been m the District of Columbia
during this period from 22 to 25 dependent children per 1,000 of the
general population under 21 years of age. The ratio in 1922 was
lower than in 1910 and the same as in 1904. Increase in the popula­
tion of Washington and postwar conditions have not caused the
increase that might have been expected in the child-dependency
problem.
,
.
.
The dependency ratios are especially interesting in the case of
colored children under care of the Board of Children’s Guardians
and the private institutions, as shown in the following table:
Comparative ratios for dependent children per 1,000 of the white and colored
population under 21 years of age.
Dependent children per 1,000 population under 21 years of age.

Year.

White.
1904

_ __________________

1922

.............- ____ _____ ____ ---

Under care of
Board of Children’s
Guardians.

Total.

19
21
15

Colored.
25
34
34

White.
7
8
8

Colored.
2^*
34
33

In private insti­
tutions.
White.
12
13
,7

Colored.
3
1

The table also shows that the greater part of the negro dependency
problem is handled by the public agency.
s The census figures used for population are for 1900, 1910, and 1920. D ata for the Board of Children s
Guardians and th e private institutions are from the census volumes on benevolent institutions for 1904
and 1910. and from figures for 1922 obtained b y the Children’s Bureau from the agency and institutions.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

M E A N IN G A N D P R E V E N T IO N OF O H IL D D E P E N D E N C Y .

3

I t is obvious that any attempt to compare the dependency prob­
lem in the District of Columbia with that in any of the States or
in any of the large cities of the States must take into account
especially the existence in the District of the large colored popula­
tion that is disadvantaged economically as compared with the white
inhabitants.
In the absence of census figures on children under care of agencies
and institutions for a date later than 1910 it is not profitable to
attempt comparison of the dependency ratios in the District of
Columbia and the ratios for other cities. Many of the conditions
peculiar to the Nation’s Capital would point toward a higher de­
pendency rate than would be found in many other cities; and it
would be obviously unfair to compare the dependency rate in the
District of Columbia—with a population resident in the one large
city—and rates for States.
FACTORS IN CHILD DEPENDENCY.

The following brief summary of the nature of the child-depend­
ency problem in the District of Columbia is based on data analyzed
in later sections of this report, concerning dependent children under
public and private care during one year—2,444 children under care
of the District Board of Children’s Guardians and 1,174 children
in private institutions from which information was secured.
Both, parents dead.—An. outstanding fact concerning the children
under care of the Board of Children’s Guardians and in the institu­
tions for dependent children during the year is the small propor­
tion who had lost both parents by death. Only 5 per cent of all
children under the care of the public agency and 12 per cent of
those in private institutions were orphans, i. e., children who had
lost both parents. I t happens that the percentage is exactly the
same for the group of children committed to the Board of Chil­
dren’s Guardians by the juvenile court as dependent and for those
brought before the court because of delinquency. There is a con­
siderable difference between the percentages of orphans among the
white and the colored children under the care of the Board of
Children’s Guardians—3 per cent for the former and 6 per cent for
the latter.
One parent dead.—Almost one-third of all the children were half
orphans. The proportion was twice as high for the children in pri­
vate institutions as for those under the care of the public agency—54
per cent of the former and 25 per cent of the wards of the board.
At the time of commitment to the board more than four-fifths of
the children whose fathers were dead were living with their mothers.
Of those whose mothers were dead two-fifths were received from the
custody of the fathers. I t was found that 61 per cent of all the
half orphans were with the surviving parent at the time when they
were received by the Board of Children’s Guardians.
Home unsuitable, though both parents present..-*- Aimost one-sixth
of all the children under the care of the Board of Children’s Guard­
ians during one year had been removed by the court from homes in
which both father and mother were living. An additional 6 per
cent came from homes in which there were a father and a stepmother
or a mother and a stepfather. Thus 21 per cent of the children under


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

4

C H IL D D E P E N D E N C Y I N T H E D IST R IC T OE C O L U M B IA .

the care of the board were removed from the custody of both parents
or of a parent and a step-parent. For the private institutions in­
adequate information was secured as to the presence of both parents
in the home; but less than 4 per cent were reported as having both
parents living. This is doubtless attributable to the fact that chil­
dren removed by the court from the custody of both parents because
of neglect or bad home conditions were committed to the Board of
Children’s Guardians.
The proportion of children removed from the custody of both
parents was greater for delinquent children than for children who
were brought before the court because of dependency—35 per cent for
the former and 15 per cent for the latter—the percentage of children
removed from step-parental homes being more than twice as large
among the delinquent as among those committed because of depend­
ency. The proportion of cases in which the child was removed from
the custody of both parents was greater for the white children than
for the colored—26 per cent as compared with 18 per cent. Thirtythree per cent of the children committed temporarily and 18 per
cent of those committed until they should become 21 years of age
were removed from homes in which both parents were living.
Abandonment and desertion.—Next to the death of one or both
parents, the abandonment of children by both parents or desertion
of the family by the father or the mother was the most frequent cause
of dependency. Of all the wards of the board 16 per cent were in
this class, including those received as foundlings or abandoned, others
concerning whose parentage nothing was known at the time of com­
mitment, and children whose fathers or mothers had deserted their
families.
Of the children in institutions for whom information was secured,
8 per cent were reported as foundlings or abandoned, or as deserted
by one parent. The larger part of the problem of children made
dependent by abandonment and desertion is dealt with by the
public agency, perhaps because these are usually court- commit­
ments.
Divorce and separation.—Information obtained concerning divorce
and separation of parents of children included in the study can not
be considered very accurate. I t is probable, also, that many cases
reported as desertion should be added to the number of cases of
‘jrmrents not living together”—which is apparently as definite a
term as the information justifies for divorce and separation as here
reported. Under this general heading are included 10 per cent of
all the children cared for by the public agency and 14 per cent of
those reported by private institutions.
Parent in an institution.—The dependency of the child was related
to institutional commitment of one or both parents in 11 per cent
of the cases under the care of the Board of Children’s Guardians.
In a number of cases one parent was in an institution and the other
was dead, so that the children were entirely dependent. Of the
children in this group both parents of almost one-tenth, the mothers
of over one-half, and the fathers of almost two-fifths were in hospitals,
insane asylums, prisons, or jails.
Unmarried mothers.—-Of the children under the care of the Board
of Children’s Guardians for whom information on this point was
obtained, 25 per cent were reported as of illegitimate birth. Only

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

M E A N IN G A N D P R E V E N T IO N OP O H IL D D E P E N D E N C Y .

5

8 per cent of the children under the care of private institutions were
reported as born out of wedlock.
It is interesting to note that the percentage of children of illegiti­
mate birth among children under the care of the public agency com­
pares very closely with that among dependent children under the
care of the division of the government of Massachusetts, which deals
largely with the same types of problems as the District of Columbia
Board of Children’s Guardians. In a study of the children under
the care of the division of minor wards, Massachusetts State Board
of Charity (now division of child guardianship, Massachusetts De­
partment of Public Welfare), it was found that 23 per cent of the
more than 7,000 children under care during one year were bom out
of wedlock.3
Further analysis of the data concerning the children under the
care of the Board of Children’s Guardians of the District shows that
83 per cent of the children of illegitimate birth who were committed
to the board were colored. This is in contrast to the proportion of
all wards who were colored (62 per cent). Only 11 per cent of the
white wards, as against 33 per cent of the colored wards, were known
to be illegitimate. These percentages would undoubtedly have been
considerably increased if the facts as to the foundlings and all the
abandoned and homeless children had been known; doubtless a
considerable proportion of these were born out of wedlock.
In 56 per cent of the cases in which the child was known to be of
illegitimate birth the mother had had the custody of the child im­
mediately prior to his becoming a ward of the board.
Mental defect.—The lack of provision for the care of the feeble­
minded in the District has seriously handicapped the work of both
the public and the private agencies.4 Institutional care has been
available for a few feeble-minded white children who were placed at
District expense in institutions in near-by States. For feeble-minded
colored children no institutional provision has been made, and the
Board of Children’s Guardians has dealt with the problem through
boarding these feeble-minded children in family homes which it be­
lieved were especially equipped to care for them. A considerable
burden of expense and work: will be lifted from the child-caring
agencies and institutions when the institution for the feeble-minded
for which an appropriation was made at the fourth session of the
Sixty-seventh Congress becomes available. The lack of proper train­
ing and care for such children, and the danger that feeble-minded
^children who lack proper home conditions constitute to the com­
munity, have been reiterated many times in the course of the discus­
sion oi the need for this new institution. I t has been urged especially
by those concerned with the public care of dependent children in the
District.
Inadequate care for colored children.—The disproportionate number
of dependent colored children as compared with the colored popula­
tion 5 indicates an especially serious social and economic problem,
which is further aggravated by the lack of proper facilities for the
8
Illegitimacy as a Child-Welfare Problem, P art 2, p. 37. U. S. Children's Bureau Publication No. 75.
Washington, 1921.
:
r :
4 M ental Defectives in the District of Columbia. U. S. Children’s Bureau Publication No. 13. Wash­
ington, 1915.
6
Of th e children under care of the Board of Children’s Guardians on M ay 15,1921,38 per cent were white
and 62 per cent colored. Of the total population under 21 years of age in the District, according to the
U. S. Census of 1920,72 per cent were white and 28 per cent colored.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

6

CHILI} DE&ENDSNCY IN THE DISTRICT ÒF OÒLtTMBIÀ.

care and supervision of colored wards of the District. Provision for
the care of colored children in institutions under sectarian or private
auspices is very meager as compared with such provisions for white
children. For delinquent colored girls and for colored feeble-minded
wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians no institutional care
whatever is available.
THE PREVENTION OF CHILD DEPENDENCY.

In any community the test of the adequacy of agencies for social
action does not lie in the numbers or the physical equipment of these
agencies but in their results as they affect the individual lives of the
persons who come to them for help. If 100 per cent attention is not
paid to thè prevention of dependency and delinquency, the resources
of a community are inadequate for child protection, no matter how
well its agencies may be equipped to deal with children after they
have been received as wards of public or private organizations. Not
until it can be said truthfully that the children who are deprived of
their own homes and come under the care of institutions or agencies
include only those whose dependency could not have been prevented
through measures of social justice, through economic assistance, or
through the removal of deteriorating forces that destroy physical
and moral health can it be claimed that a community or an agency is
doing everything that it is obligated to do for the protection of its
children.
A child may have to be removed from his own family because of
conditions that are destructive to his moral growth; many of the
commitments included in this study represent a decision on the part
of the court, which no one would question, that it was in the interest
of the child that he be placed in other surroundings. But a con­
siderable part of the child-dependency problem is apparently due to
poverty, even though this may be an indirect cause of commitment.
All the children old enough to be aware of conditions about them
have suffered mental stress from the situations which occasioned
their dependency—a stress more permanent in its effects, perhaps,
than the bodily deprivation and moral contamination that many of
them have experienced.
A family does not have the characteristic found in some forms of
vegetable life which enables the broken segments of a plant to take
root immediately in new soil. A child is not transplanted from one
mode of life to another without suffering keenly in the process of
adapting himself to the new environment, enduring fears and uncer-'
tainties and questionings that are unanswered. He may accept the
separation from his own family and companions placidly, and it may
be essential for his own development that he should be removed into
other surroundings. But in general the permanent- or long-time
separation of a child from his own kindred is likely to affect seriously
the child’s mental and emotional life.
The conclusions of the “ White House Conference on the Care of
Dependent Children” include an excellent definition of preventive
work:6
The most important and valuable philanthropic work is not the curative, but
the preventive; to check dependency by a thorough study of its causes and by
6 Proceedings of the Conference on the Care of Dependent Children, held a t Washington, D. C., Jan.
25-26, 1909. Sixtieth Congress, Second Session, Senate Document No. 721. Washington, 1909.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

M E A N IN G A N D P R E V E N T IO N OF C H IL D D E P E N D E N C Y ;

7

effectively remedying or eradicating them should be the constant aim of society.
Along these lines we urge upon all friends of children, the promotion of effective
measures, including _legislation, to prevent blindness; to check tuberculosis
and other diseases in dwellings and work places, and injuries in hazardous
occupations; to secure compensation or insurance so as to provide a family
income in case of sickness, accident, death, or invalidism of the breadwinner;
to promote child-labor reforms, and, generally, to improve the conditions sur­
rounding child life. To secure these ends we urge efficient eoooeration with all
other agencies for social betterment.
ADEQUATE SOCIAL INVESTIGATION.

This study suggests the possibilities in work for the prevention of
child dependency. One of the avenues to prevention is adequate
social investigation of the needs in each case coming to the attention
of public and private agencies or institutions and the inauguration of
more adequate means for preventing the breaking up of families.
An example of coordinated activity among agencies engaged in
child-caring work is found in the Children’s Bureau of Cleveland,
organized in 1921 by sectarian and other private agencies and insti­
tutions for the purpose of securing adequate social investigations
of all applications for the care of dependent children.7 The second
annual report of the bureau contains the following statement of the
work :8
The Children’s Survey of 1920 recommended that the bureau be organized to
perform certain fundamental functions:
Iv To investigate all new admissions to the various dependent children’s
institutions in Cleveland, making trained service for investigation available to
even the smallest institution.
II. After placement of a child in the institution to follow up his progress
and that of the family from which he came in order that thorough plans for the
future might be developed.
III. To arrange for thorough medical and corrective work on children being
admitted to institutions.
IV. To develop facilities for the mental diagnosis of difficult, problem’ and
subnormal children.

An interesting illustration of the possible advantage of thorough
study of the need for admission of children for whom application is
made is afforded by one institution in the District which on Decem­
ber 30, 1910, according to the 1910 census of benevolent institutions,
was caring for 140 children. Because of deterioration of the plant
and equipment and delay in proposed building the population has
been so reduced that in the fall of 1923 it reached the low level of 35.
Much of this reduction has been effected by closing certain depart­
ments and sending the children back to their homes. Although em­
barked on a building program, the board had apparently taken no
steps to learn whether the children who were thus returned to their
homes when the need arose could have been kept in their homes from
the beginning if certain types of assistance had been given their
families. Almost all the children cared for were half orphans.
Together with provision for social investigation, there should be
means for giving constructive help to families in which children
have been reported as dependent or neglected but in which con­
ditions do not seem to warrant immediate commitment. Responsi­
bility for this type of service belongs either with the juvenile court
7 In the District of Columbia somewhat similar work has been in the process of development during the
last two years by the Catholic Charities of Washington. This agency investigates the intake of some of
the Catholic child-caring institutions.
8 Second Annual Report of the Children’s Bureau of Cleveland, M ay, 1923 (multigraphed).


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

8

C H IL D D E P E N D E N C Y I N T H E D IST R IC T OF C O L U M B IA .

or with the Board of Children’s Guardians. Neither of these
agencies is now in a position to do preventive work of this nature.
CHILD-STUDY CLINIC.

Much attention has been given in recent years to the development
of clinical facilities for thorough scientific study of children coming
to the attention of juvenile courts or agencies in order to determine
their physical and niental condition and help in making a normal
adjustment. The study of the child’s physique, personality, and
mental habits must be linked up with social investigation into his
background and environment. Only with the knowledge so gained
can treatment be adapted to the real needs of the child. With such
a basis for action each individual child can be given the type of care
th a t is required in order to build up a healthy body and mind and
avoid the difficulties that jeopardize his development.
The director of the Commonwealth Fund, Barry C. Smith, under
whose auspices demonstration clinics have been undertaken in a
number of large cities to show the methods by which scientific study
of children may be made of service to a community, has made the
following statement regarding the meaning of such study:9
Only very recently has there come to be some conception that early study
of the individual who is out of adjustment, scientific diagnosis of his so.cial
difficulty, may make possible a considerable degree of prevention; that carefully
differentiated treatment—physical, mental, and social—based on such a diagnosis,
may produce results quite as salutary as may be found in the physician’s practice,
may even direct many a young offender on the pathway toward good citizen­
ship instead of toward the life of the “ repeater.” * * * For the child who is
tending toward delinquency, who fails to “ get along” in his school, home, or
neighborhood environment, who is troublesome or “ different” or “ maladjusted,”
who comes for the first time before the juvenile court—for him the greatest
single need is that he be accurately and adequately understood; that his problems,
difficulties, and motives be appreciated—in short, that the decision as to what
is the best thing to do for him be based on a thoroughgoing knowledge.

For a period of about 18 months the Juvenile Court of the District
of Columbia had the services of a clinic conducted by the United
States Public Health Service, which gave mental and physical ex­
aminations* to children who were below normal physically or men­
tally or who gave special difficulty. This clinic had to be discon­
tinued nearly three years ago. The Board of Children’s Guardians
has had the services of several of the psychiatrists in the city and of
the mental clinic in connection with a hospital. But both the board
and the court, as well as other social agencies in the District, have
repeatedly urged the establishment of a fully equipped clinic for the
thorough, scientific study of problem children. Many dependent and
neglected children, because of unfavorable home and environmental
conditions, are as much in need of such study as are delinquent
children. Concerted action is needed in order that clinical facilities
may be provided in the District of Columbia.
PUBLIC AID TO CHILDREN IN THEIR OWN HOM ES.1«

In the District of Columbia there is no provision whereby a mother
who needs financial assistance to maintain her children in her own
9 Anderson, V. V., M . D .: The Psychiatric Clinic in the Treatm ent of Conduct Disorders of Children
and th e Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency, p. 11. The National Committee for Mental Hygiene, New
York 1923.
10 See pp. 96-111. See also A Tabular Summary of State Laws Relating to Public Aid to Children in
Their Own Homes in Effect June 1,1924, and the texts of the laws of certain States (U. S. Children’s
Bureau Chart No. 3, revised edition; in press).


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

M E A N IN G A N D P R E V E N T IO N OF C H IL D D E P E N D E N C Y .

9

home may be aided from public funds, although board may be paid
for the children in foster homes. A dependent child can not be given
public assistance (for a period of more than a week) except through
commitment by the juvenile court to the Board of Children’s Guardi­
ans. There is little question as to the need in the District for some
means by which when the home is deprived of its breadwinner pub­
lic funds may be used to aid the children, thus preventing the break­
ing up of families and making unnecessary the assumption by the
ublic of the entire burden of the children’s care and support in
oarding homes or institutions.
The question of assisting mothers to care for their children in
their own homes has been discussed with much interest in the District
for several years. Only six States are now without some public pro­
vision for aid of the kind popularly known as “ mothers’ pensions.”
Several bills providing for such aid in the District of Columbia to
children in their own homes were introduced in the Sixty-seventh
and preceding Congresses. The fact that none of these measures has
been brought to vote in either house of Congress may be due in large
measure to lack of agreement among the various agencies and groups
urging such legislation. The discussion of proposed bills has re­
vealed dissension and differences of opinion, especially in regard to
the agency with which administration should be lodged.
I t has been shown in the foregoing discussion that 35 per cent of
the children who became wards of the Board of Children’s Guar­
dians in a given year were living with their mothers immediately
prior to commitment. The proportion is even larger (56 per cent)
for the children received in the same year by institutions for depend­
ent children reporting on this item. The mothers of these children
were widowed, deserted, divorced, or living apart from their hus­
bands ; or the fathers were in hospitals, asylums, or prisons. Un­
doubtedly many of the children received from other custodians had
mothers who with financial assistance might have cared for them.
I t must be remembered that a considerable number of the children
committed to the public board had been removed from their homes
because conditions there were detrimental to them. The greatest
value of such aid as “ mothers’ pensions” is found in giving the as­
sistance before the home has broken down and thus keeping the chil­
dren with their mothers. I t can not restore to a mother who has been
worn out in the struggle to maintain her home the children whose
delinquency is due to her enforced neglect. Perhaps comparatively
few of the families represented by wards of child-caring organiza­
tions of the District of Columbia—especially those of children com­
mitted by the court to the public agency—could be rehabilitated by
financial aid after they have once been scattered. A certain propor­
tion of the children were made wards of the public agency because
of demoralizing influences in their homes; in these cases financial
assistance would obviously not be the remedy. But failures could be
prevented for many other mothers, to the great gain of their children
and of the community.
I t is manifestly impossible to determine just how much of the child
dependency with which the public and private agencies of the Dis-

E

88962°—24f— - 2


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

10

C H IL D D E P E N D E N C Y I N

T H E D IST R IC T OF C O L U M B IA .

trict are now dealing might have been prevented had there been
public provision for aid to children in their own homes. In order to
do so, it would be necessary to go back in the family histories to the
origin of the difficulties that led to the children’s removal from their
homes because of destitution or neglect, or to the underlying causes
of the delinquent acts that made it desirable to place them in other
homes or in institutions because their own homes lacked the restrain­
ing influence needed. Although it is impossible to present statistical
data on such questions as these, the information secured in this study
regarding the children who were removed from the custody of their
mothers gives weight to the arguments in favor of economic aid in
th preservation of homes where children can be benefited thereby.
When the District, by act of Congress, is permitted to join the
ranks of the 42 States that have enacted so-called mothers’ pension
laws providing for aid to children in their own homes, it will no
longer be necessary for the public child-caring agency to remove a
child from a mother who is able to care for him in every way except
financially and place him with strangers in order to provide for
his maintenance. Perhaps not a very large proportion of the homes
that have already been Broken up through poverty or the condi­
tions that result irom deprivation could be restored to the children.
But the experience in the District would undoubtedly be found to
be very similar to that in localities where such public aid has been
provided—in respect to both the value of this aid in preventing
the removal of cnildren from their own homes and their acceptance
as wards of public or private charities, and the real benefit of such
aid to the individual children.11
REHABILITATION OF FAMILIES.

Next to the task of preventing the break-up of families, whenever
that is possible through constructive work and assistance in indi­
vidual cases, the most compelling need is to prevent the continued
dependency of children received as wards, if it is possible to rehabili­
tate the family and make it reasonably safe for the child to be in
the custody of his own parents. Some work of this kind is now
being done by the Juvenile Court of the District of Columbia in its
robation service and its supervisory control over adults who have
een brought to court for nonsupport of minor children or for con­
tributing to delinquency. The attitude of the Board of Children’s
Guardians on this very important question is shown by the number
of children whom it has placed with their own parents, under super­
vision of the board, when conditions in the home have made it pos­
sible to take such action, even in the case of children committed
for minority.
Until empowered to do so by a provision contained in an appropri­
ation act of Congress in 1921,12 the Board of Children’s Guardians
could not restore children to the legal control of their own families;
but before that time the board frequently placed children back with
their parents, retaining supervision over them. The court has long
been urging the need for a larger probation staff and for legal

E

11
See Standards of Public Aid to Children in Their Own Homes, by Florence N esbitt (U. S. Children’s
Bureau Publication No. 118, Washington, 1923).
“ é l Stat. 1137 (Act of Feb. 22, 1921).


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

m e a n in g

and

p r e v e n t io n

op

c h il d

dependency

.

11

authority to deal with dependency cases not requiring commitment.
The Board of Children’s Guardians has never had a staff large
enough to provide for supervision of its wards in accordance with
the best child-caring standards. The annual reports of the board
have repeatedly called attention to this fact. Both these agencies
could increase the effectiveness of their preventive and reconstructive
work and thus reduce still further the number of public wards, if
they were granted an adequate staff of workers equipped to deal
with each case in all its aspects and to enlist the cooperation of the
other social agencies in the District.
THE RELATION BETWEEN PUBLIC AND PRIVATE AGENCIES.

During the development of public child-caring work there has
been a steady growth also in privately, financed activity for child
care and protection. The public work has frequently had its incep­
tion in the pressing need for a greater amount of provision for the
protection of children than it was possible to secure from private
sources. In general the public agency has assumed the care of chil­
dren removed from the legal custody of their parents or requiring
care for a long period, and private agencies and institutions have
relieved temporary distress or have demonstrated methods of care
or reconstructive work. The field of the public agency is usually,
but not necessarily, delimited by the requirement that children be
received by it only on court commitment. The private agency fre­
quently devotes itself to giving assistance in temporary need through
informal arrangements with parents or guardians or to providing
temporary care for wards of courts or other public authorities.
In the most successful working out of a state-wide child-caring
program the activities of a State agency have usually been sup­
plemented by special types of care provided by private organiza­
tions, the State and private forces working together toward the
highest aim of child-caring work—the gradual elimination of the
causes of child dependency. The public agency especially has been
awake to the relation between its present task of caring for de­
pendent children and the promotion of constructive activities, under
whatever auspices they may be. The policy which should govern
such harmonious development of public agencies in relation to
private agencies, whereby they may together provide for present
needs and work toward the prevention of child dependency and
neglect, was described in the Minimum Standards for Child Welfare
as being f‘ conceived and exercised in harmony with democratic
ideals which invite and encourage the service of efficient, altruistic
forces of society in the common welfare.” 13
I t has come to be a well-established policy that the State is the
“ overguardian” of all its children. As such it has toward the de­
pendent children a peculiar obligation for protection. Public super­
vision of the work of private agencies and institutions is a neces­
sary feature of the guardianship needed for the disadvantaged
children who have been deprived of care in their own homes. The
District of Columbia lags far behind the progressive States in pro» M inimum Standards for Child Welfare Adopted by the Washington and Regional Conferences on
Child Welfare, 1919, p. 12. U. S. Children’s Bureau Publication No. 62. Washington, 1920.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

12

C H IL D D E P E N D E N C Y I N

T H E D IST R IC T OF C O L U M B IA .

viding this protection for its children.14 Public supervision, prop­
erly exercised, is restrictive only in so far as it controls the estab­
lishment or limits the activities of organizations that are proved to
be detrimental to the public interest or to the welfare of individual
wards. An equally important feature of State supervision and one
that receives continually increasing emphasis in many States may
be defined as educative rather than supervisory. This implies the
fostering and encouragement of desirable methods of care and the
promotion of cooperation among agencies and institutions in meas­
ures pertaining to the welfare of their wards and in the broader
program of prevention and reconstruction. I t is the general experi­
ence that the exercise by the State of its protective duties toward
dependent children is welcomed by the private agencies and insti­
tutions that really have at heart the welfare of their individual
wards and are seeking to lessen the burden of dependency.
I t has been shown that in the District, in spite of the absence of
such supervisory authority and the lack of proper investigations to
limit ¿he intake of institutions through discovering the real need and
dealing with it constructively, the dependency problem has decreased
since 1910 in comparison with the population. What may not be
the result in another 10 years if the preventive measures whose prin­
ciples are now accepted are put into operation through the coopera­
tion of all the public and private organizations concerned with the
care of dependent children?
An understanding of the work of other agencies gained through
open-minded contacts between the public and the private organiza­
tions must be the basis of cooperation in raising the level of child­
caring work in the District. The organization of the public chari­
ties, as well as their functions in relation to private agencies and
institutions, is of importance in this connection. From time to time
there has been discussion of the question of unifying certain of the
public boards concerned with charitable and correctional work in
the District, especially the Board of Charities and the Board of
Children's Guardians. In a small administrative unit such as the
District there would appear to be definite advantages in centralized
responsibility. Addecf prestige and greater confidence on the part
of the public might be expected to result—an especially important
consideration at this time in connection with chud-caring work in
the District.
The experience in many States would seem to indicate that better
coordination of child-caring and protective work could be attained
and the public service placed on a higher level if the District had
one central child-welfare department—presumably with greater au14 In October, 1923, the grand jury made the following recommendation to the Commissioners of the
District:
“

To the honorable the Commissioners of the District of Columbia:

“This grand jury had before it a case for consideration involving the food, clothing, and health conditions
of a children’s boarding school and nursery, in which the testimony disclosed the fact that there was no
provision in the law whereby the health or police departments might make examinations of such places
until some specific case of a law infraction had been brought to light.
“ For the general welfare of our city’s children, we, the grand jury for the October term, 1923, recommend:
“ First. T hat such law or regulation be enacted which will allowthe health department and th e proper
branch of the police departm ent to have access to allinstitutions, schools, homes, or any other places where
children under the age ofsixteen (16) areboarded or housed, whether i t be by the day, week, month, or year.
“ Second. T h at all places operated to care for children under the age of sixteen (16) m ust register w ith the
proper authorities so th at proper regulations m ay be drawn and periodical examinations of conditions
existing therein m ay be made.
“ Respectfully submitted by—
“ F o r e m a n a n d M e m b e k s o f G r a n d J u r y .”


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

M E A N IN G A N D P R E V E N T IO N O F C H IL D D E P E N D E N C Y .

13

thority than the existing boards in respect to protection of children
in line with progressive methods—and as a branch of that depart­
ment a bureau or division providing care for dependent children
who are made wards of the department by the juvenile court.15
The problem of child protection in the -District of Columbia is
peculiar as compared with that of a State. The unit of government
is small, comparable to a county in which a large city covers most of
the area. But the District must have the functions of a State with
respect to the necessary regulation of private agencies and institu­
tions and must, as well, fulfill the duty of providing care for public
wards through a child-caring agency with some authority over other
local institutions under public control. The powers and duties of
State hoards of charities, boards of control, or (as they are coming
to be called more frequently) departments of public welfare and the
way in which these boards or departments are organized in such
States as Minnesota, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Virginia, Ohio,
Indiana, and Pennsylvania can be profitably studied in connection
with the District situation. But it is equally important that the Dis­
trict of Columbia, where, because of its size, the complex organiza­
tion of boards developed in the large States is not needed—though
complete legal authority for supervisory and executive work is essen­
tial—should profit also by the experience of county boards of public
welfare.16 Some of these are doing outstanding work in child care
and protection, especially in the promotion of cooperative effort for
the prevention of child dependency and delinquency and a better
general understanding of constructive social-welfare work.
CONCERTED ACTION IN THE REVISION OF CHILD-WELFARE LAWS.

Beginuing with the appointment in 1911 of “ the Commission to
Codify and Revise the Laws of Ohio Relating to Children/’ the
development of child-welfare commissions or children’s code com­
missions has steadily progressed until, by the end of 1923, 29 States
had had such official commissions.17 The “ minimum standards of
child welfare” adopted by the conference on child welfare held
under the auspices of the United States Children’s Bureau in 191818
included the following definition of the purpose and method of the
work of such commissions :
The child-welfare legislation of every State requires careful reconsideration
as a whole at reasonable intervals in order that necessary revision and coordi­
nation may be made and that new provisions may be incorporated in harmony
with the best experience of the day. In States where children’s laws have not
had careful revision as a whole within recent years a child-welfare committee
or commission should be created for this purpose, Laws enacted by the several
States should be in line with national ideals and uniform so far as desirable
in view of diverse conditions in the several States.
Child-welfare legislation should be framed by those who are thoroughly
familiar with the conditions and needs of children and with administrative
i®For illustrations of well-organized child-welfare bureaus or divisions within central departments of
public welfare (or boards of charities or boards of control), see Statelaw s and the reports of boards in M in­
nesota, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Virginia, Ohio, Indiana, and Pennsylvania. For references to avail­
able compilations oflaws of these States, see State Commissions for the Study and Revision of Child-Wel­
fare Laws, p. 121 (U. S. Children’s Bureau Publication No. 131, Washington, 1924).
16 For descriptions of some types of such work see County Organization for Child Care and Protection
(U. S. Children’s Bureau Publication No. 107, Washington, 1922).
17 See State Commissions for the Study and Revision of Child-Welfare Laws, pp. 1-2 (U. S. Children’s
Bureau Publication No. 131, Washington, 1924).
18 Minimum Standards for Child Welfare Adopted by the Washington and Regional Conferences on
Child Welfare, 1919. TJ. S. Children’s Bureau Publication No. 62, Washington, 1920.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

14

C H IL D D E P E N D E N C Y I N

T H E D IST R IC T OF C O L U M B IA .

difficulties. It should be drafted by a competent lawyer in such form as to
accomplish the end desired by child-welfare experts and at the same time be
consistent with existing laws.

The Attorney General of the United States on March 6,#1914,
appointed a committee, of five to study the laws pertaining to
children in the District of Columbia. The letter addressed to the
members states the proposed scope of work of this committee:
Intending soon to take under consideration the question of the amendment,
revision, and codification of the laws in force in the District of Columbia per­
taining to children and to the jurisdiction, practice, and procedure of the juvenile
court of the District, I have the honor to request you to serve on a committee
* * * to study the present laws and the needs of the District in this parti­
cular and to advise me in the premises, accompanying your report, if you will,
with a draft of such a code as the committee believes would give the District
satisfactory laws upon these subjects.

The committee in its report, dated January 15, 1915, described the
work it had undertaken as follows:
In pursuance of the work thus put before it the committee made a compilation
of all the existing laws relating to children in the District, so that it might be
informed as to the development and operation of these laws and as to how far
any revision was needed.
It also secured a list of all children’s institutions .or agencies in the District
and, by means of a brief but comprehensive questionnaire^ calling for annual
reports and for the facts as to the organization and connection, if any, of each
of these with the Government, collected the data needed for taking a compre­
hensive view of the whole field and of the relations of each of these institutions
and agencies to the others and to the Government.

While this survey revealed certain obvious problems and needs,
as, for example, that the District had no provision for feeble-minded
and epileptic persons and that institutional care for delinquent white
girls and for the slighter offenses of delinquent boys was lacking, the
most apparent and urgent need was a revision of the present juvenilecourt law, to which reference had been specially made in the letter
of appointment. The reasons for this will appear in the discussion
of this particular subject later.
I t soon became apparent that a plan for providing adequately for
all cases of neglected and defective children in the District would
require careful study not only of the local situation but also of the
latest and best methods in use in other communities. In the mean­
time the juvenile court was handling cases of neglected and defective
children and, owing to the defects in the law, was working injustice
upon them. The committee, therefore, felt it a duty to submit a
report on this phase of the problem in order to avoid the delay which
further study of the whole question would necessitate. I t regarded
a prompt revision of the juvenile-court law as imperative.
Accompanying this report, and part thereof, were the drafts of two
bills: (a) A bill amending the present juvenile-court law and in fact
creating a new juvenile court; (Jb) a bill intended to remove certain
disabilities affecting children by reason of judgments of conviction
of crime of record against them in the juvenile court of the District.
The committee presented these measures in the hope that they would
be introduced in the Congress and passed as drawn. A discussion
of their merits involved primarily a consideration of the existing law
and the results obtained under it. The proposed bills were not passed
by Congress.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

M E A N IN G A N D P R E V E N T IO N OE -C H IL D D E P E N D E N C Y .

15

The District of Columbia Children’s Code Commission of five
members was appointed by the Commissioners of the District in
September, 1920. No appropriation was available for salaries or
expenses. In May, 1921, the Commissioners of the District increased
the scope of the work of the commission, and its name was changed
to “ Public-Welfare Code Commission of the District of Columbia.”
The duties of the new commission were defined as follows:
To codify the laws of the District of Columbia relating to matters of public
welfare concerning the care, confinement, and treatment of the insane and
mental defectives; children, their care, custody, education, <labor, and correction;
employment of minors; the juvenile court; aid or support of parents; aid to
mothers with.dependent children; charities and corrections and charitable and
correctional institutions and all kindred or related subjects; and to recommend
to the Commissioners of the District of Columbia what amendments and new
legislation are, in their judgment, necessary to improving the law.

Seven members were named by the commissioners to serve without
compensation. Additional members have been appointed and in
December, 1923, the total membership was 16.
A letter from the secretary of the commission states that during
the year 1922 the commission had considered proposed amendments
to an act relating to lunacy proceedings and to an act to amend the
juvenile-court act of the District of Columbia, and also had discussed
other changes in laws of the District. In November, 1923, active
work was planned in cooperation with the division of child-welfare
legislation of the Russell Sage Foundation.
STANDARDS OF CARE FOR DEPENDENT CHILDREN.

The outstanding needs in care of dependent children—and in work
for the prevention of child dependency—in the District of Columbia
are summarized in the “ minimum standards for child welfare ” framed
by the Washington and Regional Conferences on Child Welfare in
1919. The following sections are especially pertinent to the facts
brought out in this study.19
Assistance to mothers.—The policy of assistance to mothers who are com­
petent to care for their own children is now well established. It is generally
recognized that the amount provided should be sufficient to enable the mother
to maintain her children suitably in her own home, without resorting to such
outside employment as will necessitate leaving her children without proper
care and oversight; but in many States the allowances are still entirely inade­
quate to secure this result under present living costs. The amount required
can be determined only by careful and competent case study, which must be
renewed from time to time to meet changing conditions.
Removal of children from their homes.-—Unless unusual conditions exist, the
child’s welfare is best promoted by keeping him in his own home. _No child
should be permanently removed from his home unless it i s ‘impossible so to
reconstruct f a m i l y conditions or build and supplement family resources as to
make the home safe for the child or so to supervise the child as to make his
continuance in the home safe for the community. In case of removal, separation
should not continue beyond the period of reconstruction.
Home care.—The aim of all provision for children who must be removed from
their own homes should be to secure for each child home life as nearly normal
as possible, to safeguard his health, and to insure for him the fundamental
rights of childhood. To a much larger degree than at present, family homes
may be used to advantage in the care of such children.
Children in institutions.—The stay of children in institutions for dependents
should be as brief as possible. The condition of all children in such institutions
is Minimum Standards for Child Welfare, sections 3, 4, 5, 6, and 8. IT. S. Children’s Bureau Publica­
tion No. 62.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

16

C H IL D D E P E N D E N C Y I N

T H E D IST R IC T OP C O L U M B IA .

should be carefully studied at frequent intervals, in order to determine whether
they should be restored to their own homes, placed in foster homes,_or transferred
to institutions better suited to their needs. While they do remain in institutions,
their condition should approximate as nearly as possible that of normal family
life as to health, recreation, schooling, and spiritual, aesthetic, civic, and voca­
tional training.
State supervision.—A State board of charities or a similar supervisory body
should be responsible for the regular inspection and licensing of every institution,
agencv, or association, incorporated or otherwise, which receives or cares for
mothers with children or children who suffer from physical or mental handicaps,
or who are delinquent, dependent, or without suitable parental care, and should
have authority to revoke such licenses for cause and to prescribe forms of regis­
tration and report. This State agency should maintain such supervision and
visitation of children in institutions and children placed in family homes as will
insure their proper care, training, and protection. The incorporation of private
organizations caring for children should be required and should be subject to
the approval of the State board of charities or similar body. State supervision
should be conceived and exercised in harmony with democratic ideals, which
invite and encourage the service of efficient, altruistic forces of society in the
common welfare.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

THE CHILDREN’S BUREAU STUDY OF CHILD DEPENDENCY IN
THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.
THE PURPOSE OF THE STUDY AND ITS DEFINITION.

At the formal request of the Board of Children’s Guardians of the
District of Columbia the Children’s Bureau undertook a study of
record data concerning the children who had been wards of the board
during one year. Material secured from records was supplemented
by a study of the problems dealt with and the methods used, as shown
in the annual reports of the board and by visits to a number of homes
and institutions caring for its wards.1
The juvenile court of the District is the agency through which
children are committed to the Board of Children’s Guardians and is
therefore of almost equal importance with the board in a considera­
tion of the dependency problem in the District. A study of the
juvenile court had already been made by the Children’s Bureau as
one section of a comparative study of courts in a number of cities.2
Because of a recent study by the child-helping department of the
Russell Sage Foundation of child-caring institutions in the District of
Columbia,2a this inquiry by the Children’s Bureau was limited origi­
nally to an analysis of the child-caring problems of the Board of
Children’s Guardians. Toward the close of this study, however,
the bureau was requested by the Washington Council of Social
Agencies to secure data in regard to the number and distribution of
dependent children cared for in the District under private auspices
in order that a basis might be provided for comparison of the extent
and nature of the problems dealt with by the public agency and by
the private institutions. A somewhat general census of these insti­
tutions was therefore undertaken and was carried out largely through
the cooperation of those most closely concerned with institutional
work in the District. No study was made of the equipment or the
work of the private institutions.
The term “ dependency” as used in this study has a broad inclusion,
comprehending all the children who were wards of the District of
Columbia Board of Children’s Guardians and those in private insti­
tutions for dependent children. Concerning the latter the question
may arise as to the propriety of calling those children dependent
whose parents pay part of their expenses in the institutions. But it
is generally conceded that even when the maximum amount of board
charged by such, institutions is paid by the parents the amount does
not usually cover the overhead cost but includes only the child’s
actual maintenance. In 60 per cent of the cases reported by institu­
tions some payment was received from the parents, only 40 per cent
of the children being totally dependent on the institutions for their
1 The period selected for the analysis of record data was M ay 16, 1920-May 15,1921; other data were
- secured through th e fiscal year 1922-23.
WK. ;
2 Juvenile Courts a t W ork: A study of the organization and methods of ten courts, by Katharine F.
Lenroot and Emm a O.Lundberg. U. S. Children’s Bureau. (In press.)
.
. .
2a H art, Hastings H .: Child Welfare in th e District of Columbia; a study of agencies and institutions
for the care of dependent and delinquent children. Russell Sage Foundation, New York, 1924.

17

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

18

C H IL D D E P E N D E N C Y I N

T H E D IST R IC T OF C O L U M B IA .

maintenance. However, a somewhat similar situation exists in the
case of children under care of the public board; for here, too, it is
probable—perhaps more so than in the case of the private agencies—
that the whole cost of care and supervision is never met. The defini­
tion of dependency, therefore, turns on the removal of the children
from their own homes and the assumption of their care by the public
agency or the private institutions.
All the children committed by the juvenile court to the Board of
Children’s Guardians are classed as dependent in this study without
distinction as to the immediate reason for their coming to the atten­
tion of the court. The juvenile court law of the District of Columbia
D E P E N D E N T C H IL D R E N IN T H E D IS T R IC T OP COLUM BIA—PRO PO R TIO N S CARED
PO R BY PU BLIC AGENCY AND BY PRIV A TE IN STITU T IO N S.

Based on 2,800 children under care on a specified date.

directs the court to commit to the Board of Children’s Guardians
those children who must be removed from their own homes and who
are not proper subjects for the national training schools for delinquent
children.3
In providing care for the children received from the court the Board
of Children’s Guardians does not make any distinction based on the
reason for commitment; its policy is to place each child, so far as
possible, in a home or institution that is equipped to meet his indi­
vidual needs. I t may fairly be assumed that the juvenile court does
not commit delinquent children to the board, except perhaps for a
short period as a disciplinary measure, unless the fundamental diffi­
culty is in the home conditions, lack of parental control, or bad
environment from whidh the child must be removed.
The definition of delinquent children in the juvenile court law of
the District is somewhat peculiar, providing that “ the term 1delin* 34 Stat. 73-78 (Act of Mar. 19,1906).


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

T H E C H IL D R E N S B U R E A U S T U D Y .

19

^uent’ child or children as used in this act shall be held to mean and
include any child who has been convicted more than once of violating
any law of the United States, or any laws, ordinances, or regulations
in force in the District of Columbia.” 4
A dependent or neglected child is defined as “ any child who is
destitute or homeless or abandoned or dependent upon the public for
support, or who has not the proper parental care or guardianship, or
who habitually begs or receives alms, or whose home, by reason of
neglect or cruelty or depravity of the parents, is an unfit place for
such a child, or any child under 8 years of age found peddling on the
streets.” 4
CHILDREN’S AGENCIES AND INSTITUTIONS STUDIED.
THE JUVENILE COURT.

Children become public wards of the District only through com­
mitment by the juvenile court. The court is therefore the agency
of primary importance in the prevention of dependency and in the
whole problem of intake as related to the public child-caring agency.
The Juvenile Court of the District of Columbia is a court of
limited criminal jurisdiction in delinquency cases; in dependency
cases and in cases of incorrigible children it follows the principles of
chancery or equity procedure. The court is operating under the
provisions of a law passed in 1906. Many efforts have been made to
secure the passage of a new law more in accord with juvenile-court
standards in other parts of the country—notably by the committee
appointed by the Attorney General of the United States in 1914,5
which submitted to Congress in 1915 a draft of law that would have
given the court chancery jurisdiction and would thus have enabled
it to establish a procedure better suited to the protection of children.
The administration of the court has been directed toward the devel­
opment of procedure as free from formality as the law will permit,
and the court has endeavored to conduct its investigations and the
supervision of the children in accordance with the principles of social
case work, so far as its somewhat limited staff made this possible.
The jurisdiction of the court in delinquency cases includes crimes
and offenses of persons under 17 years of age committed against the
United States or the District of Columbia, not capital nor otherwise
infamous, and not including libel, conspiracy, and violations of the
post-office and pension laws of the United States. Incorrigible
children under the age of 16 years, truants between the aged of 8
and 14 years, and destitute and neglected children under the age of
16 come vdthin the jurisdiction of the court. In addition, the court
has jurisdiction over children applying for waivers of school certifi­
cates required under the child labor law, under the poverty-exemption
clause which still obtains in the District for children from 12 to 14
years of age. The adult jurisdiction of the court includes persons
contributing to the delinquency of children, determination of
paternity and enforcement of support of children born out of wedlock,
jm d violations of the child labor law. Prior to a decision of the United
* Idem.
* Supplement to Annual Report of the Attorney General of the U nited States for the year 1914, embody­
ing first report of the committee appointed by the Attorney General to study the heed for legislation affect­
ing children in the District of Columbia, including drafts of new juvenile-court laws. Washington, 1915.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

20

C H IL D D E P E N D E N C Y I N

T H E D IST R IC T OP C O L U M B IA .

States Supreme Court in 1922 6 the juvenile court exercised jurisdic­
tion oyer cases of nonsupport of wife or of children in destitute or
necessitous circumstances. It is desirable that this jurisdiction be
restored to the juvenile court through amendment of the present law.
Commitments of delinquent children must be either to the Board
of Children’s Guardians or to the National Training School for Boys
or the National Training School for Girls.7 In dependency cases
commitments may be made only to the Board of Children’s Guard­
ians. No provision exists for. dependent children who have reached
their sixteenth birthday, except that such children who are under
17 years of age may be committed to one of the national training
schools for delmquents.
Comprehensive social investigations are made by the court staff
in delinquency cases,9 but in dependency cases the responsibility for
preparing cases for hearing rests with the Board of Children’s Guar­
dians, which in such cases petitions the court to commit the children
to it. Following a meeting of the board in December, 1923, it was
recommended to the commissioners of the District that the board
be relieved of “ any responsibility or connection with the committing
of children to its care and for making investigations preliminary to
commitment and that it be made a child-caring agency only.” 10 If
the court does not consider that the circumstances justify commit­
ment, no machinery for supervision of the child in his own family
exists in either the court or the board. The court has tried, without
success, to obtain from Congress sufficient appropriations to permit
the assumption of this responsibility.
•
THE BOARD OF CHILDREN’S GUARDIANS.

The Board of Children’s Guardians of the District of Columbia
was created in 1892 as a public agency for the care of dependent
children.11 The act creating the Board of Children’s Guardians 12
provides that the board shall have the care and supervision of a ll.
children who have been ill-treated, willfully abused, or neglected
(including children under 16 years of age who have been found in
houses of ill fame), all children who are destitute of suitable homes
and adequate means of earning an honest living, all children aban­
doned by their parents or guardians, all children of habitually drunken
or vicious parents, all children habitually begging in the streets or
from door to door, all children kept in vicious or immoral associations,
and all children known by their language or life to be vicious or
incorrigible, whenever such children may be committed to the care
of the board by the police court or the criminal c o u rt13 of the Dis­
trict. I t authorizes the commitment to the board of children of
these classes who are not over 16 years of age.
8 See I The Moreland Case” in The Legal Aspect of the Juvenile Court, p. 29 (U. S. Children’s Bureau
Publication No. 99, Washington, 1922).
In November, 1923, the law relating to determination of paternity of children born out of wedlock was
attacked in the court of appeals on grounds similar to those on which the juvenile court was deprived of
nOnsupport jurisdiction.
7 See text of law in Appendix, pp. 156-166.
• Under an act of Congress approved Mar. 3, 1901, the agent of the Board of Children’s Guardians was
designated to act as probation officer. He continued to act in this capacity until Feb. 18,1902, when a
probation officer was appointed. This arrangement continued until the juvenile court began its w ork"'
in 1906.
10 The Post, Washington, D. C., Dee. 20, 1923.
17 For description of the functions and organization of the board see pp. 57-59.
\
18 See text of law in Appendix, pp. 152-153.
\
13 Since 1906 the juvenile court h as had exclusive jurisdiction in such cases.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

T H E C H IL D R E N S B U R E A U S T U D Y .

21

The board receives children from the court both on temporary
and on permanent, or minority, commitments and is the legal guardian
of such children during the term of their commitment.
In addition to dependent and delinquent children the board pro­
vides for feeble-minded children. This group includes children
received on petition of parents or guardians who are unable finan­
cially or otherwise to make proper provision for them in institutions,
as well as those committed because of dependency or delinquency
and later found to be feeble-minded. Children who are received
from parents without court commitment are not considered wards of
the board and must be released upon the request of their parents,
although they may remain under the board’s care indefinitely.
On June 30, 1923, the Board of Children’s Guardians had under
its care 1,561 children. During the preceding year it had given
care to 2,036 children,14 utilizing family homes (boarding, free, and
wage) ; two institutions under the control of the District (one for
white boys and girls and one for colored boys) ; one institution under
private auspices but maintained only for the care of wards of the
board; and, to some extent, private institutions in which it boarded
its wards.
INSTITUTIONS UNDER PRIVATE AUSPICES.

The Board of Children’s Guardians, as has been noted, receives
children on commitment. The private institutions for dependent
children, on the the other hand, receive children only on voluntary
placement by relatives or other individuals or by agencies; the
legal guardians of these children may remove them, or the institution
may return the children to their guardians, at any time.
Eighteen private institutions15—17 of which receive white children
only—care for dependent children within the District. The ma­
jority of them are under the auspices of religious organizations.
They are all supported mainly from private funds, either voluntary
contributions collected from time to time or endowment funds.
There is no public supervision of private agencies, institutions,
maternity homes, or boarding homes in the District of Columbia,
except that the Board of Charities has authority in regard to insti­
tutions receiving subsidies from the Government.16 The Board of
Children’s • Guardians places some dependent children in private
institutions for which payment is made from public funds.17
On the basis of the information obtained directly from private
institutions and from reports of the Board of Charities and other
sources it is estimated that at the beginning of 1923 approximately
900 children were being cared for in the District in private institu­
tions for dependent children. I t is estimated that about 600 addi­
tional children had been cared for in the institutions during the
preceding year.
This group of about 1,500 children who were under the care of
private institutions at some time during the year and the 2,400
wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians make a total of almost
4,000 children under the care and supervision of an institution or
-agency at some time during the year 1922.
14 This number does not include the feeble-minded children received from the parents without court com­
mitment, for whom data were not secured in this study.
15 For names of these institutions and facts concerning them, see pp. 81-82.
i* See pç. 117-118.
if For discussion of Government subsidies to private institutions, see pp. 72-73; 112-116; 120-122


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

STATISTICAL INTERPRETATION OF THE DEPENDENCY
PROBLEM.
CHILDREN UNDER CARE OF THE BOARD OF CHILDREN’S GUARDIANS.
BASIS OF THE STUDY.

The records of all children who were under the supervision of the
Board of Children’s Guardians at any time during the 12-month
period ended May 15, 1921, were chosen as the basis for analysis.
Two types of commitments to the Board of Children’s Guardians
were used by the juvenile court: The permanent, or minority, com­
mitment, which placed the child under the guardianship of the board
until he should ieach the age of 21, and the temporary commitment,
which extended from a few days to several years according to the
reason for commitment. During this year the board was responsible
for a total of 2,444 children—1,924 under care at the beginning of the
year and 520 received during the year. Of these children 503 were
discharged during the year.
More than two-thirds (1,686) of the children included in the study
were committed to the board because they were found by the court
to be destitute of suitable homes or of proper parental control, and
the remaining 758 had come before the court because of delinquency.
Of the entire group 1,698 (69 per cent) were under minority commit­
ment, and 614 (or 25 per cent) were under temporary care during the
year of the study. One hundred and thirty-two children (5 per cent)
were being cared for as feeble-minded; all but 12 of these had been
committed as permanent wards of the board.
WARDS OF THE BOARD.

At the end of the period selected for the study (on May 15, 1921)
1,941 children were under the jurisdiction of the board. The dis­
tribution of these children as to race, sex, and age gives a cross section
of the problem handled by the board.
The white children constituted 38 per cent of the whole number
and the negro children, 62 per cent. Thirty-seven per cent were
girls and 63 per cent were boys. The age distribution was as follows:
Age.

Number.

Per cent
distribution.

Total under care May 15, 1921____ _____

1,941

100

Less than 1 y e a r . . . ___ •;_______________ . .
1-3 y e a r s . . __ i -------- __ ______________ _______
4-6 years
----- ------_ ________ ____
7-9 years. _
________ ________
-------10-13 y e a r s __ . . . __ __ _____ _______ ____
14-15 years_________ _______ _________ _____
16-17 years.
__ __ _ _________ ____ _____
18 years and o v e r ______ ________ . . . _ _____

12
77
127
175
470
366
336
378

1
4
7
9
24
19
17
19

MINORITY AND TEMPORARY COMMITMENTS.

The court frequently committed a child to the board temporarily
either because its information regarding the child’s own family was
22

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

S T A T IST IC A L IN T E R P R E T A T IO N OP D E P E N D E N C Y P R O B L E M .

23

insufficient or because the indications were that it would be expedient
to return the child to his parents within a comparatively short period.
Abandoned or deserted children, or children whose parents were failing
to make proper provision for them because of physical or mental
inability or moral unfitness, were often placed with the board on
temporary commitments, in order to provide opportunity to the
officers of the board for the location of responsible relatives who were
willing to assume the care of the child or for some readjustment in the
home. Delinquent children were sometimes committed temporarily
in order that the underlying cause of trouble might be discovered
through mental and physical examination. In other cases, when the
officers of the board or of the court had advised some change in the
family's living conditions—such as more room, a better neighborhood
or a competent caretaker while the mother was at work—a temporary
commitment pending such rearrangement was recommended.
Of the 2,444 children under care during the year covered in the
study of records 1,698 were under minority commitments. Of these,
632 were originally committed as temporary wards. In addition, 120
had been on minority commitments and had been transferred to the
feeble-minded roll.
The total number of children who had been committed during the
year as temporary wards was 1,304, of whom 614 were still on tem­
porary commitment at the end of the year or at the time when they
were discharged from care,- 678 were later committed for minority
and 12 were transferred to the feeble-minded roll. Thus 53 per
cent of all the children under care during the year had been placed
under temporary supervision, but more than half of these were later
committed for minority.
Children who became wards of the board because of dependency
or neglect were much more frequently committed until majority than
were those placed under supervision because of delinquency. Of
the 1,686 children under the care of the board during the year of the
study who had been found to be destitute of suitable homes, 1,406
(more than four-fifths) were on minority commitments during the
year, whereas only 424 (not much more than half) of the 758 com­
mitted because of delinquency were wards for minority, and many of
these had originally been received on temporary commitments. Of
the children who were on minority commitments at the time of the
study nearly four-fifths had been committed because they were
found to be destitute of suitable homes and only one-fifth because of
delinquency.
Mapy children were committed temporarily pending some readjust­
ment in the home or a decision from the officers of the court as to the
advisability of returning them to their parents or relatives; other
children were committed temporarily until mental and physical
examinations could be given them. These examinations frequently
reveal very serious defects, both physical and mental, which influence
the decision of the judge as to the most desirable type of commitment.
At the end of the first temporary commitment the child might be
discharged, committed for another temporary period, or committed
hntil he should reach his majority. I t was the duty of the investigat­
ing department of the Board of Children's Guardians, at the expira­
tion of the temporary commitment, to report to the juvenile court
concerning the child as well as the conditions existing in his parental

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

24

C H IL D D E P E N D E N C Y I N T H E D IST R IC T OR C O L U M B IA .
•

home; the decision as to recommitment rested with the court.
Although the original commitment might be for only a short period,
varying from a week to several months, through a series of temporary
commitments children frequently continued under care for a year
and sometimes longer. Some of the children received under tem­
porary care were discharged when home conditions had improved
sufficiently to make this advisable. Others were kept under tem­
porary care until it became evident that no adjustment could be made;
they were then committed to the board until they reached their
majority or until they were discharged for other reasons.
REASONS FOR COMMITMENT.

At the time of the study children became wards of the Board of
Children’s Guardians only through commitment by the juvenile
court. Occasionally children were taken under care without any
court action because of immediate need*, but these children returned to
relatives within a few days when further provision was found unneces­
sary; three such children were included in the study. The board was
not allowed to hold any child for more than one week without an
order of the court. Of the older wards under care 45 had been
committed to the board by the police court prior to the establish­
ment of the juvenile court m 1906.
Of the 2,399 children committed to the board for whom the source
of action leading to commitment was reported, 1,300 (54 ner cent)
were committed on the petition of the Board of Children’s Guardians
after an investigation of the home conditions; all these children
except 2 were classed as dependent. Until about 10 years prior to
the study the board had occasionally petitioned the court to commit
a delinquent child. In the cases of 1,099 children (46 per cent of
those included in the study) the action leading to commitment ori­
ginated in the juvenile court or the police court; and of this number
353 were dependent children. In 42 cases it was not reported whether
the action originated in the court or in the Board of Children’s
Guardians, and in 3 cases the children were under care for less than
a week and were not committed.
Dependency.

•

The 1,686 children committed because they were found by the court
to be destitute of suitable homes included (1) children one or both of
whose parents were dead or were temporarily absent from the home
because of commitment to a hospital or a correctional institution,
as well as foundlings and other homeless children whose parents were
failing to provide for them; (2) children whose parents were unable to
provide for them for other reasons; and (3) children whose parents
had failed to give them the proper supervision in the home or had
willfully neglected them or exposed them to improper surroundings and
associates.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

UNDER CARE OF THE PUBLIC AGENCY AND PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS.

IN THE TOTAL POPULATION UNDER 21 YEARS OF AGE IN THE
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 1920 .

STATISTICAL INTERPRETATION OP DEPENDENCY PROBLEM.

88962

PROPORTIONS OF W H ITE AND COLORED C H IL D R E N U N D E R CARE OF T H E PU BLIC AGENCY AND PRIVATE IN STITU TIO N S AND IN T H E
TOTAL POPULA TION OF T H E D IS T R IC T OF COLUMBIA.

25


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
WÈÈ

26

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA.

Delinquency.

As has already been stated, 758 (nearly one-third) of the children
under care during the year were committed on charges of delin­
quency. The following list shows the charges upon which the 758
delinquent children were committed:
Charges.

Number.

Total delinquent children________________

Per cent
distribution.

758

Incorrigibility- :._____________________
326
Taking property of another_____________________ 164
Petty larceny.------------------------------------------------j 108
Truancy----___________ _____________ iA A ____ 66
Disorderly conduct_______________________
22
12
Destroying private property.____ _________
Vagrancy.
_______________________ . . . _____
7
Violating police regulations:
Playing in the streets______________________
7
Running automobile without license_________
3
Throwing missiles_____________________________
5
Carrying concealed weapons______________
4
Sex charges______ ___________________ ____________ 3
Discharging explosives______ __________________
2
Other--------------------------------------------19
More than one charge_______________
10

100
43

22
14
9

3
2
1
1

...

1
1

__

3
1

A G E A T C O M M IT M E N T , S E X , A N D R A C E .

The following list shows the age at commitment of the 2,444
children included in the study, according to whether they were
dependent or delinquent:
Dependent.

D elin quent.

Total children. 1, 686

758

Age at commitment.

Under 6 m onths. __
6 months, under 1
year__
1 year___
2 years__
3 years___
4 years.
5 years
6 years _ .

■
---

128
69
100
105
109
95
119
113

n __
__
' __
' _^_
__
__

Dependent.

D elinquent.

7 years _ _ ___ __ ___ 127
8 years. .
___ 134
9 years
___ 102
10 years.
___ 113
11 years..
_ . ___ 98
12 years__
___ 77
13 years. ____ __ ___ 75
14 years__ _______ ___ 71
15 years. _ __
___ 49
16 years___
_ ____
2

2
18
51
96
101
131
139
125
74
21

Age at commitment.

Eight 1 ier cent of the entire group included in this studv were
received 1iy the board before they were 1 year of age; 34 per cent
were received before they were 7 years of age; 52 per cent were
received between the ages of 7 and. 13, inclusive; and 14 per cent
were received when 14 years of age or over. Of the 1,686 children
committed because of dependency, at the time of commitment, 50
per cent were under 7 years; 43 per cent were from 7 to 13 years,
inclusive; and 7 per cent were 14 years or over. Of the 758 children
committed because of delinquency 71 per cent were from 7 to 13
years of age and 29 per cent were 14 years or over.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

STATISTICAL INTERPRETATION OF DEPENDENCY PROBLEM.

27

The children included in the study were distributed, according to
cause of commitment, color, and sex, as follows:
Boys.

Total children_____________ .__________ 1, 558
White_____________
Negro___________________________
Dependent_________
White_________________________________
Negro___________________________ ______
Delinquent.
White___ ____________________171
Negro__________________ Ü______________

Girls.

886

567
991

349
537

945

741

396
549

310
431

613

145

442

39
106

Of the children under supervision during the year 916 (37 per
cent) were white and 1,528 (63 per cent) were negro. In 1920,
according to the census, the negro children between the ages of 7
and 20 years inclusive, comprised 28 per cent1 of all children be­
tween these ages in the District of Columbia.
In order to compare the proportions of white and negro children
committed on charges of delinquency and committed because of
dependency or neglect, only those dependent children who were 7
years of age or over at the time of commitment are included, as no
child under that age was committed by the court on a charge of
delinquency. The percentages of children 7 years of age and over
were practically the same for white and negro children as for the
entire group included in the study.
Of the white children aged from 7 to 20 years, inclusive, 64 per cent
were committed because of dependency and 36 per cent had been
brought before the court because of delinquency; of the negro chil­
dren of the same age group the corresponding percentages were 46
and 54.
Boys predominated in both the white and the negro group, the
proportion being about the same—62 per cent of the white and 65 per
cent of the negro. More than half of the 1,686 dependent children
and four-fifths of the 758 committed because of delinquency were boys.
L O C A L IT IE S F R O M W H IC H T H E C H IL D R E N C A M E .

As it was impossible in most of the cases to obtain information in
regard to the birthplace of the children’s parents and the length of
time they had resided in the District, the only tabulation that could
be made in this connection was of the birthplaces of the children
themselves. Information was secured as to the birthplaces of 2,178
(89 per cent) of the 2,444 children.
Ot the white children whose birthplaces were known, 75 per cent
were bom in the District of Columbia as compared with 85 per cent of
the negro children; 25 per cent of the white and 15 per cent of the
negro children were bom outside the city. The following fist gives
i
Computed from Fourteenth Census of the U nited States, Vol. I l l , Population, p. 178 (U . 8. Bureau
of the Census, Washington, 1922).


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

28

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

the birthplaces of the 814 white children and the 1,364 negro children
whose birthplaces were reported:
W hite
children.

Birthplace.

Native born________ _______________

Negro
children.

787

1, 364

District of Columbia_____________________
607
Maryland__ _______
42
New York________________________
12
North Carolina__________________________
3
29
Pennsylvania_______________________ ,____
South Carolina___________________________ _____
Virginia-----------------------------------59
Other___________________________________
35

1, 166
57
7

Foreign born____ _ _________________

27

Canada________________________ _________
England____________________ _______ „___
Italy------------ __------------------- ------- ---------Russia___ _______________________________
Other________ __________ ;_____ __________

3
2
8
6
8

8

9
16
87
14

P A R E N T A L S T A T U S.

The status of the child’s own parents 2 at the time of his com­
mitment to the board is shown in the following statement for the
children who were under care at some time during the year:
Parental status.

Number.

Per cent.

2, 444

100

Both parents in the home___ aj___________ r;i
Mother head of family____________________

370
665

15
27

Father dead____ _________
Father deserted_____ _ ______ '_________
Parents divorced______________________
Father in. hospital___________________
Father in hospital for insane____________
Father in correctional institution_______
Father working away from home_______
Father not living with family or where­
abouts not known__________________

238
162
14
5
8
43
6

______
______
______

189

______

Mother unmarried_________________________
Father head of fam ily________________

295
234

12
10

Mother dead________________________
Mother deserted._________ ___________
Parents divorced___________ - _________
Mother in hospital___________________
Mother in hospital for insane__________
Mother in correctional institution______
Mother not living with family or where­
abouts not known__________________

123
18
3
30
19
8

Total children__________ __________

_____
__ ;__
___

33

Step-parents________\__________________ _

152

Mother and stepfather-____.___________
Father and stepmother_______________
Stepfather only______________________
Stepmother only_ i ___________________

99
50
2
1

6

2
It was not always clear from the entries in the records for the older cases whether the agency did not
know the whereabouts of the parent or parents at the tim e of the child’s commitment or whether the absence
of information was due merely to failure to record it. In the case of the 466 children included under “ no
parental hom e” the whereabouts of one or both of whose parents was not known, the fact as to the nonex­
istence of parental homes was definite.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

STATISTICAL INTERPRETATION OE DEPENDENCY PROBLEM.
Parental status.

Number.

No parental home________________________

728

Both parents dead___________________
Whereabouts of both parents not known.
Both parents in institution____________
One parent dead, whereabouts of one not
known_________________ _____—
One parent dead, one in institution_____
One parent in institution, whereabouts of
one not known___________
One parent in institution, one without
home_________ - ___________________
One parent dead, one without home___
Whereabouts of one parent not known,
one without home__________________

116
215
25

29

P ercent.

30

163
57
58
23
41
30

The following table shows for dependent and delinquent and for
white and negro children the percentages who had no parental
homes or who had one or both parents or a step-parent in the home
at the time they became wards of the board:
Parental status of dependent and delinquent and of white and colored wards of the
Board of Children’s Guardians.
Per cent distribution.
Parental status.

Depend­
ent.

Delin­
quent .

Total____________________________________________

100

100

100

100

Both parents in the home__________________ _____ _______
One parent and one step-parent in the home..................... ..........
Mother only in the home_____________________ ___________
Father only in the home_________________________________
No parental home----------------------- --------------------------------

10
4
40
11
35

26
10
38
7
19

22
5
36
13
24

11
7
42
7
33

•

White.

Colored.

Children rem oved from parental h o m e s.3

Only 370 (15 per cent) of the 2,444 children had both parents
living in the home. The total is 519 (21 per cent of the entire group
studied) if homes in which there were step-parents are included (50
children had a father and a stepmother and 99 had a mother and a
stepfather). Twenty-seven per cent of the white children as com­
pared with 18 per cent of the negro children had both parents or a
parent and a step-parent in the home.
The homes of 960 children (two-fifths of all) were maintained by
the mothers. The percentage of cases in which the mother was
maintaining the home was somewhat smaller for the white than for
the negro children—35 as compared with 41. These 960 children
who had neither fathers nor stepfathers in the homes included 295
children whose mothers were unmarried. Three-fourths of these
children were being cared for by their mothers at the time of their
commitment to the board. Five per cent of the white and 16 per
cent of the negro were children of unmarried mothers.
3
The number of children who were received from their fathers and mothers was not the same as the
number who were reported as being w ith their parents in their own homes at the tim e of commitment.
Some children had no homes because, though they remained in the custody of their parents up to the
tim e they were received as wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians, the parents were at the same time
sent to correctional institutions. A somewhat similar situation sometimes occurred in regard to children
who had one parent in the home and those who had a parent and a step-parent. These included children
who were received as wards of the board at the time of the parents’ death or their commitment to a correc­
tional institution or to a hospital. On the other hand, there were some children who were not living in
their own homes a t the tim e of commitment although one or both parents were maintaining a home.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

ûo
O
PA R E N TA L STATUS OF C H IL D R E N U N D E R CARE OF T H E PUBLIC AGENCY AND PRIV A TE IN STITU T IO N S IN T H E D IS T R IC T OF COLUM BIA.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

CHILDREN IN PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS.

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,

CHILDREN UNDER CARE OF THE BOARD OF CHILDREN’S GUARDIANS.

STATISTICAL INTERPRETATION OP DEPENDENCY PROBLEM.

31

The homes of 234 children (about one-tenth of the whole number)
were maintained by the fathers alone. The mothers of 123 of these
children were dead, the mothers of 18 had deserted, the parents of
3 were divorced, and the parents of 90 were separated. This number
included 30 whose mothers were in hospitals, 19 others whose mothers
were in hospitals for the insane, and 8 whose mothers were in correc­
tional institutions. Two children had stepfathers and one had a
stepmother but no parent in the home.
Children having no parental home at commitment.

Three-tenths of the entire number (728) were children who had
no parental homes at the time of their commitment to the board.
This group included 116 orphans (5 per cent of all wards) and 261
half orphans (11 per cent). In the case of 57 of the half orphans
the surviving parent was in an institution, 8 mothers and 10 fathers
being in correctional institutions, 9 mothers and 1 father in hospitals
for the insane, and 19 mothers and 10 fathers in other hospitals.
In 81 cases one of the parents was in an institution and the other
was failing to provide a home. An analysis of this group shows
that 19 mothers and 23 fathers were in correctional institutions, 5
mothers and 1 father in hospitals for the insane, and 27 mothers and
6 fathers in other hospitals.
In 25 cases both parents were in institutions. In 11 both parents
were in correctional institutions, in 6 both parents were in hospitals,
in 3 the mothers were in correctional institutions and the fathers
were in hospitals (1 father was in a hospital for the insane), and in
5 the fathers were in correctional institutions and the mothers were
in hospitals.
C U S T O D IA N S A T T IM E O F C O M M IT M E N T .

Sixteen per cent of the children were living in their own homes
with their fathers and mothers at the time they became wards of
the board. An additional 6 per cent of the children had a parent
and a step-parent in the home. Twenty-two per cent of the white
children were with both parents and 4 per cent with a parent and
step-parent, as compared with 12 and 6 per cent, respectively, of
the negro children. Of the dependent children 11 per cent were
from homes in which both parents were present and 4 per cent from
step-parental homes; the corresponding percentages for delinquent
children were 25 and 9.
About two-fifths of all the children were removed from the mothers.
Thirty-eight per cent of the white children and 39 per cent of the
negro children were removed from the custody o f their mothers
when committed to the board. Forty-one per cent of the dependent
and 34 per cent of the delinquent children were being cared for by
the mother immediately prior to their commitment.
In one-tenth of the cases the father was the custodian at the time
when the child was committed. The percentage of children who
were in the custody of the fathers at the time of commitment was
twice as large among the white as among the negro—14 per cent as
compared with 7 per cent. Eleven per cent of the dependent child­
ren and 7 per cent of those committed because of delinquency were
being cared for by their fathers when committed.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

>

05

to

CUSTODIANS FRO M WHOM C H IL D R E N W ERE REM OV ED BY T H E JU V EN ILE COURT AND C O M M IT TE D TO T H E BOARD OF C H IL D R E N ’S
GUARDIANS.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

-

DELINQUENT CHILDREN.

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

DEPENDENT CHILDREN.

STATISTICAL INTERPRETATION OF DEPENDENCY PROBLEM.

33

Relatives other than the parents had the custody of 13 per cent
of the children at the time of commitment to the board. Only two
or three children received by the board were in the custody of child­
caring institutions when committed. Eight per cent of the children
were living temporarily with neighbors or friends following the death
or commitment to institutions of one parent or both.
Seventy-three children were received from foster homes. This
number constituted 3 per cent of all the children; the percentages
were 2 and 3, respectively, for the white and negro groups, and 3
and 4 per cent for the dependent and delinquent children.
The custodian of the child prior to the commitment to the Board
of Children’s Guardians is shown in the following table, according
to race and according to whether the child was brought before the
juvenile court because of dependency or delinquency:
Custodians at time of commitment of white and colored and dependent and delinquent
wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians.
Children committed to Board of Chil­
dren’s Guardians.
Custodian a t time of commitment.
Depend­
ent.

Delin­
quent.

White.

Colored.

Total children.............. ........ .................................................

1,686

758

916

1,528

Father and mother...........................................................................

188
184
690
23
42
189
44
168
151
7

191
53
261
24
48
117
29
26
5
4

202
124
351
20
20
64
22
60
51
2

177
113
600
27
70
242
51
134
105
9

Father and stepmother....................................................................
Mother and stepfather_______ ___________________________
Other relatives_________ ______________ ________________
Adoptive or foster parents........ .......................... ...........................
O th er..______ ___ _____________
. . _________________
No custodian (foundling or abandoned child). . ........................
Custodian not reported------------------- ------ --------------------------

R E C O R D S O F F A M IL IE S A N D C H IL D R E N .

N um ber o f children com m itted from each fam ily.

The 2,444 wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians included
in the study came from 1,764 family groups—many of which, how­
ever, did not have the custody of the child at the time of his commit­
ment to the board. The “ own families” of the 2,444 children had
had the following numbers of children at some time under the care
of the public agency:
Number of children under care at some time.

Number
of families.

Total families included in the study________________ 1, 764

One child___ ______________i ______ __________________ 1, 383
Two children______ |____ ____.____ ____________________
216
Three children___ __________ _________________ __,_____
90
Four children________ __ _________________ , *1__ t i _—
36
Five children_______ ____________ - f t _________________
29
Six children.--__ ___i____________ _________Ln----------- 8
Seven children_______ ___________________--------------------1
Eight children____ .*-------------------- ------------------------------1
Nine children___ ________— ................... ..........- ....................
1


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

34

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

The following table shows the correlation between the total number
of children in each family and the number of children the family
had had under care of the Board of Children’s Guardians:
Number of children in fam ily and total number at some time under care of the
Board of Children's Guardians.

All the children of 555 (one-third) of the families had at some time
been wards of the board. Of these families 313 had had under care
only one child; 110, two children; 50, three; 41, four; 29, five; 8, six;
2, seven; and 2, nine. Families of which all the children had been
under the care of the board at the same time numbered 424. Exclud­
ing the families, and the wards from the families for whom it was
not reported how many children there were per family, it is seen
that 36 per cent of all the children in 1,530 families were wards of
the board.
Dependency or delinquency records of the families.

In 520 (30 per cent) of the 1,764 families represented by the 2,444
children under care during the year of the study one or both parents
had previously been before the juvenile court or the family had been
aided by a family-relief society or some other social agency. Eightyeight families had records with more than one agency.
In 72 families the fathers, in 20 the mothers, and in 3 families
both'parents had been before the juvenile court on charges of non­
support or desertion. Nineteen of the fathers and 6 of the mothers
had been sentenced to correctional institutions by the juvenile
court. In addition to these, 51 fathers, 67 mothers, and in 10
families both the father and the mother had been inmates of cor­
rectional institutions through other court commitment. Eighteen
of the mothers of wards of the board had themselves been previously
or were during the year of study wards of the Board of Childrens
Guardians. One of these mothers had three children under super­
vision during the year of the study, one had four, and each of the
other 16 had one. Both parents of one child were in a hospital for
the insane and in 43 families one parent had been in such an insti­
tution—in 31 families the mothers and in 12 the fathers. A total
of 77 children from these 44 families were included in the study
and 14 other children in these families had been under supervision
at some previous time.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

STATISTICAL INTERPRETATION OF DEPENDENCY PROBLEM.

35

Eleven of the motners and two of the fathers had been inmates
of institutions for dependents. The Associated Charities or other
family-relief agencies had aided 235 of the 527 families that had
been known to agencies. A total of 27 families had been provided
with institutional care through the District of Columbia Board of
Charities, of which 4 had been helped by both the Board of Charities
and a family-relief agency. Forty-eight families in all were aided
in some way by other agencies of various types, including the Juve­
nile Protective Association, the Washington Humane Society, the
Instructive Visiting Nurses’ Association, and the Salvation Army.
Children’s previous agency records.

Eight hundred and seventy-one (more than one-third) of the 2,444
children had been under the care or supervision of an agency or
institution for the care of children previous to the commitment to
the board effective at the time of the study.
Children committed because of dependency.—Of the 1,686 children
who were committed because of dependency 324 had been known
to some agency previously. The agencies are shown in the following
list:
Agency.

Number.

Total children_______________________ ___________* 324
Board of Children’s Guardians__________________________
Institution for dependent children_____ :_________________
Juvenile court_________________________________
Child-caring agency___________________________________
Juvenile court and Board of Children’s Guardians_________
Board of Children’s Guardians and institution for dependent
children____________________________________________
Correctional institution____________________ _______ _
Institution for dependent children andchild-caring agency.. _
Board of Children’s Guardians, juvenile court, and correc­
tional institution__ _________________________________
Juvenile court and institution for dependentchildren_______
Institution for dependent children and institution for feeble­
minded________________________________________

131
83
52
22
15
6
6
4
2
2
1

One hundred and fifty-four, or nearly half this group, had been
wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians previously; this figure
includes 17 who had also been before the juvenile court for delin­
quency, 2 of whom had also been in institutions for delinquent
children. A total of 71 had been before the juvenile court on charges
of delinquency, 96 had been in institutions for dependent children,
8 had been in institutions for delinquent children, 26 had been under
the supervision of a child-caring agency, and 1 had been in,an institu­
tion for the feeble-minded.
Children committed because of delinquency.—Of the 758 children
who had been committed to the board because of delinquency 547
4 The entries for the juvenile court relate to appearance before the court for an offense other than that
which was immediately responsible for the commitment to the board which is dealt w ith in this study.
The entries for the Board of Children’s Guardians include only children who had been wards of the board
on temporary commitment and had been released prior to M ay 16,1920 (the beginning of the year covered
by this study).


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

36

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

had had a previous agency record. The agencies to which these
children were known are given in the following list:
Agency.

.

Number.

Total children____ ______!---------------------- - ----------- 4 547
Juvenile court____ — ------------KU---------- ----------!J- - ------- 404
Juvenile court and Board of Children’s Guardians-------------92
-------19
Board of Children’s Guardians--------------------- —
Juvenile court and institution for dependent children---------8
Board of Children’s Guardians, juvenile court, and correc­
7
tional institution. _i-------------------- ------------------- -------- Correctional institution-------------------------- r - —- - ------- r _
6
Institution for dependent children— !---------------------- ■- -----5
Board of Children’s Guardians and institution for dependent
children--------__------------- :ih-------------------------------------2
Other___________ _____ , -------------------------------------- - - - - 4

A total of 511 (93 per cent) of this group had been before the
juvenile court on charges of delinquency prior to that which occa­
sioned the commitment to the board in effect at the time of the
study. This number included 92 who had been wards of the Board
of Children’s Guardians previously, 8 who had also been in institu­
tions for dependent children, and 7 who had been wards of the
board and in institutions for delinquent children. A total of 120
children—22 per cent of the 547 who had previous agency records—
had been wards of the board previously; 15 had been in homes for
dependent children and 13 in institutions for delinquent children.
C O N T R IB U T IO N S O P P A R E N T S T O T H E S U P P O R T O F T H E C H IL D R E N .

In addition to having jurisdiction over dependent and delinquent
children, the juvenile court assumed jurisdiction over nonsupport
cases, until in April, 1922, the United States Supreme Court decided
that it had no jurisdiction over such cases.5 The fathers of 143
children included in this study and the mothers of 22 had been before
the juvenile court because of failure to support their children.
The court ordered the parents of children committed to the
Board of Children’s Guardians to make such payments toward the
children’s support as appeared feasible in consideration of the eco­
nomic condition of the parents. In a large proportion of the cases in
which the father or the mother agreed voluntarily, or was ordered
by the court, to contribute toward the support of a child or children
under care of the Board of Children’s Guardians, the sum was only
$1.50 to $2 a week per child, and sometimes this small amount was
paid for the care of several children committed to the board at the
same time. Occasionally when both parents were working a regular
weekly payment was ordered from each of them. The records
failed to show how regularly these sums were paid or over how long
a period payments extended; but it was evident from the informa­
tion available that the parents frequently failed to carry out the
court orders in this regard. In cases in which the parent made a
voluntary payment the sum was usually larger and was paid with
more regularity than when payment was ordered by the court.
* The entries for the juvenile court relate to appearance before the court for an offense other than that
which was immediately responsible for the commitment to the board which is dealt with in this study.
The entries for the Board of Children’s Guardians include only children who had been wards of the board
on temporary commitment and had been released prior to M ay 16, 1920 (the beginning of the year cov­
ered by this s*udy).
1
, , _
/_
.
6
See “ The Moreland Case,” in The Legal Aspect of the Juvenile Court, by Bernard Flexner and
Reuben Oppenheimer, p. 29 (U. S. Children’s Bureau Publication No. 99, Washington, 1922).


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

STATISTICAL INTERPRETATION OF DEPENDENCY PROBLEM.

37

Larger amounts were paid by parents for feeble-minded children
who were not wards of the board but who were under supervision
at the parents’ request; in some instances the amounts paid by the
parents for the support of such children approximated the amount
the board was required to pay for their care in institutions. In these
cases, since the arrangements were purely voluntary, the board was
privileged to return the children to the parents whenever the parents
failed to make the payments promised.
During the fiscal year July 1, 1920, to June 30, 1921, the board
received $7,930.33 from relatives for the support of children, including
$1,053 which was paid for the care of feeble*minded children under
the supervision of the board.
The Board of Children’s Guardians does not have authority to
assist parents to find boarding homes for children or make arrange­
ments for the care of children, other than the feeble-minded, who
have not been legally declared its wards.
C O M P A R IS O N O F T H E U S E O F V A R IO U S T Y P E S O F P L A C E M E N T .

First placement.

Analysis of first placements made by the board shows that during
the year of the study institutions had been used extensively as ^‘re­
ceiving homes” pending placement in family homes, or for children
who were committed to the board for short periods. In order to dis­
cover whether the proportion of children placed in institutions and in
family homes had changed during the two years ended May 15, 1921,
from what it had been during preceding years, comparison was made
of the first placement of all children under care during the year of the
study—children who had been committed over a period almost 21
years in duration—and of the children under care during the year of
the study who had been received by the board during the two-year
period. The proportions of first placements in institutions were
practically the same (47 and 49 per cent) and those for children placed
m boarding homes were identical (46 per cent). The figures follow:
Per cent c istribution.
Children
under care
during year
ended May
15, 1921.“

Type of first placement.

Total___________________ _________________________

____

In stitution................... ............................................................................ ....................
Boarding home_____ ____ ________________________ ________________ ..
Free home__________________________________ ___________________
Parental h o m e.._____ ___________ _______ _____________________ . . .
Prospective adoptive home_________ ______________:J,____________
Trial indenture___ ________________________________________ ___ .
House of detention______________________________________________
« Committed at any time during preceding 21 years.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

.

Children
committed
during 2year period
ended M ay
15,1921.

100

100

47
46
2
1

49
46
i

(b)
( 6)

jB

2

b Less than 1 per cent.

3

(»)

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA.

38

The first placements by the board of the 2,435 children for whom
information was obtained are shown in the following list, according
to whether the child was committed because of dependency or delin­
quency:
Type of first placement.

Dependent. Delinquent.

Total children__ ____ _________________ 1,677

758

606
941
54
31

551
184

36
2

12

Institution----------------------------------------------Boarding home_____________________________
Free home__________________________________
Parental home___________________________ '__
Prospective adoptive home___________________
Trial indenture______________________________
Hospital____ _______________________________
House of detention________________________

3
4

6

5

PLA C EM EN TS AT E N D OF YEAR OF C H IL D R E N U N D E R CARE OF T H E BOARD OF
C H IL D R E N ’S GUARDIANS.

Boarding homes.

27*

Institutions.

Free homes *

Parents’ homes.

Wage homes.

Trial adoptive homes _

Other **.

Hospitals.
Based on 1,939 children under care on M ay 15,1921, for whom information was obtained.
* “ Free homes” includes homes in which self-supporting children were paying their own board.
** “ Other” includes 16 in indenture or trial indenture homes, 2 in apprentice homes, 8 in house of deten­
tion, and 29 in the Army, Navy, or Marine Corps.

The board had placed in institutions 36 per cent of the children
committed because of dependency as compared with 73 per cent of
those committed because of delmquency. Of the dependent chil­
dren 56 per cent as compared with 24 per cent of the delinquent were
first placed in boarding homes. Fifty-four children committed

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

STATISTICAL INTERPRETATION OP DEPENDENCY PROBLEM.

39

because of dependency and 6 committed because of delinquency were
placed in free homes when received by the board, and 31 dependent
children and 5 who were delinquent were returned to their parents
under supervision. Thirty-six dependent children and 12 delmquent
children were found to be in need of special treatment and placed in
hospitals until they could be placed in private homes or in institu­
tions.
A total of 237 children of the 441 who were committed to the board
during the calendar year 1920 were placed in institutions as soon as
they were received. On May 15, 1921, over one-fourth of these 237
children were still in institutions, many of them having been trans­
ferred from those in which they were first placed. Over one-third
had been transferred to boarding homes, free homes, or the homes of
relatives.
•

Dependent. Delinquent.

Total children________________________

98

139

16
Remaining in first institution_____________ 1___
Transferred to:
Other institution.________________ ________
10
46
Boarding home_________________________
Parental home_________________ . . . . _____
6
Free home______________________________
7
Wage home_____________________ _____________
1
Hospital_____________
Discharged from first placement_______________
6 12
Whereabouts unknown_______________________ ______

25
18
14
5
5
2
__
7 64
6

The use of institutions and family homes.

The following list shows the number and percentage of children
who were placed in institutions or in family homes oi the different
types at any time while they were wards of the board :
Number of children. Per cent.

Free homes________________________
971
Boarding homes--------------- ------------------------------ 1,794
Wage homes_____________
304
516
Parents’ homes under supervision_________
Institutions___________________________ ______1, 751

40
73
12
21
72

Three hundred and eight children (13 per cent of all) had been
cared for in boarding homes from the time of their commitment to
the board, and practically the same number (306) had always been
in institutions.
I t is seen that while nearly three-fourths of the children had been
in boarding homes and the same proportion in institutions at some
time, one-fourth were being cared for in boarding homes and less
than one-fourth in institutions a t the end of the year of the study or
when released from care. Two-fifths of the children had been in free
homes a t some time; less than one-fourth, however, were being cared
for in this way at the end of the year or a t the time they were released.
One-fifth had been tried in the homes of their own parents while
under the board’s jurisdiction, although only one-seventh of all were
in their homes until the end of the year or until their discharge from
jurisdiction. One-eighth of the children had been in wage homes at
some time, but less man 5 per cent were living in such homes at the
6 Temporary wards whose terms of commitment had expired.
7 Sixty were temporary wards whose terms of commitment had expired, 3 were permanent wards who
were committed to the national training school, and 1 married,


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

40

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OE COLUMBIA.

time of discharge or at the end of the year. Probably much of this
difference is accounted for by the fact that the older children had
shifted from this arrangement to boarding in family homes and
working elsewhere.
The wards of the board were as a rule required to go to work as soon
as they reached the age of 16 years, and the placing officers frequently
advised with them and helped them to find work. Certain occupa­
tions were not favored, ana every possible effort was made to secure
for the children profitable, safe, and congenial work. Colored girls
were frequently placed at domestic service in private families when
they left school, and some of the boys were placed with private fami­
lies on farms where they worked either indoors or outside. Work­
ing children received their own wages and were responsible for their
own personal expenses. An officer of the board visited these children
at intervals, advised with their employers, and in case the arrange­
ment proved unsatisfactory arranged for the child’s placement in
another wage home, or in a boarding home until other plans could be
made.
On the recommendation of the physician or of one of the nurses
employed by the board, a child in need of hospital treatment was
given care in one of several hospitals in the city—through a special
appropriation made for this purpose. The Washington Asylum
Hospital also received patients of all classes for observation and treat­
ment, and this institution was frequently used for children suffering
from venereal disease or children in need of special prolonged treat­
ment or of observation for mental condition.
Number of placements of each child.

A consideration of the number of placements of each child brings
out the fact that many of these children were tried in a number of
homes or institutions before a satisfactory arrangement could be
reached. Sometimes the caretaker became ill or for some other
reason was unable to keep the child; but more frequently the change
was attributed to some fault or lack of adaptation on the part of the
child. Occasionally the board moved a child in order to place him
farther away from his family or old associates, or to have him nearer
school or near a hospital if he was in need of frequent examination or
treatment, or to place him with his brothers or sisters.
Transfer from a family home to an institution and from an institu­
tion to a family home, as well as from one institution to another, de­
pended very largely upon the child’s conduct. In a few instances,
however, it was necessary to place a child in an institution temporarily
because no family home was available or to provide for him in a
family home temporarily until arrangements could be made for his
care in a suitable mstitution.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

STATISTICAL INTERPRETATION OP DEPENDENCY PROBLEM.

41

The following list shows the number of placements of the 625 chil­
dren under temporary commitment and of the 1,809 under minority
commitment for whom the number of placements was reported:
Number of placements.8

Total children

One________ ____
Two__ ____ _____
Three___________
Four__ _________
Five__;---------------Six_______ ______
Seven_____.______
Eight____ _______
Nine____________
Ten_____________
Eleven__________
Twelve__ | --------Thirteen_________
Fourteen________
Fifteen to nineteen
Twenty and over__

Temporary
wards.

M inority
wards.

__ 625

1, 809

237
141
74
64
35
32
25

160
280
248
227
198
146

6
3
2
2

1
1

2

120

99
79
74
42
36
19
23
52
6

Data that could be fairly compared with the foregoing are not
available for other cities, and it is impossible to say whether a similar
situation prevails in other places. The number of changes indicated
in the above figures points to a very serious situation that can not
help being detrimental to the children.
One reason for the large number of placements is to be found in
the temporary commitments. Children committed temporarily are
very frequently recommitted one or more times. This often neces­
sitates shifting of location because of the difficulty in securing suit­
able homes which will receive these children and the uncertainty con­
cerning the length of time they will have to be provided for. The
duration of temporary commitments varied from one week to over
five years, in the majority of cases being about two years. In the
light of this fact and of those shown above in regard to thé number
of placements, the seriousness of the situation is evident.
The number of placements of children under minority commit­
ment is also to be explained to some extent on the above basis;
many of these children had been committed as temporary wards—
some of them several times—before they became wards for minority,
and the board was in a position to provide more permanent homes
for them. A particularly unfortunate situation in relation to the
shifting of the children from one location to another is due to the in­
elasticity of the appropriation made to the board. It frequently
happens that before the expiration of the fiscal year the amount
appropriated for the maintenance of wards has been so nearly ex­
hausted that the last few weeks find the board in a dilemma, having
to provide for the care of some of its wards who are in boarding homes
without having the money necessary to continue paying board for
them. Other arrangements are necessary for the short period until
the next appropriation is available.
8 “ Placements” include placements in both family homes and institutions but not in the house of deten­
tion or a hospital.
9These figures exclude two children committed to the board but never placed by it—a boy who ran away from
the juvenile court immediately following his commitment and has never been located, and an abandoned in­
fant who was committed b u t whose relatives were located the same day and agreed to provide for him.

88962°—24f----- 4

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

to
BOARD OP C H IL D R E N ’S GUARDIANS, D IST R IC T OF COLUMBIA—N U M B E R OF TIM ES WARDS W ERE PLA C ED .

3

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

Based on 2,434 children for whom number of placements was reported.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

1»

13

14

15 or more

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,

1

STATISTICAL INTERPRETATION OP DEPENDENCY PROBLEM.

43

Although information in regard to the number of placements brings
out the fact that in many cases children had to be moved frequently,
and new plans for their care were necessary from time to time, the
special significance of these changes in correlation with the length of
time the child had been a ward of the board is shown by the figures
given in the following table:
Length of time under care, by number of 'placements; children under care of Board of
Children’s Guardians, May 16, 1920-May 15, 1921.
Number of children under care for specified length of time.
Number of placements.

Total
One____________
Two______ _•____
Three___________
Four..................
Five____________
Six_____________
Seven___________
E ight......................
Nine___________
Ten_____________
Eleven__________
Twelve__________
Thirteen.............. .
Fourteen....... .........
Fifteen to nineteen.
Twenty and o v er..
Not reported.____

3-4
years.

5-9
years.

10-14
years.

15
years
and
over.

Not reported.

3

dren.

1 year.

1-2
years.

12,442

554

501

323

707

234

120

397
421
322
291
233
178
145
105
82
76
44
37
20
25
52
6
8

283
157
55
36
11
7
2
3

75
133
107
85
40
23
19
10
4
2
1
2

17
39
49
53
45
38
32
17
12
9
6
3
1
1
1

14
68
79
87
98
77
57
52
40
36
25
22
14
11
25
2

5
20
24
22
26
22
21
17
18
17
7
6
4
7
13
2
3

3
3
8
7
13
10
14
6
g
12
5
4
1
6
13
2
5

1
1
1

1 Excluding 2 children who were never placed.

I t is seen that of the children under care for less than a year more
than one-tenth had had from 4 to 8 placements in this short period
of time. Of those under care 1 or 2 years more than one-third had
been shifted from 4 to 12 times. Two-thirds of those under care
3 or 4 years had been in 4 to 15 locations. Over three-fourths of
the children under care from 5 to 9 years had been placed 4 times or
more; almost one-fifth of the whole number in this group had been
placed from 10 to 20 or more times. Almost four-fifths of the chil­
dren under care from 10 to 14 years and almost nine-tenths of those
under care 15 years and over had been placed 4 times or more.
Of the children in these two groups together, three-tenths had had
from 10 to 20 or more placements.
P H Y S IC A L A N D M E N T A L C O N D IT IO N O F T H E C H IL D R E N .

Physical condition.

*

Children examined when received.—Since the board has had a
physician in its employ the plan has been to give a physical examina­
tion to each child when he becomes a ward of the board. Of the 686
children for whom it was possible to secure information as to physical
condition at the time they became wards of the board only 170 (25 per
cent) were found to be in satisfactory condition. Three hundred and
ninety-eight (58 per cent) were in unsatisfactory condition; that is,
they were below normal in certain respects or were suffering from
defects which with proper care and treatment could be remedied and
would not cause any serious handicap. One hundred and eighteen

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

44

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

(17 per cent) of the children who had an examination were found to
have physical disabilities which constituted serious handicaps;
although some of these children could not be completely cured, the
condition of the majority of them could be greatly improved by
proper treatment.
The following list shows the number of children reported as having
some physical defect which was considered a serious handicap:
Physical defect.

Total children with serious physical defects.
Syphilis or gonorrhea_____
Active tuberculosis_______
Deformity of limb or spine
Sight defect_____________
Speech" or hearing defect. _
Heart defect_____________
Epilepsy _________________
Other___________________

Number.

. 118
32
24
24
10
10

7
4
7

The group of children classified as unsatisfactory in physical con­
dition at the time of reception included those who were in need of
treatment or special care temporarily but whose defects were not of
such nature as to interfere with their progress in school. They were
children who were underdeveloped, who had diseased tonsils, slight
speech or hearing defects, or intestinal or other organic disturbances,
or who were suspected to have tuberculosis or venereal disease. The
proportion in each of the three groups—satisfactory, unsatisfactory,
or seriously handicapped condition—does not differ to any extent for
the white and the negro children.
An analysis of the findings for children committed as dependent
shows that only 22 per cent were in good physical condition, 59 per
cent were in unsatisfactory condition, and 19 per cent were seriously
handicapped. Of the delinquent, 29 per cent were in good condi­
tion, 57 per cent were in unsatisfactory condition, and 15 per cent
were seriously handicapped.
Children examined 'prior to release from care.—Of the children
included in the study 929 (nearly two-fifths) had had a physical
examination within six months prior to their release from supervision
or the end of the year of the study. Of this group 511 (55 per cent)
were found to be in good condition; 294 (32 per cent) were in un­
satisfactory condition; and 124 (13 per cent) were suffering with some
serious handicap.
The following list gives the number of children examined within
6 months of release or the end of the year who were in satisfactory
condition, in unsatisfactory condition, and seriously handicapped:
Physical condition.

Number.

* Total children__________ ___________ j ___________ ___929

Satisfactory;___________ .__ ___ ^
__ j__ ___________
511
Unsatisfactory._________________________
294
Seriously handicapped________________ i$___________ ____124
Syphilis or gonorrhea. ______________________________
35
Active tuberculosis________ \________________________ 35
Deformity of limb or spine_____ ____________________
19
Sight defect_____ ________
7
Speech or hearing defect_____________ ._____________
10
Heart defect__ _______ ______________ __ :____ ______
3
Epilepsy
_____________ +__ ,------------------- ---------9
Other_____________________
6

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

STATISTICAL INTERPRETATION OF DEPENDENCY PROBLEM.

45

Of the 124 children in a serious physical condition at the end of
the year or at the time of discharge, 35 had active tuberculosis; 12
of these children were white, and 23 were negro. Thirty-two of the
35 children with venereal disease were negro; 23 of them were girls.
Of the 19 deformed children 9 were white and 10 were negro; 11 were
boys and 8 girls.
Policy regarding mental exam inations.

The board has the services of several of the psychiatrists in the city
as well as of the mental clinic in connection with one of the hospitals.
Mental examinations were given to four classes of wards of the board:
(1) Children who were apparently feeble-minded or deficient, (2)
children presenting special behavior problems, (3) children whose
histories were inadequate for placement for adoption or in free homes,
and (4) children selected for study because of some special opportunity
offered to a child who was able to profit by it. Frequently, careful
study of a child’s needs was made over an extended period in order to
ascertain the best plan to follow in caring for the child.
Of the 2,176 children who were 7 years of age and over when they
were committed to the board 529 were given mental examinations
immediately prior to their reception or at some time after they became
wards; one-fourth of those examined were found to be sufficiently
subnormal to be classed as feeble-minded. During the greater part
of the year covered by this study of record data the juvenile court
had the services of a clinic conducted by the United States Public
Health Service,10 which gave mental and physical examinations
to all children found by the probation officers especially difficult to
manage, as well as to all children apparently below normal either
physically or mentally. A copy of the clinic’s report was forwarded
to the board at the time of the child’s commitment and was frequently
of material assistance in making proper provision for the child.
F eeble-m inded wards.

One hundred and thirty-two children were committed to the
board by the court as either temporary or permanent wards and later
transferred to the rolls of the feeble-minded, because upon examina­
tion they were found to be in need of institutional or other special care.
Fifty-eight of these feeble-minded children were first committed as
temporary wards (46 of these were later made permanent wards), and
74 were originally committed as permanent wards. In addition to
these children received from the court, 62 feeble-minded children who
had never been formally committed to the board were being cared
for at the request of parents. Two institutions which care for feeble­
minded children granted special rates for children placed by the
Board of Children’s Guardians, and when necessary the board supple­
mented the amount the parent was able to pay.
Only 28 of the 117 feeble-minded wards and 50 of the 62 feeble­
minded children under supervision who were not wards of the board
were in institutions for the feeble-minded at the end of the year.
Board was being paid for them at the rate of $25 to $40 a month.
Feeble-minded children are released from supervision when they
become 21 (or when the term of their commitment expires) unless
their parents request the board to continue to provide for them.
i° This assistance has not been available since April, 1921.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

46

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

The ages of the 117 feeble-minded children who were wards of
the board on May 15, 1921, are shown in the following list:
Age.

Number.

Total feeble-minded wards__ 117
10 years____________________
11 years_______________
12 years_______________
13 years__ _____________________
14 years_______________________

5
1
5
6
8

Age.

15
16
17
18
19
20
21

Number.

years___________________
years_______________________
years_______________________
years___ _______________
years______________
years_______________________
years or over________________

17
16
19
13
15
7
5

At the end of the year of the study 28 of these children were
in institutions for the feeble-minded, and 36 were in institutions of
other types. At that time 12 were being cared for bv their own
parents, 12 were in boarding homes, 12 were in homes of relatives or
friends to whom no board was being paid, 6 were working in private
homes and receiving wages, and one boy was in the United States
Army. The remaining 10 children were classed as “absconders.’’
CONDUCT OF CHILDREN WHILE UNDER CARE OF THE BOARD.

The difficulty of the task confronting the Board of Children’s
Guardians is indicated by the data secured concerning the conduct
of the children while under its care. I t must be remembered that a
considerable proportion of the wards had been committed because
of delinquency.
Although a number of the younger children were hard to control
and exhibited traits which caused the caretakers considerable trouble,
the 268 children under 7 years of age at discharge or at the end of the
year are not included in the tabulation showing the child’s conduct
while under care. Information was obtained as to the conduct of
1,726 of the 2,176 children 7 years of age and over who were under the
care of the board during one year. The conduct of 501 of these was
reported as good; the 450 for whom there was no report may be
assumed to have given no special difficulty. The other 1,225 were
reported as disobedient, runaways, truants, sexually immoral, or
guilty of fighting, stealing, lying, or some less serious offense; for
many of them more than one type of misconduct was reported.
A total of 952 of the 1,225 children whose conduct was reported as
poor were runaways, and 68 were habitual truants. Three hundred
and fifteen of the children stole, 217 were disobedient, 108 were
habitually untruthful, and 108 were sexually immoral. Fifty-six
children were reported as being guilty of delinquencies other than
those detailed above; the offenses of this group included vagrancy,
housebreaking, assault, street begging, destroying property, carry­
ing concealed weapons, forgery, and disorderly conduct. The conduct
of 34 children who did not seriously misbehave was considered poor;
these children used bad language, had violent tempers, or were
impudent, obstinate, quarrelsome, destructive, or generally hard to
manage.
W ards brought before th e ju ven ile court.

Forty-seven per cent (758) of the 1,606 children 7 years of age and
over when received by the board had been brought into court because
of some delinquency. Twelve per cent (197) came before the juvenile
court or the police court on charges of delinquency while wards of the
board.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

STATISTICAL INTERPRETATION OF DEPENDENCY PROBLEM.

47

Of the permanent wards 7 years of age and over who were com­
mitted to the board because of dependency or neglect 6 per cent
were brought into court on charges of delinquency while wards of the
board. Of the corresponding group of children who were committed
as delinquents 19 per cent were brought before the court on charges of
delinquency while wards of the board.
The investigating department of the Board of Children’s Guardians
reported that during the year ended June 30, 1923, 48 wards of the
board were brought before the juvenile court for minor offenses; 13
of them were sent to one of the national training schools. Thirteen
wards were brought before the juvenile court on the charge of
incorrigibility; of this number 10 were committed to one of the
national training schools. Four colored boys who were beyond the
age of juvenile-court jurisdiction were brought before other courts.
“ A bsconding” children.

The 275 wards classed as “ absconders”—children whose where­
abouts was not known at the end of the year or at the termination of
the periods for which they had been placed under supervision 11—were
for the most part older wards of the board who were able to care for
themselves independently or who were being cared for by relatives
and had left their foster homes without notifying the board. This
number represents the net accumulation of many years, as runaway
wards are carried on the rolls of the board until they reach majority
or are discharged for other reasons. In some cases a parent or other
relative had removed the child from the home or institution in which
he had been placed and had failed to notify the board, either through
carelessness or intentionally because the board as legal guardian of
the child objected to his return to relatives; the latter explanation
applied with especial frequency in the cases of the younger children
included in the group o f absconders. Some of the older boys and
girls who had become self-supporting did not report to the board when
they changed their addresses merely because they did not realize
that they were under obligation to do so.
If it had been possible to ascertain the reason for the child’s disap­
pearance in every case it is probable that the number of absconders
would have been somewhat reduced. The largest number (101, or
37 per cent) of those whose whereabouts was not known at the end of
the year or at the time of discharge from supervision Were in institu­
tions immediately prior to their being lost sight of by the board.
Fifteen (5 per cent) of the children had been placed as apprentices or
on indenture, 32 (12 per cent) were in wage homes, 30 (11 per cent)
were in the homes of their own parents, 52 (19 per cent) were in free
homes, and 43 (16 per cent) were in boarding homes. For 2 the
whereabouts prior to disappearance was not reported.
Fifty-eight (one-fifth) of the absconders were under 14 years of age;
of this number 9 were less than 10 years old, 4 were 10, 6 were 11,
10 were 12, and 29 were 13 years old. Eighty-six were 14 or 15 years
of age, and 131 were 16 or over. The following table shows the ages
Children who had run away and had been located during the year were classified as “ runaways” and
not as “ absconders.”


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

48

CHI l T) B e PENDENCY IN THE BISTNICT OP COLUMBIA.

of the absconding children and the length of time their whereabouts
had been unknown:
Age at absconding and length of time whereabouts was unknown; wards who ran
away while under care of the Board of Children’s Guardians.1
Length of time whereabouts was unknown.
Age at absconding.

Total
Less 6 months, 1 year,
2 years, 3 years,
abscond­ than 6 less than less than less than less than 4 years
and over.
ers.
months. 1 year.
2.
3.
4.

Total absconders_______

275

63

Under 10 years______________
10 years____________________
11 years.____________ _______
12 years_____________ ____
13 years________ __________
14 years____________________
15 years____________________
16 years_______________ ____
17 years____________________
18 years________________ ____
19 years__________________ _
20 years___ ________________

9
4

1
1
1
10
9
15
8
5
3
6
4

10
29
32
54
03
29
20
19
10

34

1
4
3
7
7
3
3
6

60

1
4
9
10
10
7
12

36

35

47

1

1
2
1
1
1
6
5
10
8

6
2
4
2
10
4
9
10

4
1
8
8
6
7
1

1 Whose whereabouts was unknown when they were discharged from care or on M ay 15,1921.

Seventeen per cent of the absconders had been gone for 4 years or
more; 13 per cent for 3 years; 35 per cent for 1 or 2 years; 12 per
cent for 6 months to 1 year; and 23 per cent for less than 6 months.
WARDS DISCHARGED DURING ONE YEAR.

Age at discharge.

The ages of the 503 wards of all classes and groups who were
discharged from the care of the board during the year covered by
this study (including those who died) are shown in the following
list:
Age a t discharge.

Number.

Total wards discharged dur­
ing year_________ __ __ 503
Under 6 months __ __ ___ __Ji J _ 7
6-11 m o n th s..__ ______ _._______
7
1 y e a r .._______ _______________ ■ 7
2 years______ .______ __________
5
3 years_____ . _________________
13
4 years__ ______________
6
5 years
___ ____-tUu______
4

6 years. __________ _ _____,___1__
7 years___________
8 years___________

3

9
10

Age at discharge.

Number.

9 years__ ____-._______
12
10 years.__ _______ __________ ! 15
11 years_________
21
12 y e a r s . ^ ___________L____ 34
13 years________ ___________ 37
14 years__________________
64
15 years____________
59
16 years______________
35
17 years__ ____
12
18 years______________________
12
19 years____ ____________
4
20 years_______________
2
21 years______________ 1_______125

Of the 503 wards discharged from supervision 62 per cent were 14
years of age or over. Twenty-five per cent had reached the age of
21 years; these were the children who had been committed until
they should reach the age of 21. Thirteen per cent were from
16 to 20 years of age, inclusive, and 24 per cent were 14 or 15 years
of age. Most of the 190 children who were less than 14 years of
age when they were discharged had been committed as temporary
wards. One hundred and seven children (21 per cent) of all dis­
charged during the year were from 10 to 13 years of age; 38 (8 per
cent) were from 5 to 9 years; and, 45 (9 per cent) were under 5 years.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

STATISTICAL INTERPRETATION OE DEPENDENCY PROBLEM.

49

Reasons for discharge.

The reasons for discharge from supervision are given in the fol­
lowing list for the 503 wards (191 on minority commitments and
312 temporary wards) who were discharged during the year of the
study:
Reasons for discharge.

Number.

Total wards discharged from supervision_____________ 503

Terms expired____________________________ _______ i____ 293
Attained majority_________________________
131
Committed to national training schools. _________ _________ 37
Married_________
14
Died_______________________________________.__________ • 14
Adopted____________________.- _ -------------------------------8
Dropped—no commitment___________________
3
Transferred to Blue Plains Home for Aged and Infirm 12_____
2
Transferred to Government Hospital for the Insane________
1

Reference has been made to the fact that until 1922 the board had
no authority to release from guardianship a child under minority
commitment before he had reached his majority, except in the case
of girls who married, wards who were adopted, or wards committed
to one of the national training schools. Temporary wards could
not be released from supervision except upon the expiration of their
terms of commitment. Attainment of majority and the expiration
of temporary commitments were responsible for the discharge of
84 per cent of those released from supervision during the year.
Seven per cent were committed to one of the national training schools,
3 per cent died, 3 per cent married, and 3 per cent were discharged
for other reasons.
Length o f tim e under care.

Wards on minority commitment.—The following list shows the
length of time the wards under minority commitment who were
discharged during the year had been under supervision :
Length of time under care.

Number.

Total minority wards discharged during year_________ 191
Less than 6 months------------------------------------------------------ —
6-11 months_____________________ _______ ________ ________
1-4 years__________________ _____________ -------------- 1 ------5-9 years__________ ----------------------------------------------------- ; ..
10-14 years___________________________________ __________
15 years and over------------------------------------------------------------

8
5
22
80
37
39

Forty per cent of these 191 children had been under supervision
for at least 10 years; 42 per cent, from 5 to 9 years; 12 per cent,
from 1 to 4 years; and 7 per cent, for less than 1 year. All the
permanent wards who had been under supervision for less than 5
years had been released because they married or had to be committed
to the national training school. All but one of the 13 who were
under the supervision of the board for less than a year were discharged
when they were 14, 15, or 16 years of age. Two of these 13 were
girls who were released because they married, and 11 were committed
to the training school (one a boy of 9 years).
Until 1915 it was the policy of the court to commit girls until
they were 18 years of age, when they were considered to have reached
13 Feeble-minded wards,


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

50

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

their majority; but since that time both boys and girls who were
committed for minority have remained under supervision until they
were 21. During the year of the study 131 wards of the board were
discharged because they had reached their majority; 9 of these
were girls who had been wards for at least 10 years and were released
when they became 18 years of age. Almost naif these children had
been wards of the board for 10 years or more.
'
Of the eight children adopted during the year one had been under
care for 2 years, 2 for 3 years, 1 for 5 years, 1 for 6 years, 2 for
7 years, and .1 for 8 years. All these were colored children who
had been committed to the board because they were destitute of
suitable homes. Three children who were never formally com­
mitted to the board but were under care for a few days during the
year were returned to their parents.
Six of the 14 children who died during the year had been under
supervision of the board for less than 1 year, 1 for 1 year, 2 for 2
years, 2 for five years, 1 for 6 years, and 2 for more than 10 years.
I t was the policy of the board to discharge girls who married
adults, if after investigation conditions were found to be satisfactory.
Two of the 14 girls who were released during the year because they
married had been under supervision for less than 1 year, 3 for 1
year, 1 for 2 years, 1 for 3 years, 1 for 5 years, 2 for 6 years, and 4
for 10 years or longer.
When a ward of the Board of Children’s Guardians under 17 years
of age is brought into court on a delinquency charge the case is
heard in the juvenile court, and if the judge does not return him to
the board he is committed to one of the national training schools and
discharged from the supervision of the board. The cases of all
minors 17 years of age and over who are brought into court on de­
linquency charges are heard in the police court. When a ward of
the board is committed to a national training school by the police
court, the board retains supervision until he reaches majority.^ Of
the 37 wards of the board who were committed to national training
schools by the juvenile court 17, all of whom had been committed
to the board on delinquency charges, had been wards for less than
1 year; 15 had been under care for 1 to 3 years; 3, for 4 to 7 years,
and 2, for 10 years or more (both of these were committed to the
board on the charge of dependency).
Two of the older feeble-minded wards who had been under super­
vision for 15 years or more were transferred to the Home for the
Aged and Infirm at Blue Plains, and one who had been under care
for 10 years was transferred to the Government Hospital for the
Insane. The board had no definite policy in regard to retaining
supervision over wards placed in the latter institution, and at the
time of the study 6 inmates of this institution (5 who were feeble­
minded and 1 who was insane) were still wards of the board.
Temporary wards.—The board was required to investigate the
home conditions of every child placed under temporary care and to
return the child to the juvenile court at the end of his term of commit-*
ment. Although there was no limit to the length of time a child
might continue as a temporary ward of the board, in the majority
of cases the first temporary commitment was for a short period,
usually from 1 week to 3 months. Occasionally, however, a child
was committed as a temporary ward for an indefinite period “ pending

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

STATISTICAL INTERPRETATION OF DEPENDENCY PROBLEM.

51

final judgment.” Some children were discharged at the end of the
first commitment; others were continued under temporary care
through a series of commitments. Temporary wards were fre­
quently recommitted either temporarily or under minority commit­
ments. The following list shows the length of time under care for
temporary wards discharged during the year of the study:
Length of tim e under care.

Num ber.

Total temporary wards discharged during
year___ _________ _____________ _____312
Less than 1 month
1-2 months______
3-5 months______
6-11 months_____
1 year__________ :
2 years___ ______
3 years_________
4 years__________
5 years__ ___t __

Per cent distribution.

100

65
45
28
33
401
65

21

20

45

14

>

14
9
11

2.

Feeble-minded wards.1*—All children are committed to the board
because of dependency or delinquency and as temporary or per­
manent wards. For this reason the 132 wards of the board who
had been found to be feeble-minded have been included in one or
the other of the preceding lists. Unless the parents of feeble-minded
children request the board to continue to provide for them after their
term of commitment expires or after they reach majority, they are
released from care under the same conditions as other children.
Fifteen feeble-minded wards were discharged from care during the
year of the study; all of them had been under care for at least 2 years,
and 6 had been under care for 10 years or more. The following list
gives the length of time the 15 feeble-minded wards discharged
during the year had been under the care of the board :
Length of time under care.

Number.

Length of time under care.

Total wards discharged dur­
ing year_________
15
2 years, less than 3 _____________
3 years, less than 4_________
5 years, less than 6_____________

Number.

7 years, less than 8_ _,__________
9 years, less than 10 _ __________
10 years, less than 11_____________
4 15 years, less than 16___________
1 20 years and over-..,____________
1

2
1
3
1
2

One of the two who had been wards of the board for 20 years or
more was 22 years of age, and the other was 31 years of age. The
former had been under supervision for 22 years and the latter for
26 years. Both of these were committed to the Blue Plains Home
for the Aged and Infirm during the year covered by the study. Of
the other 13 who were released from supervision during the year,
the term of commitment (as dependent or delinquent children) of
8 had expired, 3 of the girls married, 1 was committed to the Govern­
ment Hospital for the Insane, and 1 died.
CHILDREN UNDER CARE OF PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS.

Of the 18 private institutions in the city which provide for depend­
ent children, 14 supplied data in regard to the 700 children cared for
13 The 62 feeble-minded children who were under the care of the board through voluntary placement by
parents, b u t who were never committed as wards of the board by the juvenile courts, are not included in
this analysis.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

52

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA.

by them in 1922,14 and 13 gave some information concerning the 474
children who had been under their care during the previous year
but had been returned to relatives, had been placed in foster homes, or
had been provided for in other ways.
Information was obtained from the institutions on special forms
filled out by them for the individual children under care or from
unpublished institution reports which were placed at the disposal of
the bureau. In some instances the record system was so primitive
that little reliance could be placed on information concerning wards,
even when an attempt was made to furnish it.
INSTITUTION POPULATION.

The early history of the private institutions in the District of
Columbia is described in the section on the development of private
child-caring work.15
The total number of children under the care of private institutions
in the District at the time of the study was approximately 900. The
population of each institution varied from 25 to 130. Several of
these institutions were caring for children who were wards of the
Board of Children’s Guardians; these children have been excluded
from the group considered in this section of the report, as they were
included in the discussion of the wards of the board. Of the total
number under care more or less complete information was received
from the institutions for 700 children.
Nine of the 18 institutions are sectarian. Although these had been
established primarily for the children of certain denominations
other children in need of care are received by nearly all of them.
Of the children who were under the care of private institutions
304 were boys and 396 were girls. All but 18 were white children,
15 were negroes, and 3 Chinese.
The following list gives the ages 16of 700 children in the institutions
on a specified date:
Age.

Number.

Total children under care __ 700
Under 1 year______________ 63
1-3 years_____________ J_______ 45
4^8 years_____________________ 196
9-11 years______ _*____________ 155

Age.

Number.

12-13 years___________________ 80
14^15 years___________________ 49
16-17 years__ _________________ 26
20
18 years and over___ __________
Not reported.._______________ _ 1766

The majority of the infants were being cared for by their mothers
in two maternity homes and an infant asylum and maternity home
which received both mothers and babies. Because of limited ac­
commodations and the difficulties of discipline several institutions
caring for both boys and girls refused to keep boys over 12 years of
age, returning boys above this age to relatives or making provision
for them in other institutions. Girls were more frequently provided
for until they were 16 or 18, and a proportionately larger number
of girls was found in the higher age groups. Nineteen girls 18 years
of age or over were in a denominational institution maintained for
the care and training of older girls. An 18-year-old negro boy, who
u One institution furnished information only as to the number and sex of the children.
« See pp. 112-116.
16 This age grouping is used because it is the one given in the reports of several of the larger institutions.
17The age limitations of institutions caring for 60 of these children were from 6 to 16 years, and the other
6 children were in an institution which cared only for children under 4 or 5 years of age.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

STATISTICAL INTERPRETATION OE DEPENDENCY PROBLEM.

53

was feeble-minded, had been in the institution in which he was living
for 13 years. No board was being paid for him, as he was able to
help considerably about the house and the matron considered that
he more than earned his board.
AGE W HEN RECEIVED, SEX, AND RACE.

The children’s ages when received were not reported by four of the
larger institutions which furnished other data m regard to the 371
children under their care. I t is known, however, that the 95 children
in one of these institutions were all under 9 years of age, the 212
children in two others were from 5 to 15 years of age, and the 64
children in another institution were from 12 to 20 years.
Only four institutions in the District reported receiving children
under 2 years of age. These institutions received only white children
and were not equipped to care for children over 5 or 6 years of age.
Only 3 of the 14 institutions received children after they had rêached
the age of 14 years. Two sectarian institutions received only girls,
and one other supported by the same denomination received onlv
boys.
All the 39 children received by private institutions before they were
6 months of age were of illegitimate birth. Only 5 other children
were under 2 years of age; the mothers of 2 of these had deserted
their families, and the fathers of 3 had* died. The children received
when they were between the ages of 2 and 5 years, inclusive, numbered
93, or 57 per cent of those whose ages were reported and who came
to the institutions before they were 6 years of age. Twenty-six per
cent were from 6 to 8 years of age, inclusive, and 17 per cent were 9
years of age or older when received.
The following list gives the ages of the 240 children whose ages at
the time they were received by the institutions were reported:
Age when received.

Number.

Total children___________ 240
Born in the institution_________
Under 6 months_________ ____ ^
6-11 months_________________ _
1 year________________________
2 years.______________________
3 years__ _____________________
4 years_______________________
5 years____________ _____„____

33
6
2
3
12
18
27
36

Age when received.

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

Number.

years. _
_ __ _________
___ __ _________
years _
years__ ______
_________
______ ____ ______ iöj
years
years __
_________
y e a r s __ _______ . _________
years
_______ _
years _ _ _ _ _
______
years. __________ _________

22
20
21
18

6

10

3
2

1

CUSTODIANS OF CHILDREN BEFORE THEIR ENTRANCE TO INSTITUTIONS.

All children who were in private institutions for dependent children
at the end of the year had been received from parents, other relatives,
u friends,” or other institutions or agencies. They were all consid­
ered to be under care temporarily, as the person or the agency which
placed them could remove them at any time and the institution could
request their removal in case the relatives failed to comply with its
regulations. The matron of one institution, with the consent of the
father, had been appointed the legal guardian of two children under
her care; these were the only children known to be permanent wards
of any of the institutions.
1 :: :


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

54

CHILD1 DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

Information was obtained as to the source from which 536 of the
700 children in institutions were received:
Number.

Custodian from whom received.

.

Total children__
Mother_______________________
Father________________ — ;------Parents, other relatives, or friends
Institutions or agencies-------------Born in the institution--------------Not reported (foundlings)-----------

536
107
72
is 272

8

74
3

PARENTAL STATUS.

The following list gives the parental status of 612 children when
received by the institutions (excluding 88 for whom parental status
was not reported) :
Parental status.

Total children
Both parents living in the home-------------------------Both parents dead---------- --------------------------------One parent dead---------------------------------------------Mother unmarried------------------------ ---------------Parents separated or divorced, or a parent deserted
One parent in hospital for insane-_---------------------One parent in correctional institution------------------Mother dead, father deserting---------------------------Not reported (foundlings or abandoned)--------------

Number.

612
22

72
326
51
116
7
3
2

13

I t was reported that 12 per cent of the children received by the
institutions were orphans. Even this low percentage is considerably
higher than that reported for the wards of the public child-caring
agency (5 per cent). But this may readily be accounted for by the
fact that a considerable proportion of the wards of the board were
removed from their homes because of parental neglect or home com
ditions that were detrimental to them, whereas the private institu­
tions received no children by court commitment. As would also be
expected, the reverse of the situation found in the public agency was
true in regard to the proportion of children both of whose parents
were living in the home. These constituted only 4 per cent of the
children in institutions, as compared with 15 per cent of those under
the care of the public agency. Half orphans, on the other hand,
comprised 53 per cent of all the institution children but only 25 per
cent of those under care of the Board of Children’s Guardians.
Unfortunately information obtained from the institutions on this
point was too incomplete to permit a comparison of the number of
children whose fathers had died with the number whose mothers had
died.
1’
' ' *'*'
. Only 8 per cent were reported as being the children oi unmarried
mothers, as compared with 12 per cent of those under the supervision
of the public agency. A very considerable percentage of the children
were reported as having parents who had separated or one of whom
had deserted the family. This group represented 19 per cent of the
total. The fathers of four children and the mothers of three were
in. a hospital for the insane, and the fathers of three were in correc­
tional institutions.
____


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

STATISTICAL INTERPRETATION OF DEPENDENCY PROBLEM.

55

CONTRIBUTIONS OF PARENTS TO THE SUPPORT OF THE CHILDREN.

Practically all the private institutions are maintained in part from
payments made by relatives for the care of children. The amounts
varied according to the financial circumstances of those responsible
for the child. Information was obtained on this point regarding only
35 per cent of the 700 children included in this study.
Relatives were paying the full amounts required by the institutions
for the care of 80 children, and in 68 cases only part of the amount
asked for the support of a child was being paid. Thus in the case
of 148, or 60 per cent of the 248 children for whom information was
obtained, relatives were paying something toward their support.
I t was reported that the institutions were receiving no payment for
the other 100 children.
The following gives the parenta. status of the 248 children for
whom information was obtained, separately for those for whose
support some payment was being made by relatives and those who
were being cared for entirely at the expense of the institutions:
Full or
partial
payment.

Parental status.

Total children.
Both parents living in the home.
One parent dead__
Both parents dead.
. Mother unmarried.
Parents separated or
serted.
One parent in hospital:
One parent in correctional institution.
Mother dead, father deserting.
Child abandoned___________
Not reported_______________

P r-T
LM

__

No
payment.

148

100

2
88
4

_____
30
7
40

29 * « d 0
S}6rr

Si

^ 3 -1 ^ d ä £ S £
2
3

1
6

In 85 per cent of the cases included in this group of 248 in which
the mother was dead the father was contributing toward the child’s
support, and in 63 per cent of the cases in which the father was dead
the mother was paying. Either full or partial payment was being
made for 66 per cent of the children whose parents were separated
or divorced or one of whose parents had deserted. About one-fifth
of the unmarried mothers were paying something toward the child’s
support.
CHILDREN DISCHARGED FROM CARE DURING ONE YEAR.

Information regarding children discharged from care during one
year was secured from 13 institutions, all of which furnished data rethe persons to whom children were released. Four of these,
Êarding
owever, failed to report the ages of the children at discharge or the
length of time during which they had been under care.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

56

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

Age at discharge.

#

The age at discharge was reported for only 136 of the 474 children
who had been discharged from care during the year. The ages of
these children are shown in the following list:
Age at discharge.

Number.

Total children___________ 136
Under 6 months. __------------------- 15
6-11 months_______________ .... 12
1 year____ ____________________
7
2 years_________ s--------------------5
3
3 years________
4*years_____________ d------------8
6
5 years-------- -----------6 years----- ----------9
_____________ ____-2
7 years.
Length of time under care.

Age a t discharge.

Number.

8 years___________
9 years_____ _______if.________
10 years________________________
11 years______________________
12 years_____________________ _
13 years___________
14 years._____________
15 years____ u'.J______ X --------16 years___ ___________________
18 years___________________ - . .
19 years. ___ _ __ r______ ___

14
8
15
7
10
4
4
1
2
3
1

Two-thirds of the 133 children discharged during the year for whom
information as to length of time under care was obtained had been
given care for less than 2 years, one-fourth for 2 to 4 years, and only 10
for 5 years or more. All but 2 of the 10 children cared for 5 years or
more were placed with their own parents or other relatives when dis­
charged. Eight of these 10 children were 12 years of age or over at
the time they were discharged.
A large proportion of those who had been under care for the shorter
periods of time were returned to parents—7 of the 8 who had been in
institutions for three years, 16 of the 19 under care for two years, 22
of the 23 under care for one year, and 58 of the 67 under care for
less than one year.
The following list shows the length of time under care for the 133
children discharged during the year of the study for whom this infor­
mation was obtained :
Length of time under care.

Number.

Total children___________ 133
Less than 6 months____________
6 months, less than 1 year______
1 year, less than 2 -------------------2 years, less than 3____________

42
25
23
19

Length of tim e under care.

3 years, less
4 years, less
5 years, less
6 years, less
8 years, less
9 years, less

than
than
than
than
than
than

Number.

4____________
5____________
6 -----------------7----9 ____________
10 __________

8
6
2
3
2
3

Forty per cent of the children remaining in institutions had been
cared for less than one year, .25 per cent for one or two years, 19 per
cent for three or four years, 6 per cent for five years, and 10 per cent
for six years or more.
Custodians of children upon discharge.

Information concerning the custodians of the children upon dis­
charge was given for all but 2 of the 474 children reported by 13 insti­
tutions. Three hundred and ninety-nine children were reported re­
turned to their parents or guardians. A change in the situation in
the home through the return of a parent or the remarriage of the
mother or of the father, or the reestablishment of a home through the
assistance of some relative was responsible for the return of most of
these children.
Only 26 children were placed in adoptive homes. Eleven were
placed in family homes—10 being cared for free and 1 boarded. Ten
children were placed with relatives or friends. Twenty-two children
were transferred to another institution; 1 girl was discharged because
she married; and 3 children died.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

METHODS OF THE BOARD OF CHILDREN’S GUARDIANS.
DEPARTMENTS OF WORK.

•

In June, 1923, the organization of the board under the direct
supervision of an executive officer called “ agent” was as follows:
Investigating department, foster-homes department, placing-out de­
partment, medical department, and clerical service.
The work of the placing-out department was being carried on by.
10 placing officers. This branch of the board’s work was seriously
handicapped because, owing to the small number of workers per­
mitted by the limited salary appropriation, each officer had under
her supervision from 200 to 350 children. The foster-homes depart­
ment consisted of two workers who gave all their time to locating
and inspecting family homes in which wards of the board might be
placed. The force of the investigating department consisted of a
supervisor and 3 investigators. In addition to the workers in these
departments the board had a physician on part time, 1 nurse, and a
clerical staff of 7 persons.
INVESTIGATION OF DEPENDENCY AND NEGLECT CASES.

The investigating department, in addition to investigating all
complaints made to the board of children who were neglected,
cruelly treated, or living in immoral surroundings, at the expiration
of temporary commitments reinvestigated conditions in the families
from which the children were removed and had charge of cases in­
volving incorrigibility and court hearings of wards of the board.
On June 30, 1923, there were 1,561 children under the supervision
of the board. A much smaller number of children were committed
to the board by the juvenile court during the fiscal year ended on
that date than in preceding years—a total of 222 children, 27 on
minority commitments and 195 for temporary care. Of these 222
children 67 were committed on petition of the Board of Children’s
Guardians, which had made investigations of complaints. The other
155 were committed by the juvenile court mainly because of delin­
quency, investigation having been made by the staff of the court.
Action for commitment because of dependency or neglect usually
originates with the board. Cases are reported to the board by indi­
viduals, by social agencies, or by the juvenile court, and a thorough
investigation is made of the home and the family in all cases in which
a child is reported as being neglected or cruelly treated or as living in
immoral or unfit surroundings. If on investigation the child is found
to be ‘ ‘destitute of a suitable home, ” the board petitions the court
to commit him to its care. Occasionally children who have run
away from home and are loitering or aimlessly wandering about the
streets, or children who have been abandoned by their parents, are
taken under care by the board until they can be returnee! to relatives
or until action can be taken by the court. The act creating the Board
of Children’s Guardians states that such children may not be kept
longer than one week except by an order of the court.
88962°—241 -— 5

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

57

Crc
00

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA BOARD OF CHILDREN’S GUARDIANS.

Supervisor.
3 investigators.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

FOSTER-HOM ES
DEPA RTM EN T.
2

agents.

PLACING-OUT
D E PA R T M E N T .
10

placing Officers.

M ED ICA L
D E PA R T M E N T .
1

doctor (part tim e).
1 nurse.

\

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

IN V ESTIG A TIN G
DEPA RTM EN T.

i CLER IC A L STAFF.
7 workers.

I

METHODS OF THE BOAED OF CHILDREN’s GUARDIANS.

59

During the fiscal year ended June 30, 1923, the investigating
department received a total of 644 applications and complaints,
involving 1,302 children.1 Applications from parents anch relatives
for the board to care for children numbered 342, involving 585
children. Complaints of unfit surroundings and neglect of children
received from the police department, the public schools, various
organizations, and private individuals, numbered 302, involving 717
children. Of the total of 1,302 children 614 were white and 698
were colored, and 1,021 were of legitimate and 281 of illegitimate
birth.
Investigations were made in all cases, with the result that 440 cases,
involving 854 children, were adjusted by the Board of Children’s
Guardians, and the remainder were referred to other agencies. Most
of the latter were referred to the Associated Charities and the Catho­
lic Charities of Washington; in many of them the families were found
to be in need of financial assistance, and some of them were already
active cases in these organizations.
In only 50 cases, involving 67 children, were petitions filed by the
board in the juvenile court on the ground “ destitute of a suitable
home.” Sixty applications or complaints, involving 157 children,
were referred to the Associated Charities; 56 cases, involving 139
children, to the Catholic Charities; 3 cases, involving 8 children, to
the Juvenile Protective Association; 2 cases, involving 2 children, to
the probation office of the juvenile court; 1 case, involving 1 child, to
the Board of Charities; 2 cases, involving 4 children, to the Red
Cross. At the close of the year 30 cases, involving 70 children, were
under investigation.
Of the 67 children for whom petitions for commitment were filed
in the juvenile court by investigators of the Board of Children’s
Guardians, 7 were committed until they should reach majority (the
age of 21 years), 3 were committed until they should become 18
years of age, and 52 were committed temporarily. Two cases, in­
volving 5 children, were continued,1‘subject to call. ” (In both these
cases it was reported that the families had left the District before the
summonses were served and had not been located.)
In addition to the investigation of new cases, 270 cases, involving
366 children, were reinvestigated at the end of temporary com­
mitments to determine whether conditions were such that these
children should be returned to their parents or relatives. Thirtysix cases, involving 65 wards committed during minority, were re­
investigated with a view to returning the children to parents or rela­
tives, if conditions were favorable. Of these children, 4 were returned
to their homes. The cases of 37 feeble-minded wards in institutions
Were taken up for further investigation. Twelve cases, involving 22
wards, were reinvestigated to find out whether the parents could con­
tribute toward the children’s support.
THE POLICY OP THE BOARD IN REGARD TO PLACEMENT.

An early report of'the board contains the statement: “ The policy
of the board has been to find free homes for its Wards as soon as they
are fitted to go into such homes. Until that time they are kept in
i D ata from manuscript report of the investigating department of the Board of Children’s Guardians for
the year ended June 30, 1923.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

60

suitable boarding homes or institutions.” 3 This has continued to be
the policy of the board, especially in providing for children committed
because of dependency.
_
_
Wards of the board are placed in family homes rather than m
institutions when such arrangement can be made. Children who re­
quire institutional care because of their mental condition, or because
their conduct or physical condition is such that they can not be
satisfactorily placed in a family home, constitute^ a very large pro­
portion of those who are provided for in institutions. Analysis of
the statistics relating to the placement of wards of the board shows
that at the end of each year approximately three-fourths of the
children were in family homes. Within the year preceding this
study special emphasis had been put on the advantages of family
homes for the care of children, and an effort was being made by the
executive of the board to secure more homes of the better class m
which children could be placed either free or at board.
P L A C E M E N T S O F W A R D S O N J U N E 30, 1923.

Of the 1,561 children under care of the board at the end of the fis­
cal year 1923, almost three-fifths were in free homes or were living
in homes on trial for adoption, were with relatives (including their
own parents) and other persons to whom no board was being paid,
or were supporting themselves and either living in their places of
employment or paying their own board in private families; only onethird were being cared for at public expense in boarding homes and
institutions.
_
- ±„ «,
The distribution of wards under care of the Board oi Childrens
Guardians on June 30, 1923, was as follows:3
Per cent disNumber.

Total wards__ — --------------- .Jl__---------- 1,561

In free homes 4: -----.— ?------------- --------- - - - - - -

^46

tribution..

100

55

In boarding homes------------------------ '- - - -----------In wage homes 5 ------------ - ------------ - -----------------

6 J"

*

Inhospitals----------------- --— - - — - - ----- ---------Whereabouts unknown----------------- ------ ------------

»4

o

21

SIMILARITY WITH M ETHODS OF LEADING STATES.

The following data will be of interest as giving a comparison of the
types of placement used by certain States engaged in public childcaring work somewhat similar to that in the District of Columbia.
For the children under the care of the division of child guardianship
of the Massachusetts Department of Public Welfare the distribution
on November 30, 1922,7was as follows:
2 Report

of the Board of Children’s Guardians of the District of Columbia for the Fiscal Year Ended

^ R e p o r t o f the Board of Charities of the District of Columbia, 1923, p. 108.
:
,.,
4 Including parental homes of children under supervision of the board and homes m which working chil­
dren were paving their own board, as well as the type of family homes usually classed as free.
6 Including family homes in which older children were living and receiving wages m return for full-time
n l S g 90 in the Industrial Home School for Colored Children who were being cared for at public
exnense b u t for whom the board did not pay from its appropriation.
iJiv . .
. , t>
^ 7 Report of division of child guardianship for the year ended November 30, 1922, m Annual Report of
Departpaent of Public Welfare, Massachusetts. Boston.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

METHODS OE THE BOARD ÔE CHILDREN *S GUARDIANS.
Per cent distribution.

Number.

Total wards

6, 127

In free homes_________,________ . ____ ____

100

ygg

In boarding homes_____________ ______ 3 759
In wage homes . . A . . _____ ____ *
~”
I
Other places____ ______ ___________ I ____”_____

’ 692

In institutions.________ ,_±__ ____ ___
Whereabouts unknown ______________________

711
108

61

12

61
11

99

2
12
2

The New Jersey State Board of Children’s Guardians reports the
distribution of its wards on June 30, 1922, as follows: 8
Total wards.____ ____ ________________

Per cent distribution.

Number.

2,973

100

In free homes__________ •___ _________________i 067
In boarding homes__________ ___^ __ ________ 1, 906

36
64

The Ohio Department of Public Welfare in its reportfor theyear
ended June 30, 1922,9 gives the following statistics for the wards of
its child-care division for the fiscal year:
Number.

Per cent distribution.

Total wards-------- _-------------------_______ 1, 990

100

In free foster homes, under supervision of chil­
dren’s bureau.._____ *;!__ _ _ _ _____ ____________________l 415
At board in private families__________________ ’ 575

7i
29

l

j

. Of the children under the jurisdiction of the West Virginia State
Board of Children’s Guardians on August 1, 1923, 839 were in free
family homes and 5 were temporarily in boarding homes; only 14
were in an institution.10
The Minnesota State Public School represents a type of provision
for dependent children that is paralleled in a number of States, among
them Michigan, Wisconsin, Colorado, Rhode Island, Nebraska,
Kansas, and Missouri. The institution or “ school” is used as a
temporary home for children until they can be placed out in family
homes. This system was originated in Michigan in 1874, with the
intention of promoting family-home care for dependent children and
avoiding the experience of some of the older States in which insti­
tutions had been fostered through the State subsidy system. The
^ ^ or many of these “ schools ’ or “ homes,” which are in reality
child-placing agencies with an institutional adjunct for temporary
care, will be found to be similar to the following in regard to the
status^ of wards of the Minnesota State Public School on June 30,
1922 :
, Number.

Per cent dis-

tribution.

Total wards----------------------- ---------------- 1,489

100

Placed out in family homes.___ _____...________1 177
In the institution temporarily. _____ ____ ______ ’ 312

79
21

Of the wards of the public agency of the District 79 per cent were
in family homes under supervision of the board. In Massachusetts
the proportion in family homes was larger (84 per cent); and in New
®Report of New Jersey State Board of Children’s Guardians for the Year 1922, p. 16.
,nTr
-Report of the Ohio Department of Public Welfare, for the year ended June 30.1922. p. 48.

10Unpublished data received from the board.
11 Biennial

Report, State Public School, Minnesota, Period Ended June 30, 1922, p. 4 .


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

62

Jersey and Ohio all dependent State wards were so provided for,
as were also the majority of the wards of the West Virginia board.
Of the children under the jurisdiction of the Minnesota State agency
79 per cent were in family homes and 21 per cent were temporarily
in the institution conducted by the State for its dependent wards.
From the foregoing data it is seen that in respect to the proportion
of its wards placed in family homes the work of the Board of Children s
Guardians of the District of Columbia closely parallels that of certain
States which lead in provision for the care and protection of dependent
children.
PRESENT POLICY COMPARED WITH THAT OF PREVIOUS YEARS.

On June 30, 1923, 82 per cent of the children who had been made
wards of the board for minority were in family homes, and 10 per cent
were in institutions. The remaining 8 per cent comprised runaway
children and children receiving hospital care. During the preceding
28 years of the board’s activity the percentages of wards m family
homes on the last day of each fiscal year ranged from 60 to 84. The
lowest percentages were found in the-10 years preceding 1923.
In the following tabular statement the percentages of wards during
minority who were in family homes on June 30 of each year are shown
in comparison with .the corresponding percentages in institutions.
The latter ranged from 27 per cent (in 1915) to 10 per cent (in 1910
and 1923).
Year.

1895_______
1896 _____ _____
_______
18971898____ ________
1899_______ _______
1900_______ _______
_______
1901- _
1902 _ . _ ________
1903_______ _______
1904-________
1905- -_ -_ _____
_____
1906 ___ __
1907_______ _______
_____
1908_______
1909_______ _______

of wards
in family
homes.1*

79
81
81
78
76
77
74
78
79
74
81
83
84
83
80

Per cent
of wards
in institutions.

Year.

Per cent
of wards
in family
homes.11

1910_,___ - ______
1911________ ______
1912 _ •_____ _____
_
1913________
1914________ ______
1915________ _ _
1916________ ______
1917________ ______
1918________ ______
21 1919________ _____
15 1920________ ______
12 1921________
10 1922________ ______
11 1923________ ______

18
15
15
16
19
17
19
16
16

81
77
73
72
66

63
60
62
67

68
68

71
74
82

Per cent
of wards
in insti-'
tutions.

12

14
18
19
24
27
25

20

16

12

15
15
14
10

12

FAMILY-HOME PLACEMENTS.
M ETHOD OF SELECTING HOM ES.

The board’s procedure in selecting homes for wards is as follows:
Persons who desire to take children into their homes are required to
furnish three references in addition to the minister of the church which
they attend and the family physician and to satisfy the board that
the children will be well cared for both physically and morally. The
references are interviewed and some independent references are also
seen. Accessibility to church and school and facilities for play under
safe conditions as well as the character and economic condition of
the members of the family are carefully considered.
18 Including those placed with parents and in wage homes.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

METHODS OF THE BOARD OF CHILDREN’s GUARDIANS.

63

Every applicant for a child to be taken for possible adoption, for
wages, or on free arrangement is required to state the object in taking
a child, the kind and amount of work required, if any, and previous
experience with children. Special inquiry is made as to whether the
family has ever had children from other agencies. The persons named
as references are questioned as to their relationship to the family,
the length of their acquaintance, and the disposition, habits, church
attendance, and financial condition of the person who has aDplied for
the child.
If the information obtained appears to be satisfactory, an agent of
the board visits the home and talks with the woman who would have
charge of the child and with as many other members of the family as
possible and inspects the home with reference to sleeping quarters,
facilities for play, and other conditions.
The act of Congress making appropriations for the fiscal year 1902
required that children should, when practicable, be placed in homes
where they would be brought up in the religious faith of their parents;
and the board adopted a rule to the same effect soon after its organ­
ization.13 White children are always placed with white women and
negro children with negro women, except that if a very young white
child is sick or in need of special care and no other suitable home is
available at the time, he may be placed, very temporarily, in the home
of a competent negro woman.
GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION OF HOM ES.

Since the establishment of the Board of Children’s Guardians its
wards have been placed in 30 different States. The largest number of
States in which the board had wards in a single year was 20.
In 1897, the first year for which figures as to the geographical
distribution of the wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians are
available, the board was caring for 145 children in the District of
Columbia, 78 in Virginia, 52 in Maryland, and 22 in 5 other States
(Alabama, Delaware, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania).
Less than half the wards of the board were being provided for in the
District.
On May 15, 1921, 360 (about one-fifth) of the wards of the board
under minority commitment were living outside the District. The
largest number (195) were in Virginia, 114 were in Maryland, 14 in
Pennsylvania, 7 in West Virginia, 6 in New York, 6 in Illinois, 4 in
New Jersey, 3 in California, 3 in Georgia, 2 in North Dakota, and 1
in each of the following: Florida, Kentucky, Ohio, Tennessee, Texas,
and Canada. Nine of those in Virginia were in institutions to which
they had been committed by the court; 26 of those in Maryland were
in institutions for delinquents in which they had been placed by the
board. Nine others were in institutions outside the District. Fortyone were in boarding homes in Maryland, and 36 were in boarding
homes in Virginia. A very large proportion of those in family homes
other than boarding homes were with relatives, although 4 were in
wage homes and 28 in prospective adoptive homes. The wards of the
board in distant States had usually gone away with relatives or had
gone to take positions. Many of them were nearly 21 years of age.
13 Report of the Board of Children’s Guardians of the District of Columbia for the fiscal year ended
June 30, 1901, p. 10.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

64

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OE COLUMBIA.

Practically all the children who had been placed in family homes
outside the District were “ on trial with relatives or friends/ on trial
for adoption, or apprenticed or indentured. Up to 1915 (the latest
year for which information was available from printed reports), the
board had placed very few children in hoarding homes outside the
District of Columbia; 11 is the largest number reported in any one
year, and for several years there was only 1.
' _•
The number of wards of the board in institutions outside the
District of Columbia has varied from 15 to 90—the largest proportion
in any year being approximately one-fifth, of the entire number of
wards who were m institutions. The fact that there were no local
institutions for certain types of cases has always made it necessary
for the board to place a certain number of children in institutions m
neighboring States.14
4
,
In each year for which information was obtained a larger number ot
children have been provided for in private homes in Virginia than in
any other State, the number ranging from 78 in 1897 to 355 in 1910.
In some years as many as one-fourth of the entire number under care,
and never less than one-tenth of the wards, were in homes in Virginia.
A much smaller number of wards have been provided for in homes in
Maryland, the largest number in any year being 104. The percentage
of the entire number under ,care who were provided for in Maryland
homes decreased from 18 per cent in the earlier years to 3 per cent
in 1915.
THE USE OF BOARDING AND FREE HOM ES.

The figures previously cited show that on June 30, 1923, 320 (21
per cent) of the 1,561 children under care of the board were in board­
ing homes and 846 (55 per cent) in free homes. In comparing the
figure for free homes with data from other child-caring agencies it
must be kept in mind that the board uses the term free home as
covering not only the family homes usually classified as free homes
but also homes in which working children are paying their own board
and homes of parents or other relatives in which wards are under
supervision of the board.
Comparison of the use made of boarding homes and ot tree homes
shows that the proportion of permanent wards being cared for in
boarding homes on June 30, 1923 (18 per cent), was lower than the
proportions for the preceding six years and that a larger proportion
of wards were in free homes at the end of the last fiscal year then ever
before. The percentages of children in boarding homes ranged from
7 to 29 in the 29 years. There is a curious similarity between the
figures for the first five years of the board’s activity and those for the
last seven years, the years between showing a gradual decline with
low figures for 10 years, followed by an increase.
The data concerning the use of free homes, on the other hand,
show a fairly regular increase for the first 15 years, followed by a
decline for 11 years and again by an upward trend. In 1923, 59 per
cent of the permanent wards of the board were in free homes—a
figure considerably higher than for any of the preceding years.
For 9 years of the 29, two-fifths or more of the children under minor­
ity commitment were cared for in free family homes. The following
figures show what proportions of the wards of the Board of Chil« See Table 4 in appendix, pp. 146-147, for data regarding institutions used by the board.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

METHODS OF THE BOARD OF CHILDREN V GT7ARDIANS.

65

dren’s Guardians under minority commitment were in free and in
boarding homes at the end of each fiscal year since the board was
established;
Year.

Per cent
Per cent
of minority of minorwards in ity wards
boarding
in free
homes.
homes.

18
23
1895
____ ______
12
21
1896_______ ______
16
23
1897_______ ______
16
29
1898_______
20
20
1899_______ ______
24
17
1900_______ ______
24
16
1901_______ ______
22
16
1902_______ ______
28
13
1903_______ ______
25
13
1904_______ ______
34
12
1905_______ ______
40
9
1906_______ ______
42
8
1907_______ ______
42
9
1908_______ ______
44
7
1909_______ ______
Minority and temporary commitments.

Per cent Per cent
of m inority of minorwards in ity wards
boarding
in free
homes.
homes.

Year.

1 9 1 0 ____
1911_____
1912. _
1913_____
1914____
1915____
1916_ ___
1917____
1918____
1919_____
1920 ___
1921_____
1922____
1923____

9
9

11

16
17
15
17

22
20

25
28

20

25
18

42
40
36
33
31
31
29
29
36
36
33
43
44
59

The preceding figures relating to children committed to the board
during minority show an interesting contrast with the percentages
of children temporarily committed who were in the various types of
placement at the end of each fiscal year. As would be expected, the
percentages in institutions were about twice as high for the children
under temporary care as for those committed during minority.15
Similarly the figures for children placed in boarding homes ranged
from 15 to 28 per cent for the children under minority commitment
but from 35 to 48 per cent for the temporary wards. Free homes,
on the contrary, were used for 29 to 59 per cent of the children under
long-time care, as compared with 3 to 25 per cent of the temporary
wards.
Placements of white and negro children.

For the 18 years preceding 1922 for which figures on the basis of
race are available the proportion of negro minority wards placed in
all types of family homes averaged over 7 per cent more than the
corresponding proportion of white children—75 as compared with 68
per cent; and the proportion of negro children in institutions aver­
aged 11 per cent less than that of white children—A3 as compared
with 24 per cent. The proportion of placements in family homes
has markedly increased in the last 2 years for white children and
in the last year for negro children, the percentages being as follows:
1922, 82 for white and 69 for negro; 1923, 86 for white and 79 for
negro.16 The percentages of the children of the two races placed in
free homes are very much alike, ranging from 27 to 61 per cent for
the white and from 25 to 58 per cent for the negro children. For
wards in boarding homes, on the other hand, the percentages were
considerably lower for the white than for the negro children, except
in the last lour years, when they were similar for the two races.
Number of children in a home.

It was the policy of the board to place as few children as possible
in each home, but the number varied considerably according to conn See Table 2 in appendix, p. 144.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

16 See Table 1 in appendix, p. 143.

66

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA.

ditions. I t was sometimes found advisable to place several children
with a caretaker who was considered by the board to be well adapted
to work of this kind and who was wiling to give all her time to the
care of children of special ages and types. A few homes cared for
only tuberculous children or feeble-minded children, and others re­
ceived only children under 3 years of age.
On May 15, 1921, the end of the year covered by the analysis of
record data, 465 wards of the board were being boarded in 190
private homes. I t was the board’s policy to keep brothers and
sisters together in the same family home wherever possible, and a
number of the homes which were boarding more than one child were
caring for two or more members of a family.
The following list shows the distribution of the children boarded
in the 190 homes, by number of children per home:
Number of
children per home.

Total__ __

Number
of homes.

190
—

1______________
2 ___

3 ______________
4 _ ________

68

50
34
18

Number of
children per home.

Number of
children.

465
'---68

5______________
6
8

__________________
__________________

100

9 ______________

102

10

_________________

Number
of homes.

9
7

1
2
1

Number of
children.

45
42
8

18

10

72

Amount of board paid.

At the time of the study the amount of board paid for a child was
$20 a month, except for infants and for older children in need of
special food or extra care. From $25 to $37.50 a month has been
paid for children suffering from tuberculosis and others who required
special care. For feeble-minded children $25 a month was paid in
family homes, and for children who presented behavior problems as
much as $37.50 a month has been paid. From the amount received
the caretaker was required to replace the child’s clothing when
necessary. The Board of Children’s Guardians provided necessary
medical and dental treatment.
In this connection it is interesting to note that in 1917 a special
committee appointed by the board made a study of the amounts
paid in other localities for the board of children in private homes
and recommended that the rate be increased from $10 to $12 a month
for children over 3 years of age, from $11 to $13 for children under
3 years of age, from $12 to $14 for chronically sick children, and
from $13 to $15 for feeble-minded children. A few months later the
board decided to increase the rates by adding $3 a month in each
case. In the following year it was found necessary to increase the
rate of board to $20 a month for children over 3 years of age, $21
for children under 3 years of age, and $22 for chronically sick and
for feeble-minded children.
Data obtained by the Children’s Bureau in a recent study of child­
caring agencies which board children in family homes indicate that
the amount of board usually paid by the Board of Children’s Guard­
ians—$20 to $22 a month, or $4.50 to $5 a week—is approximately
the same as that paid by agencies in other cities. The amounts
paid by the societies studied are as follows:
One agency in Philadelphia: Regular rates, $3.50 a week; for babies, $4;
maximum rate, $5. In temporary homes—regular rate, for children over 2
years of age, $5; for children under 2, $7; maximum rate, $9.
A second agency in Philadelphia: Regular rate, $6 a week; for babies, usually
$ 10; maximum rate, $ 12.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

METHODS OF THE BOARD OF CHILDREN » GUARDIANS.

67

An agency in Detroit: Average rate, $4.50 a week; for babies, $5; maximum
rate, $7 to $10 (seldom paid).
A second agency in Detroit: Regular rate, for children over 2, $4.50 a week;
for babies, $5; in special cases, $6 or $8.
An agency in Chicago: Regular rate, for children over 2, $4.50 a week; for
children under 2, $5; maximum rate, $ 10.
An agency in St. Louis: Regular rate, for children over 2, $3.50 a week; for
children under 2, $3.75; maximum rate, $6.25.
INDENTURE DISCONTINUED.

The policy of placing children in homes on indenture or as ap­
prentices was discontinued by the Board of Children’s Guardians in
1914.17 However, two of the older children under the hoard’s care
were still apprentices, and 16 were on indenture at the end of the
year of the record study. Although the terms of the indenture dif­
fered somewhat from time to time, the usual contract was for a total
of $50 to be paid to the board for the benefit of the child in annual
installments until he became 18 years of age. The money was placed
at interest by the board and paid to the child when he became 21
years of age. The person who received a child on indenture agreed
■?to treat said child properly and kindly at all times as a member
of his family.” Other provisions of the contract were in part as
follows:
That he will provide the child suitable and sufficient clothing for all seasons
of the year, for week days, and for attending public religious worship, and with
suitable food and other necessaries, including medical attendance in health and
sickness, and a decent burial in case of the death of sa id ---------after having
lived two years continuously in the family. * * * That he will have it
taught some useful occupation and the branches usually taught in the common
schools, causing it to attend the public schools. * * *

It was the policy of the board to require a period of trial indenture,
varying in length, before the final contract was made.
POLICY REGARDING ADOPTIONS.

Only in exceptional cases was a child placed in a home on trial
for adoption before he had been a ward ot the board for at least one
year. This policy was followed to give opportunity for the loca­
tion of some relative who would be able to provide for the child
permanently and also to make sure of the character of the foster
home and the adaptability of the child to it. In arranging for the
legal adoption of a child under minority commitment it was the
policy of the board to obtain the written consent of the parents be­
fore a witness, or, if neither parent was living, the consent of the
nearest relative. A large number of children were kept year after
year in boarding homes with the expectation that eventually they
could be returned to their own parents or because of the unwilling­
ness of the parents to relinquish claim to them. The board had a
number of very desirable homes in which children could be placed
for adoption, but the number of children available for such place­
ments was small. Adoption homes could be found readily for chil­
dren (especially foundlings) under 6 years of age who were normal
mentally and without family ties.
HOM ES FOR HANDICAPPED CHILDREN.

Special care was taken in placing children suffering from tuber­
culosis and venereal disease, Doth for their own sake and for the
•17 N o

wards of the board remained in apprenticeship or on indenture after December, 1922.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

68

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

purpose of protecting other children from infection. Tuberculous
children were so placed that they could attend an outdoor school.
Several boarding homes were reserved for these children, and special
emphasis was placed on diet and general living conditions, as well as
on regular attendance at a clinic for treatment. Active cases of
tuberculosis were treated in the tuberculosis hospital and in the
children’s hospital (children under 12 years), and no child was
considered cured and eligible to be placed in a home with nontuberculous children until a “ recovery card” had been granted by
the attending physician. Country homes in Maryland and Virginia
were used for the care of many oi the children and were considered
especially desirable for children with any tendency toward tuber­
culosis.
PLACEMENT W ITH OW N FAMILY.

As the majority of the children became wards of the Board of
Children’s Guardians because of unsatisfactory conditions in the
home, only in exceptional cases was it deemed advisable to place them
with their own parents, under supervision, as soon as they were
received by the board. Thirty-six children were so placed on trial
as soon as they were committed to the board. These included
children who had run away from home and were returned, children
who were removed from relatives other than their own parents, and
children whose parents had separated and who after being removed
from one parent were placed with the other.
Whenever home conditions had sufficiently improved or the child’s
conduct was such as to warrant his return to his parents, he was placed
on trial in his own home, and if the arrangement was satisfactory he
was allowed to remain; but he continued to be under the supervision
of the board and was visited by a placing officer at regular intervals.
This method had been followed ever since the board was established.
At first such children were said to be “ placed on probation to their
parents” ; later the term was changed to “ placed on trial with their
parents.”
Of the entire group of children included in this study of record data
one-fifth (516) Were placed in the homes of their parents a t some time
while under the care of the board, remaining under supervision. I t
would appear that in at least one-third of these cases the arrangement
was not regarded as satisfactory, as only 346 children were living in
their parental homes at the time of discharge or at the end of the year.
SELF-SUPPORTING WARDS.

I t was the general policy of the board to keep the children in
school until they became 16 years of age. Children who Were habitual
truants or difficult cases in school, or who were unable to make the
usual progress, were allowed to go to work when 14 or 15. Of the
children under care of the board on May 15,1921,194 were working,
and the occupations of 157 were reported. The largest number in
any occupational group (with the exception of the 39 enlisted in the
Army, Navy, and Marine Corps) were the 38 employed in domestic
service. Twenty-four were working on farms; 12 were in the Govern­
ment service (10 as clerks or stenographers and 2 as messengers);
8 were employed in stores (2 as clerks and 6 as bundle wrappers or
messengers); 4 were clerks in private offices; 3 were working as
apprentices in skilled trades; 5 were factory or laundry operatives;

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

METHODS OE THE BOARD OE CHILDREN S GUARDIANS.

69

and 24 were engaged in other occupations (including drivers of
delivery wagons, elevator boys, “ helpers” for carpenters, electricians,
hucksters, and a lamplighter, a bootblack, a waitress, a teacher, and
a nurse in training).
In addition, there was a large group of children 16 years of age and
over who were working and paying their own board in family homes.
I t was impossible to ascertain the exact number of such children, as
all children for whom the board was not paying were considered as
being in free homes. INSTITUTIONAL CARE.

In the 29 years of the Work of the Board of Children’s Guardians
more than 40 institutions under private control and 3 under the
management of the public authorities have been used by the board
for the care of children who were its wards. A table giving the
names of these institutions and the number of children under care in
each institution at the end of each fiscal year from 1895 to 1923 is
given in the appendix, pages 145-147.
N U M B E R O F C H IL D R E N IN IN S T IT U T IO N S .

A preceding section discussed the percentages of placements in
institutions as compared with the percentages of family-home place­
ments over a period of years.18 I t was shown that on June 30, 1923,
82 per cent of the minority wards of the boards were in f amily homes
and 10 per cent in institutions. For all wards (including those on
temporary commitment) these percentages were 79 and 13,. respec­
tively.
The following list shows the number of wards of the board (tem­
porary and permanent) who were being cared for in institutions of
different types on June 30, 1923:
Institutions.

Number.

Total wards in institutions

__ ____________ ___

202

Industrial Home School for Colored Children_____________ 19 90
Temporary home for negro children____ ________________
55
8
Institutions for dependent children__ ____ _______________
Institutions for delinquent children______________________
22
Institutions for feeble-minded children___________________
27

The situation represented in the above figures is not entirely
comparable with the conditions found in preceding years, because
of the change in the board’s policy concerning the use of the Indus­
trial Home School (for white children). Therefore data pertaining
to children in institutions on May 15, 1921—the end of the year of
the special record study—are here given :
Institutions.

/

Number.

Total wards in institutions_______________________ 20393
Industrial Home School (for white children)____ _
90
Industrial Home School for Colored Children_________ ___ 19 84
Temporary home for negro children_____________ ________
79
Institutions for dependent children____________________ _
15
Institutions for delinquent children_____ _________________
86
Institutions for feeble-minded children-____i_____________
28
Hospital for the insane_________i _■iLvj',______ ^__________
7
School for the blind________ __________________________
3
School for the crippled_________________________________
1
is See p. 62.

19 Boys

only.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

20 Excluding

57 children who “ absconded” from institutions.

VO

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OE COLUMBIA.

Two of these institutions, the industrial home schools, were under
the direct control of the District of Columbia. One institution
under private auspices^ tlie temporary ^liome for colored cnildrent
cared only for wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians.
Reference has already been made to the fact that although 1,751
children, or nearly three-fourths of those included in the record
study, had been in institutions at some time while they were wards
of the board, only 393, or about one-fourth, were in institutions at
the end of the year or at the time when they were released from
care. In addition to the 393 children who were in institutions under
the supervision of the board at the end of the year of the record
study and 135 children who had been released from supervision while
in institutions, there were 76 who had been in institutions but had
run away while wards of the board.
INSTITUTIONS UNDER DISTRICT CONTROL.

The Industrial Home School, which provided for white boys and
girls between the ages of 6 and 14 years, and the Industrial Home
School for Colored Children, which received only negro boys between
the ages of 10 and 19 years, were maintained for the care of wards of
the Board of Children’s Guardians. Admission to these institutions
was through the Board of Children’s Guardians.
Until 1923, when the Industrial Home School was placed under the
Board of Children’s Guardians, the school had a separate board. The
Industrial Home School for Colored Children is under the direct con­
trol of the Commissioners of the District of Columbia.
Prior to 1910 the Board of Children’s Guardians paid out of its own
funds the maintenance of its wards who were being cared for in insti­
tutions in the city, including the industrial home schools. In 1910
the appropriations to these schools Avere increased so that wards of
the board might be provided for without any payment by the board.
The Industrial Home School.

The early history of the Industrial Home School and its transition
into a public institution are described in another section of this
report.22
For several years the Industrial Home School was considered a
permanent home for dependent children, and it was unusual for the
board to remove a child once committed to the home to place him in a
private home. At the time of the study, however, it was the policy
of the Board of Children’s Guardians to use the school as a home for
children who for some reason could not be placed in private homes or
as a temporary home for children who would be cared for otherwise
as soon as suitable homes were available.
The children in the institution had their own school on the grounds,
the classes being conducted by teachers assigned by the District
school department. The boys worked on the farm and in the green­
houses under the supervision of the persons in charge, and the girls
were taught to sew; there was no other instruction outside the
schoolroom. Material and tools were on hand for manual training,
but at the time of the study no teacher was provided for such work.
A young man who had formerly been in the school voluntarily acted


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

METHODS OF THE BOARD OF CHILDREN’S GUARDIANS.

71

as athletic director for the boys, giving his services for two hours
every afternoon.
.
On May 15, 1921, 90 children were being cared for in the institu­
tion. In the summer of 1921 one of the workers of the board under­
took to supervise all wards of the board in the Industrial Home
School and made particular efforts to learn their individual needs,
with the idea of placing them in private homes as soon as possible.
During the following year the population of the institution was
entirely depleted, and for some months no children were placed in the
school. This situation was brought about mainly because of diver­
gent opinions held by the managing boards of the Board of Children’s
Guardians and the Industrial Home School. A solution was appar­
ently arrived at when Congress abolished the separate board of
trustees of the Industrial Home School and placed the agency and
the institution under the management of one board.23
The Industrial Home School for Colored Children.

For many years the board lacked necessary provision for the care
of negro wards.24 The report of the Board of Children’s Guardians
for the year ended June 30, 1901, made the following statement in
regard to the need for an industrial home for negro children:
Since the benefits of the present Industrial Home School of the District are
"confined to white children, there is need of a similar institution for colored children.
A committee of this board was appointed April 13, 1901, to confer with a com­
mittee of the Board of Charities upon this subject and reported that the latter
committee had intimated its purpose to recommend the establishment of such a
school.25

The Industrial Home School for Colored Children of the District
of Columbia was created by an act of Congress and came into existence
July 1, 1907. The institution has approximately 120 acres of land,
four modern cottages, an administration building, and a school
building. The school is operated on the cottage plan. The popu­
lation of about 90 boys is distributed among four cottages. Each
cottage family is governed by a housemother or caretaker, who
prepares the boys’ meals, mends their clothing, and directs them in
household duties assigned to them.
The report of the Board of Charities for 1922 recommended that
an additional appropriation be made for the Industrial Home School
for Colored Children.
This school, which can accommodate only 90 boys, is filled at all times with
colored boys in need of special training. The school is admirably conducted and
renders the most satisfactory service. It is for colored boys only and is adminis­
tered by a staff of colored people, including a colored superintendent in charge.
We earnestly recommend appropriations to build additional cottages at this
institution. There are now kept in private institutions at public expense a
sufficient number of colored boys to fill three additional cottages. We recom­
mend also that a small cottage be built as a home for the superintendent and his
family. Conditions in this respect are most unfortunate. The superintendent
2» In December, 1923, the board asked the Commissioners of the District for authority to accept a farm
near Annapolis Junction, M d., on which to establish an institution for care of wards, to be used for children
for whom institutional care is indispensable. A t the same tim e it was suggested th a t the Industrial Home
School property be sold and th at a conveniently located ‘‘temporary ’’receiving home be provided.
24 On November 10,1897, the board entered into a contract w ith Prof. William H . H . H art for the care,
maintenance, and training of male negro wards between the ages of 8 and 18 years at his farm, which was
situated in M aryland a short distance outside the District. This arrangement contmued until June 30,
1906. Twenty-one boys were cared for a t the H art Farm School during the fiscal year ended June 30,1899,
and a larger number during each of the following years. Sixty boys were provided for in this institution
during each of the last four years of its existence.
„
. ,_
28 Report of the Board of Children’s Guardians for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1901, p. 13.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

72

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

has not been able to find room enough in any building to shelter his family, which
consists of himself, wife, and four children. Part of his family must now live
away from the institution. Such conditions are likely to result in our losing a
most valuable man at any time and then render it almost impossible to secure
a proper man in case of a vacancy.26

Teachers from the District school department were assigned to
this school, and a special teacher was provided for mentally defective
boys. All boys were required to attend school half the day and
work in the shop or on the farm the other half of the day. The boys
did practically all the necessary work about the place, and an attempt
was made to teach each one every part of the work so that his train­
ing might be of value to him when he left the institution. There
were 84 boys in this institution at the end of the year of the study.
There is no similar provision for negro girls. The following
statement on the need of such provision is made by the Board of
Children’s Guardians in its annual report for 1920:
An industrial home school for colored girls is greatly needed here. Many of
the older colored girls committed to us would go to the National Training School
if there was room there for them, and others of the less incorrigible type need the
discipline of an institution and should be in an industrial school where they ean
be properly trained for usefulness.27

In discussing the facilities available for the care of its wards, the
Board of Children’s Guardians in November, 1923, again emphasized
the need for additional cottages at the Industrial Home School at
Blue Plains for the care of delinquent negro girls.,
PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS USED BY THE BOARD.

Institutions for dependent children.

On June 30, 1923, 59 wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians
were being cared for in private institutions for dependent children.
A privately conducted institution known as the Children’s Tem­
porary Home, which received only negro boys 7 years of age and
over who were wards of the board, was caring for 55 of the 59. Board
was paid for these children by the board at the rate of $25 a month.
A public school with two teachers in charge had recently been opened
on the grounds, and plans were being’made to start a class in manual
training. Several acres of ground allowed sufficient space for out­
door work and recreation.
Since 1905 the board has provided for the care of its wards in
private institutions for dependent children in one of two ways—by
making private arrangements and paying board for them out of the
appropriation for the maintenance of wards or through the use of
the funds made available for special contracts. Under the latter
arrangement the institutions are paid out of the appropriations set
aside for this purpose only such amounts as have been earned by
them through providing care for children received from the board.
One of the reasons which led to the creation of the Board of
Children’s Guardians and one of the main arguments for the estab­
lishment of the District Board of Charities was the extensive system
of congressional appropriations for the support of private institu­
tions. The section of this report dealing with the history of private
institutions contains interesting items concerning congressional appro26 Report of the Board of Charities of the District of Columbia, 1922, P-9.
. ^
27 Twenty-seventh Annual Report of the Board, of Children’s Guardians of the District of Colunihia., for
the fiscal year ended June 30,1920, p. 6..


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

METHODS OF THE BOAED OF CHILDEEN ’s GUAKDIANS.

73

priations to aid in the establishment of these institutions and the
beginning of the subsidy system.28 The report of the Joint Select
Committee to Investigate the Charities and Reformatory Institu­
tions in the District of Columbia includes a statement, submitted to
Congress, of the public appropriations for the maintenance of private
institutions for children from 1883 through 1897.29 Figures were
not available for the years prior to 1883. Figures for subsequent
years have been secured from appropriation acts.
From 1883 through the fiscal year ended June 30, 1893, the sub­
sidies to private institutions, 3 to 12 in number, totaled from $16,500
to $54,750. The activities of the Board of Children’s Guardians
began in July, 1893. For the year ended June 30, 1894, the total
appropriations were reduced from $54,750 to $34,800, and during
the following four years the total grants ran from $36,700 to $45,600,
received by 10 or 11 institutions. For the fiscal year 1899-1900
and continuing through the year 1906-7 the number of institutions
receiving subsidies and the amounts were greatly reduced. During
these eight years five or six institutions received grants totaling
from $22,400 to $36,100.
By an act of Congress of March 3, 1905 (33 Stat. 908) the contract
system was put into effect in place of the system of lump-sum appro­
priations. Under this system certain specified institutions were to
care for children under contracts entered into .by the District of
Columbia Board of Charities. Congress appropriated amounts desig­
nated as the maximum that could be used to pay for the care of
wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians. For the year ended
June 30, 1906, such contracts were made with six institutions. In
the following year the number was reduced to five, and beginning
with July 1, 1907, contracts were made with four institutions—the
Washington Home for Foundlings, the National Colored Home, St.
Ann’s Infant Asylum, and the German Orphan Asylum. In 1910
the German Orphan Asylum was dropped from the list of institutions
with which contracts might be made. By an act of Congress of
March 3, 1917 (39 Stat. 1037) the contract arrangements were placed
with the Board of Children’s Guardians instead of the Board of
Charities.
The amounts made available for the contracts ran from $21,000
to $23,300; information was not available until 1917-18 as to the
amounts actually expended. For 1910-11 the annual appropriation
made available for such contracts with the three institutions—the
Washington Home for Foundlings, the National Colored Home, and
St. Ann’s Infant Asylum—was $20,700; for the years from 1911-12
through 1919—20 the amount was $21,900—$9,900 for the care of
wards in the National Colored Home and $6,000 for wards in each
of the other two. During 1917-18 and 1918-19 practically all the
money available was used by the board; during 1919-20 none of
the $9,900 was used for children in the National Colored Home, and
only $8,565 of the remaining $12,000 was used for the care of chil­
dren in the other two institutions. For 1920-21, $5,000 was set aside
for use in each of these three institutions; only $4,547 of the total
$15,000 was used. For 1921-22 and 1922-23 the amounts were
29 P art I.—Hearings; Statements; Reports from Cities; Suggestions for a Board of Charities, p. 91.

88962°—24t------6


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

74

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA.

reduced so that only $2,500 could be used in the National Colored
Home, $1,500 in the Washington Home for Foundlings, and $1,000
in St. Ann’s Infant Asylum, the total available being $5,000. Almost
the whole amount available in 1921-22 for children in the National
Colored Home was expended, but of the other $2,500 only $1,237
was used. No information was obtained as to the amount spent in
this way during 1922-23. In the appropriation act for the fiscal
year 1923-24 (42 Stat. 1360-1361) Congress eliminated all reference
to contracts with private institutions and made no direct appropria­
tions to institutions. The Board of Children’s Guardians, though
not granted any special sum to board children in private institutions,
can, of course, compensate institutions for the care of wards from its
regular appropriation.
Provision for delinquent boys and girls.

Delinquent white boys in need of closer supervision or stricter
discipline than was consistent with the management of the industrial
home schools have usually been placed by the board in an institu­
tion in Baltimore—St. Mary’s Industrial School, a Catholic institu­
tion for boys. Nine of its wards were in this institution on June
30, 1923. There was no institution in the District of 'Columbia in
which delinquent white or negro boys or delinquent negro girls could
be placed by the hoard. Delinquent negro girls were occasionally
placed in institutions outside the District; the Industrial Home for
Colored Girls (for Protestant girls), located just outside Baltimore,
and the House of the Good Shepherd (for Catholic girls) in Balti­
more care for most of the negro girls whom the board finds it neces­
sary to place in institutions. On June 30, 1923, the hoard had 8
wards in the former institution ; in addition it had 5 delinquent girls
in institutions in Virginia.
Delinquent white girls are placed in the House of the Good Shep­
herd in Washington, and girls who have to be provided with maternity
care are placed in the House of Mercy. At the end of the fiscal
year 1923 two white wards of the board were in the House of the
Good Shepherd, and two were in the House of Mercy.
INSTITUTIONAL CARE OF HANDICAPPED CHILDREN.

Institutions for the care of feeble-minded children.

Reference has been made to the fact that there is no local institu­
tion for feeble-minded children and no available institution for the
care of feeble-minded negro children.30
The Training School a t Vineland, N. J., the Pennsylvania Training
School for Feeble-Minded Children at Elwyn, Pa., and the Gundry
School at Falls Church, Va., have received a limited number of the
feeble-minded children who were under the supervision of the board.
On May 15, 1921, there were 90 children in these institutions who
had been placed there by the Board of Children’s Guardians. Of
these children 28 were wards of the board and 62 had been received
under care by the board, without commitment, from parents or
guardians, who were paying a part or all of the cost of maintenance
m the institutions. In addition, 7 wards of the board who had
been committed to the Government Hospital for the Insane were
30 i n June, 1922, Congress made an appropriation for an institution for the feeble-minded.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

METHODS OP THE BOARD OE CHILDREN’s GUARDIANS.

75

still under "supervision. Six of these were feeble-minded and one
was insane.
On June 29, 1922, $250,000 was appropriated by Congress for
an institution for the feeble-minded in the District of Columbia.31
Of this amount $100,000 was to be immediately available, with the
provision that the institution be located at Blue Plains on the land
adjoining the Home for the Aged and Infirm. This location was
considered by the Board of Charities and others interested to be
entirely unsuited for the purpose, and no steps were taken toward
beginning the construction of the institution. On February 28,
1923, the provisions of the original bill were set aside by the passage
of another bill appropriating $300,000. Of this amount $100,000
was to be immediately available—$38,000 for the purchase of a
site in Maryland, Virginia, or the District of Columbia, and the
remaining $62,000 for the erection of buildings. The site has been
purchased in Anne Arundel County, Md., about 20 miles from
Washington, and in August, 1923, plans were being made for the
construction of buildings.
Schools for the physically handicapped.

An annual appropriation is made by Congress for the care of blind
children in suitable institutions in Maryland or other States,32 and
four such children were being cared for in the Maryland School for
the Blind during the school year 1920-21. An 11 year-old white
girl who was permanently crippled as a result of infantile paralysis
was in the Widener Memorial Industrial Training School for Crippled
Children in Philadelphia at the end of the year of the study.
HOSPITAL CARE AND SPECIAL TREATMENT.

Reference has already been made to the fact that a special appronation was made for the care of wards of the board in several of the
ospitals of the District. These included the Children’s Hospital,
receiving children under 12 years of age; Garfield Hospital and
Columbia Hospital, receiving patients 12 years of age and over; and
the Washington Asylum Hospital and Freedmen’s Hospital, receiving
patients of all ages. Although not especially equippedfor the care of
children, the Tuberculosis Hospital received wards of the board for
treatment. The Episcopal Eye, Ear, and Throat Hospital received
children in need of operation or special treatment.
The clinics in connection with the Episcopal Eye, Ear, and Throat
Hospital and the Freedmen’s Hospital were frequently used for
wards of the board, as was also the tuberculosis clinic conducted by
the District of Columbia Health Department. Wards of the board
who had a venereal disease were required to attend the clinic con­
ducted by the District of Columbia Health Department until they
were discharged. No ward suffering from venereal disease was
placed outside the city. In addition to these clinics, the infantwelfare centers maintained by the Child-Welfare Association and
the Instructive Visiting Nurses Association aided in caring for a
number of the younger children under care. Several surgeons and
other specialists in the city rendered valuable assistance in cases
needing special care.

E

3142 Stat. 702 (Act of June 29, 1922), as affected by 42 Stat. 1360 (Act of Feb. 23, 1923).
33 Rev. Stat. 1873-74, secs. 3689 and 4869; 30 Stat. 1101; 35 Stat. 295.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

76

"

CHILD1 DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OE COLUMBIA.

Special effort was made to provide properly for tuberculous chil­
dren in homes where they would receive proper care and would not be
a source of infection tp other children. During the year of the study
44 active cases of tuberculosis were reported, and 10 suspected cases;
14 children who had had tuberculosis were given recovery cards.
A sanatorium for the care of tuberculous children would be a great
benefit to the District and would lighten the duties of the placing
officers in arranging for the care of this class of children.
The executive officer of the board in the annual report for the
year ended June 30, 1920, made the following statement in regard to
one of the urgent needs in connection with the work of the board :
A sanatorium for tuberculous children could be used to great advantage and
should be established at once, if only in a modest way. After careful examina­
tion as many as 50 tuberculous children have been found among the wards of the
board this year, for whom it has been very difficult to provide.. Some of the
younger ones have remained 'for a number of months at Children’s Hospital and
have later been placed in private homes where there were no other children.
Others have been in private homes only and have gone to the tuberculosis school,
and still others have been placed in the tuberculosis hospital.
The reason for the difficulty in finding suitable homes must appear evident.
Many adults are afraid to board children suffering from this disease, in even the
incipient stage, and others are not willing to take the responsibility and give
the necessary care. It necessitates on our part placing them in homes where
there are no other children, and if they are of school age, near the tuberculosis
school. It also means a careful watch to see that instructions are carried out
regarding fresh air, rest, and diet.
The hospitals can not offer ideal conditions for incipient cases, for the reason
that although general care and feeding may be good, the children miss their
school and such recreation as they should have to keep them in a happy frame
of mind.33
THE QUESTION OF AN INSTITUTIONAL ADJUNCT TO THE BOARD.

Since the early years of public child-caring work in the District
there has been discussion of the need for some form of public insti­
tution closely related to the child-caring agency. I t is shown in
other sections of this report34that the Industrial Home School, begin­
ning as a private enterprise, was assumed as a public institution in
1896. After many years of urging of the need for a public institu­
tion for negro children—for whom there was practically no provision
in private institutions—the Industrial Home School for Colored
Children was established in 1907. This school was located in the
country on a tract of 100 acres and was built on the cottage plan.
I t has since been supplemented by an institution for negro boys,
operated under private auspices but caring only for wards of the
Board of Children’s Guardians. Aside from the lack of institutional
provision for negro girls who can not be cared for in family homes,
there seems to have been little recent difficulty in regard to the
question as it relates to negro children.
The problem of the type of institutional care needed for white
wards of the board, however, has been a matter of much discussion.
In 1897, almost immediately after the Industrial Home School was
transferred to the control of the District of Columbia, the president
of the Board of Children’s Guardians, in his statement before the
Joint Select Committee to Investigate the Charities and Reforma­
tory Institutions in the District of Columbia, reported for the board
33 Twenty-seventh Annual Report of the Board of Children’s Guardians, for the fiscal year ended June
30,1920, p. 7.
34 See pp. 114-115.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

METHODS OF THE BOARD OF CHILDREN*S GUARDIANS.

77

on the “ essential features of an ideal system,” including the follow­
ing propositions:
A receiving station conveniently located in the city of Washington, where
would be established the executive offices of the child-caring commission, which
would also provide accommodations for not to exceed 20 children, to which the
police could send any child found homeless about the street, night or day, and
at which would be kept children held under temporary care, pending investiga­
tion of their necessities.
A thoroughly modern child-caring institution, located near some wholesome
country town within 50 miles of Washington and easy of access. This should
consist of one central building for general purposes and grouped about it such
a number of cottages for children and other buildings for special purposes as
might be required. It should occupy a tract of land of such dimensions as
would furnish facilities for the production of the fruit, vegetables, milk, and
meat required for its own use, and for the training of boys in agricultural pur­
suits.35

Until recent years there was considerable difficulty because chil­
dren were received into the Industrial Home School independently
of the Board of Children’s Guardians. The report of the commis­
sioners to Congress in 1904 on the care of delinquent and dependent
children pointed out that—
The Industrial Home School, now a public institution, under the control of
the commissioners and supported entirely by public funds, should be the prin­
cipal receiving and training home for white wards of the Board of Children’s
Guardians, who should be placed there by the authority of the Board of Chil­
dren’s Guardians. No other children should be placed in that institution. 38

The same report pointed out the difficulties existing at that time
in connection with the management of this institution. At that time,
although the school was a public institution, it received wards on
the action of a committee of its own board. I t continued to do so
until 1913, since which time no children have been received directly
by the industrial schools but all have been placed there by the Board
of Children’s Guardians.
In this report the commissioners also recommended that the insti­
tution be removed to larger grounds in the country.
The Board of Childrens Guardians has frequently called attention,
also, to the need for a temporary receiving home especially equipped
for the study of the mental and physical condition of children and
for emergency care.37 The following is quoted from the report of the
board for 1918:
We repeat that one of the greatest needs of the board is a temporary home for
the children where they may be received immediately after commitment and
kept under observation for a short time before being placed. An intelligent
matron would give them kindly care and treatment, free them from communica­
ble skin and scalp diseases, and fumigate their clothing. She would see that the
most important part of the recommended medical work be attended to, and clean,
healthy, and desirable children could be placed in good homes after this period
of observation, in place of the undesirable, dirty, sickly ones which the present
arrangements force us to place in the homes that will receive them. This will
insure the best type of private boarding homes taking more children.
36 P art I.—Hearings; Statements; Reports from Cities; Suggestions for a Board of Charities, p. 456.
36 Care of Delinquent and Dependent Children in the District of, Columbia; letter from the Commis­
sioners of the District of Columbia submitting a plan for the future care of delinquent and dependent
children in the District of Columbia, p. 2. Fifty-eighth Congress, second session, Senate Document No.
85, January 6,1904.
i .,
37 i n December, 1923, the board recommended to the Commissioners of the District th at a “ tem porary”
receiving home be made available for the use of the board to be “ less extensive and more conveniently
located than th e Industrial Home School,” which it is proposed to sell because it is “ not adapted for use as
a temporary receiving home.”


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

78

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA.

A receiving home would be a source of great assistance in caring for all emer­
gency cases, which are so perplexing. It would divert from the District building
a continual traffic which is objectionable and would give the office more working
space, as it is exceedingly difficult, though interesting, to work in an office over­
flowing with children at all hours of the day .
The supply of clothing would be kept there and given out to the children far
more satisfactorily than under the present crowded conditions at the office. If
deemed advisable the doctor would have his semiweekly office hours here, and
later the board hopes to have a well-equipped dental office in such quarters in
order to combine, under the supervision of the doctor and the office, all of the
dentistry which is now being done by five dentists at their private offices.88

TJnder the section of the annual report for the year ended June 30,
1920, dealing with “ some well-known needs” the executive of the
board made a recommendation for the establishment of ‘‘a new in­
dustrial home school for white children on the cottage plan, situated
outside of the city and equipped to give proper vocational instruc­
tion.” 89
The report of tne board of trustees of the Industrial Home School
for 1921 contains the following in regard to the institution and its
needs:
Only children between the ages of 6 and 14 who are mentally normal are de­
sired. * * * For many years this institution was conducted as semiperma­
nent for dependent children, many of them remaining here from the age of 6
years until they had finished high school; and while some were placed outside
in private homes such placement was only made when it was felt to be peculiarly
advantageous to the child. Consequently the turnover in the student body was
comparatively small. For such a home the trustees felt that the institution
should be moved to a small farm and new buildings erected on the cottage system.
The present main building is the old Georgetown almshouse of nearly a hundred
years ago, with additions and improvements, and is felt to be wholly unsuit­
able. * * *
In recent years the Board of Children’s Guardians have adopted a change of
policy in regard to the children committed to our charge; these children are now
only sent to the home until suitable private homes or boarding homes can be
found for them. The institution is also used as a place of temporary commitment
for children until a more permanent disposition can be arranged for. Under these
circumstances it is absolutely necessary that the home should be in the city, and
a great deal of land is not required. The present board of trustees believe,
therefore, that as the present location is high and healthy and contains land
enough for garden and greenhouses it is entirely satisfactory. It is believed,
however, that certain improvements are imperatively demanded. These include
electricity in the place of gas, for lighting purposes; new plumbing; new heating
pipes between the boiler room and the greenhouses; and the tearing down of the
oldest portion of the main building, which has depreciated to such a great extent
as to render it impossible of being repaired for use. As soon as financial condi­
tions permit the board will urge the desirability of tearing down the older buildings
on the grounds and the replacing thereof with other buildings on the cottage
system in order that modern methods of handling children may be more satis­
factorily applied.40

The report of the Board of Charities of the District of Columbia for
1922 discussed the difficulty then existing between the Board of
Children’s Guardians and the Industrial Home School in the following
paragraphs:
During the year (1921-22) there developed a difference of opinion between the
Board of Children’s Guardians and the Industrial Home School which finally
resulted in the closing of that school for the time being. The Board of Charities
made a careful examination of the matters in dispute and on June 22, 1922,
38 Twenty-fifth Annual Report of the Board of Children’s Guardians, for the fiscal year ended June 30,
1918, p. 8.
39 Twenty-seventh Annual Report of the Board of Children’s Guardians of the District of Columbia,
for the fiscal year ended June 30,1920, p. 6.
40 Report of the Board of Trustees of the Industrial Home School of the District of Columbia, in Report
of the Board of Charities of the District of Columbia, 1921, pp. 101,100.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

METHODS OF THE BOARD OF CHILDREN’S GUARDIANS.

79

submitted to the Commissioners of the District of Columbia a report thereon.
Briefly, the point in contention is as follows: The Board of Children’s Guardians
takes the position that it can find suitable family homes for all normal white
children and that an institution is necessary only for the care of abnormal children,
or for the temporary care of children when received, for such period as may be
necessary to afford opportunity for study of mental, moral, and physical character­
istics of the child and for the application of such treatment as may be indicated.
The trustees of the Industrial Home School, on the other hand, maintain that
the institution is the best training for a certain number of dependent children,
some of whom should be allowed to remain in the school for a considerable period
of time. The result of these different views on the part of the two agencies con­
cerned was the closing of the school by virtue of the fact that the Board of
Children’s Guardians, which has legal custody of all dependents, withdrew the
children from the school, and the school has been without children now for
several months.
The property is being cared for by two or three employees who have been
retained for the purpose of harvesting the crops and marketing the flowers from
the greenhouses.
The Board of Charities in its report to the commissioners recommended “ that
the Industrial Home School be used for the purpose of such a receiving home
and for the care of such children as can not be provided for elsewhere.” Unfor­
tunately, because of a lack of unified control, this recommendation has not been
carried out. The members of the Board of Children’s Guardians are appointed
by the judges of the police court and a judge of the Supreme Court of the District
of Columbia. The members of the board of trustees of the Industrial Home
.School are appointed by the commissioners, and there is no authority vested in
anyone that can reconcile the differences that may arise between these agencies.
The Board of Charities has frequently in its annual and in special reports
called attention to the lack of coordination in the control of the charitable and
correctional institutions of the District of Columbia. This controversy over the
Industrial Home School acutely illustrates this lack of coordination. We have
frequently expressed the conviction, which we now reiterate, that all publicwelfare agencies should be under the direction of the Commissioners of the
District of Columbia. All the experience of the added years emphasizes the
wisdom of this recommendation. If authority were thus centralized, it would be
possible when controversies arise, as controversies inevitably will, for the com­
missioners to insure cooperative action.
Several attempts have been made to secure legislation with a view of effecting
a more harmonious organization of public-welfare agencies, but unfortunately
such efforts have not yet resulted in legislative action. There is at present a code
commission appointed by the commissioners, with Mr. Justice Siddons as its
chairman, studying the question with a view of making a report with recom­
mendations for the necessary legislation.
Pending a more comprehensive plan, it would relieve the present situation in
relation to the Industrial Home School if a clause were enacted providing that
the members of the Board of Children’s Guardians should be appointed by the
commissioners and that the control of the Industrial Home School should be in
that board, acting with the approval of the commissioners.41

On February 28, 1923, the following law was passed by Congress
abolishing the board of trustees of the Industrial Home School,
placing the institution under the Board of Children’s Guardians,
and providing that the members of this board be appointed by the
Commissioners of the District of Columbia:
Board of Children's Guardians appointed by commissioners; powers of trustees of
Industrial Home School transferred to board.— * * * Provided, That the board
of trustees of the Industrial Home School of the District of Columbia is abolished
on and after the date of the approval of this act, and thereafter the powers and
duties of such board as specified and restricted by law shall be transferred to and
vested in the Board of Children’s Guardians: Provided further, That on and after
the date of the approval of this act the authority to appoint and remove members
of the Board of Children’s Guardians is transferred from the judges of the police
court and the judge holding the criminal court of the District of Columbia to the
Commissioners of the District of Columbia, and shall be exercised by them in
accordance with section 2 of the act of July 26, 1892 (Twenty-seventh Statutes,
41 Report of the Board of Charities of the District of Columbia, 1922, p. 8.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

80

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA.

page 268), and the powers and duties of the Board of Children’s Guardians as
prescribed by or pursuant to law shall thereafter be performed under such regula­
tions as may be made by said board and approved by the commissioners.42

The foregoing provision for the appointment of the members of
the Board of Children’s Guardians by the Commissioners of the
District put into practice a plan that had been urged at intervals for
many years. The arrangement for a single board charged with the
management of the child-caring work of the Board of Children’s
Guardians and the Industrial Home School is similar to that in force
in St. Louis, where a single board is at the head of the child-caring
agency and the city institution for boys.43 I t is a curious feature of
the present situation in- the District that the Industrial Home School
for Colored Children (receiving only boys) is not under the Board of
Children’s Guardians, although its relation to the board would
logically be similar to that of the industrial school for white boys and
girls. I t has been pointed out that there is no public institutional
provision for negro girls. In practice the institution for negro boys
appears to have been used by the board more especially for the semidelinquent, whereas the industrial school for white children has been
used also for dependent or neglected children who for some reason
could not be placed in family homes or who are awaiting such
placement.
«42 Stat. 1360-1361 (Act of Feb. 28, 1923).
5
|
. .t
« The St Louis Board of Children’s Guardians provides family homes for dependent and neglected
children, gives aid to children in their own homes, and directs the Bellefontaine Farms, an intermediate
institute for the training of delinquent boys.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS ENGAGED IN CHILD-CARING WORK.
INSTITUTIONS FOR DEPENDENT CHILDREN.

The following summaries in regard to the 18 private institutions
for dependent children in the District have been abstracted from the
Directory of Social Agencies of Washington, D. C., published by the
Washington Council of Social Agencies in.1922.
The figures for the number of children under care were obtained
either directly from the institutions or from annual reports made by
them. A few of the wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians
were being boarded in some of the private institutions. These
children are included in the total number of children under care of
the institutions.
Baptist Home for Children.—A charitable institution for the maintenance
and education of dependent white boys and girls between the ages of 3 and
10 at admission. It is under the general supervision of the executive board
of the Columbian Association of Baptist Churches. Baptist children are
given preference. Supported by voluntary offerings from the white Baptist
churches of the District of Columbia. Children under care: 27.
Bruen Home for Children.—A nonsectarian home for children over 2 years of
age who have no other home. Supported partly through small sums paid
for board and partly by contributions from churches and individuals.
Children under care: 63.
Central Union Mission.—Children’s Emergency Home for Destitute Mothers
and Children. Children under care: 27.
Episcopal Home for Children.—A home for white children of all denominations
between the ages of 6 and 16. Admission is by application. Children attend
the public schools of the District of Columbia. Supported by Episcopal
Church and voluntary contributions. Children under care: 51.
Florence Crittenton Home.— A nonsectarian home for white women and girls who
are unfortunate and need help, A small fee is asked from those able to pay
or from the Board of Charities when it sends cases to the home. Its purpose
is to bring such women and girls under religious and benevolent influence
and to assist young mothers in preparing themselves to care for their chil­
dren. Supported by voluntary contributions. Children under care: 24
(includes only the babies).
German Orphan Asylum.—A nonsectarian home for white children of all nation­
alities. Supported by voluntary contributions. Children under care: 33.
Gospel Mission.— Maintains emergency children’s home. Day nursery for
white children from 2 to 8 years of age. Children under care: 11.
House of Mercy.—A rescue home for young white girls and their babies, not
limited to residents of the District. Under the direction of the Bishop of
Washington. First cases only. No diseased nor feeble-minded admitted.
Must remain one year at least, generally two years. Industrial and domestic
training. Supported by endowment and voluntary contribution. Chil­
dren under care: 21 (includes only the babies).
Jewish Foster Home.—A home for temporary care of dependent Hebrew chil­
dren between the ages of 4 and 14. Must be residents of the District,
except in a few emergency cases. Children under care: 19.
National Association for the Relief of Destitute Colored Women and Children.—
An association for the care of destitute negro women and children. Boys
and girls, wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians, taken to board.
The home also maintains wards of its own, as it did before the Board, of
Children’s Guardians was created. It also receives children whom death has
deprived of father or mother, in cases in which the surviving parent is
obliged to work away from home. Supported partly by appropriation
from Congress, disbursed by Board of Children’s Guardians. Children
under care: 27

81

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

82

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

St. A nn’s Infant Asylum and Maternity Hospital.—An institution for the care
of white mothers and infants. Supported by patients’ fees and voluntary
contributions. In charge of Sisters of Charity. Children under care: 95.
St. John’s Orphanage.—An institution for white boys and girls between the
ages of 5 and 9 years at admission who through the death, desertion, or in­
capacity of one or both parents are in need of a home. Supported by St.
John’s Church (Episcopal). Summer home at Arlington, Va. Governed
by a board of trustees and by the ladies’ aid. Children under care: 74.
St. Joseph’s Male Orphan Asylum.—A home for dependent and orphaned
white boys between the ages of 6 and 14 years. Supported by endowment fund,
annual benefits, and fees for board. In charge of Sisters of the Holy Cross.
Children under care: 82.
St. Rose’s Technical School.—An institution for the care and training of depen­
dent white girls between 14 and 16 years of age. Supported by products of
sewing rooms and entertainments. In charge of the Sisters of Charity of
St. Vincent de Paul. Children under care: 54.
St. Vincent’s Orphan Asylum.— A. home for dependent white girls between 5
and 14 years of age who are without one of both parents. Supported by fees,
voluntary contributions, legacies, etc. In charge of Sisters of Charity of
Emmitsburg, Md. Children under care: 130.
Swartzell Methodist Home for Children.—A home for white boys and girls
from. 3 to 14 years of age, preferably Protestants, who are without proper
homes. Supported by Methodist churches of the District. Children under
care: 24.
Washington City Orphan Asylum.—An institution for the care of orphans and
destitute white Protestant children. Children under care: (approximately)
85.
Washington Home for ChildrenJ— An institution for the care of homeless
white children under 6 years of age. Board $30 a month, or less if circum­
stances necessitate. Supported by voluntary contributions. Children under
care: 48.

The Children’s Temporary Home, which receives only negro
wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians, has not been mchided
in this section of the discussion.
For several years prior to the study special congressional ap­
propriations were made for the care of wards of the Board of Chil­
dren’s Guardians in St. Ann’s Infant Asylum and the Washington
Home for Foundlings, and by the National Association for the Care
of Destitute Colored Women and Children (which maintains the
National Colored Home). During the fiscal year 1920-21 only a
small part of the appropriation for St. Ann’s Infant Asylum and the
Washington Home for Foundlings was used, and in 1921-22 the
amount of the appropriation was considerably reduced. These
two institutions are the only ones in the city which receive children
under 2 years of age without their mothers; the former is a sectarian
institution, and the latter gives hospital care to infants—both
foundlings and other children in need of special care. The National
Colored Home is the only institution in the city which cares for
negro children other than wards of the Board of Children’s Guard­
ians. This institution receives wards of the board as well as other
children on free and boarding arrangement but can care for only a
limited number of children. In the majority of the cases in which
it is necessary to provide for infants or negro children outside their
own homes, either because of the death of one parent or because
the mother has to go to work and can not keep the child with her, it
is necessary for the guardian to find a boarding home without assist­
ance from any agency.
1 Formerly Washington Home for Foundlings.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS ENGAGED IN CHILD-CARING WORK.

83

AGENCIES CONCERNED WITH DEPENDENT FAMILIES AND CHILDREN.

The Directory of Social Agencies of Washington, D. C., published
in 1922 by the Washington Council of Social Agencies, lists a number
of organizations that do relief work with families. Although only
one of these (the Catholic Charities of Washington, described later)
has developed distinctive child-caring work, the work of all familywelfare societies fundamentally includes the prevention of child
dependency and is closely related to the work of child-caring agencies
and institutions. In order to present authoritatively and in brief
form the main facts concerning the family-relief agencies, the follow­
ing summaries, representing reports by the agencies themselves,
have been abstracted from the directory of social agencies:
Associated Charities of the District of Columbia.—A family-welfare agency
ministering to the poor and distressed without respect to race or creed,
furnishing relief where and when necessary but striving to restore the family
to self-maintenance at the earliest possible moment. Provident Savings
Fund, operated by the Associated Charities for the encouragement and
teaching of thrift. Deposits last year were $19,910.30. Camp Good Will,
and Camp Pleasant (for negroes), conducted by summer outing committee
for eight weeks in the summer for families of jnothers and children unable to
provide their own vacation. Social-Service Exchange conducted for the
confidential use and benefit of social-service agencies, churches, and benev­
olent individuals of. the District of Columbia. A directory of 85,000
names of clients or registering social agencies. The Associated Charities
is supported by voluntary contributions.
Catholic Charities of Washington,—The Catholic Charities provides a clearing
house and coordinates the work of the parish conferences of the Society of
St. Vincent de Paul and other organizations and institutions engaged in
social and relief work in the District of Columbia. It cares for city-wide
problems, develops new activities, and assists parish conferences with their
cases. (For further discussion of the work of this society see pp. 84-85.)
Society of St. Vincent de Paul, Particular Council.—The central office is a
clearing house for the different parish conferences of the society and also
between the society and other organizations. The particular council has
a special works committee which cares for the spiritual needs of Catholic
inmates in various institutions.
Central Union Mission.—A nonsectarian religious and relief-giving organiza­
tion for white men, women, and children. Free employment bureau.
Summer outings for mothers and children. (Children’s Emergency Home
has been described under institutions.)
The Salvation Army.—A nonsectarian religious and relief-giving organization
for men, women, and children. It operates through a main office, a socialservice department, and three corps headquarters. Fresh Air Camp at
Patuxent, Md., is maintained during the summer months, where mothers
and children are given vacations of 10 days to 2 weeks. Supported by
voluntary contributions.
United Hebrew Relief Society.—An organization to provide financial assistance
to Jewish widows and orphans, to help Jewish families in sickness or distress,
and to provide food and shelter for Jewish transients. Supported by
voluntary contributions.
Volunteers of America.—A religious organization; seeks to relieve human needs
in a practical way regardless of creed, color, or nationality. Maintains a
mission hall and relief station.
OTHER AGENCIES ENGAGED IN CHILD-CARING WORK.

I t is difficult to compile an adequate list of agencies concerned with
the care of dependent children or the prevention of dependency.
Churches, settlements, all social agencies, and other groups interested
in promoting the welfare of the community contribute materially and
spiritually to the prevention of child dependency through the main­
tenance of homes. Among the organizations in the District, other

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

84

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA.

than those listed, which devote themselves more specifically to some
form of children’s aid, may be mentioned the following:2
Christ Child Society.—An organization for the relief and care of children. Aid
given to crippled children in the form of appliances and home instruction if
needed. Volunteers visit in homes, extend relief, and make and distribute
garments—especially layettes for infants of poor mothers. Conducts dental
clinics, attends to the health needs of the children, and operates its own
farm, where children are sent during the summer. Supported by contri­
butions from members and an annual tag day.
; Congress of Mothers and Parent-Teacher Associations of the District of Columbia.—
The health committee is serving school lunches of milk and graham crackers.
A committee will furnish shoes, rubbers, and clothing to children who are
out of school because of this need. Supported by dues and voluntary
contributions.
Ladies of Charity— Supply clothing and look after women and children,
materially and spiritually. Four parish units. Supported by dues, and by
contributions from the Society of St. Vincent de Paul.
Prudence Crandall Association.—An organization to furnish shoes to needy
negro school children upon recommendation of the teachers. Supported bv
voluntary contributions.
Sterling Relief Association.—Clothes and shoes given to negro school children
upon recommendation of the teachers. Hot lunches also served at certain
schools. Supported by voluntary contributions.
Washington Humane Society.—A society to protect children and animals from
cruelty and abuse.
T H E D EV ELO PM EN T O F A CATHOLIC CHILD -CARIN G AGENCY.

Until the child-caring work for Catholic children was organized in
1922, there was in the District no private agency especially con­
cerned with the problems of providing boarding-home and free-home
care for dependent children and children needing such care during
family emergencies. The Catholic Charities of Washington in May,
1922, organized a children’s division as one of its four branches. The
other closely related divisions are: The division of family case work,
the division of protective care, and the division of recreational work.
Other agencies handling the general problem of family aid in the
District cooperate with the Catholic agency, referring to it all new
cases of Catholic children and old ones involving religious problems.
An outstanding feature of the work of the Catholic Charities in Wash­
ington—as of similar work developed in other cities by religious
groups, especially the Jewish and the Roman Catholic—is the close
interrelationship between the work with families, the work toward
the prevention of dependency and delinquency, and the child-caring
work of the agency and of institutions with which it is cooperating.
The work of the children’s division of the Catholic Charities of
Washington is important in its relation to the future work of Catholic
institutions in the District. The children’s division investigates the
intake of certain institutions and places out or supervises children
who are discharged from care. Its activities are defined by the
director as follows :
The children’s division (a) cooperates with St. Ann’s Infant Asylum and
Maternity Hospital, investigating and planning for mothers and children under
their care; (6) places out children from the various Catholic institutions; (c) finds
boarding and free homes for children; (d) cooperates with the Board of Children’s
Guardians in the care and supervision of Catholic children; (e) concerns itself
with improving the standards and policies of Catholic child-caring homes and
exercises general supervision over their work.
2 The descriptions of activities here given include only those related to special assistance


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS ENGAGED IN CHILD-CARING WORK.

85

In its first annual report3 the agency states that during the first
eight months of the existence of the children’s division, 92 children
were directly under its care.
PROTECTIVE WORK.

The Juvenile Protective Association of the District of Columbia
was organized in 1914 and represents the first work of this kind in the
District on a comprehensive scale. This agency deals primarily with
delinquency problems, but its work is, of course, closely related to the
prevention of dependency. The work is described in the directory of
social agencies as follows:
A city-wide nonsectarian organization whose sole object is to protect children
and prevent delinquency. It is supported entirely by voluntary contributions.
Cases are received from the juvenile court, all social working agencies, schools,
churches, business firms, private individuals, and parents. First visits are made
by a trained social worker, the follow-up work being done by this worker assisted
by as large a number of volunteers as can be secured and properly supervised.
Having made the approach to the family through the delinquency of one of its
child members, all efforts are directed toward the adjustment of any condition
which tends to promote delinquency on the part of any child in the family. All
community resource are called upon, special effort being made to insure the
health of the children and to connect them up with school and church and proper
recreational activities. * * * One important part of its work is. supplying
Big Brothers and Big Sisters for children who need them. An equally important
feature of the work is correcting neighborhood conditions which contribute to
the delinquency of children.

As was mentioned in the preceding section, the Catholic Charities
of Washington has a division of protective care. This is describtkl by
the director of the organization as follows:
The division of protective care cooperates with the juvenile court and other
agencies of the community in dealing with delinquent Catholic children. The
juvenile court refers the following types of cases to the division: (a) All cases of
Catholic children disposed of unofficially by the chief probation officer; (6) cases
in which sentence has been suspended; (c) cases discharged from probation;
(d) the court frequently asks the aid of the division for specific types of service in
cases on active probation. The division of protective care has developed an
organization of Big Brothers and Big Sisters to assist in caring for delinquent and
semidelinquent children. Some of the parochial schools of the District are
referring their problem children to the division.
3
The Charity of a Year—First Annual Report (January to December 31, 1922) of the Director of Catholic
Charities, Washington, D. C., p. 8.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

The records of individual children tell the story of the complica­
tions of poverty, immorality, and other delinquencies, disease, and
mental defect. They show the lack of resources to deal with these
conditions early enough in an effective way. In consequence, par­
ents and children are separated unnecessarily, children become de­
linquent because of improper home conditions, education is neglected,
and the child is handicapped for his whole life. No care that an
agency can provide for a child can compensate for the experiences
that have left an ineradicable impression on his mind or for the
deprivation of those things that go to make up a normal, healthy
childhood.
Mrs. F, a widow, has three girls and two boys under the care of the Board of
Children’s Guardians. She earns her living by going out to work by the day.
More than four years ago her oldest boy, then 11 years of age, was brought before
the juvenile court because of persistent truancy and was committed to the
guardianship of the board. He has spent most of the time since his commit­
ment in a private industrial school in Maryland but has been for short periods
in the Industrial Home School, the Working Boys’ Home, a boarding home, and
his mother’s home. He ran away three times from the Industrial Home School,
twice from the Working Boys’ Home, and four times from the school in Mary­
land. After he had been in the boarding home only two weeks the foster mother
requested that he be removed. The three periods he spent with his mother were
each very short, the last and longest being of three months’ duration. Since
the home conditions were then not favorable the mother asked to have h i m sent
back to the Maryland school, and he is still there.
About a year ago the four younger children were committed to the board for
minority. A month earlier the mother had given birth to a child out of wed­
lock, and a social settlement had reported the family to be in need of assistance.
At the time of the commitment the Associated Charities stated that the family
had been helped by no less than seven organizations, and the day nursery to
which the children were being sent had refused to continue to care for them
because of their uncleanly condition and bad habits. The baby was first placed
in a children’s hospital and after six weeks there was placed in a boarding home.
The other children (aged 3, 6, and 10 years) were placed in boarding homes. All
four children are now under one foster mother’s care.
The 0 ’s_ have a family of 10 children, 5 boys and 5 girls. The father has a
record of intemperance, and though he is working and a number of the older
children are of working age, the family does not seem to be able to get along on
its income. Its ^members also have a reputation for quarrelsomeness. The
Associated Charities, the District Board of Charities, and the Christ Child
Society have at different times given the family assistance, and one of the chil­
dren was for a time in an institution for dependent children. A few months ago
five of the children, ranging in age from 4 to 12 years, were committed to the
care of the Board of Children’s Guardians for minority. One boy and two girls
were sent to an institution; the two younger boys were placed in a boarding home.
Some years previously all these children except the youngest had been under
the guardianship of the board for a week.
Of the other five children four are older than those committed, being 15 to 22
years of age. They have all at various times been temporarily under the care
of the board, some of them for several periods. One of the girls spent a year in
1 Each of the stories in this section is written as of the date when the material was secured in the course
of the Children’s Bureau study. The conditions described in the present tense are, therefore, those which
obtained while the investigation was proceeding, b u t they m ay not be those existing a t the tim e of the
publication of this report. The identity of the families and children is, of course, disguised; where, for
convenience, letters or names are used they are not actually those of the persons under discussion.

86

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

STORIES ILLUSTRATING CHILD-DEPENDENCY PROBLEMS.

87

the National Training School for Girls, having been committed to it when she
was 15 years of age. The only child in the family who has not been under the
guardianship of the board is the year-old baby.
^
Alfred’s mother was a frail woman, but she strove early and late to care for
her children and give them an education. The father was immoral and a heavy
drinker and refused to support his children. While he was serving a five-year
sentence for violation of the Mann Act the mother divorced him. She had to
work away from home all day. Alfred and his sister became incorrigible, and
Alfred was brought before the juvenile court a number of times. Then the
mother died, and Alfred went to live with a blind old grandmother who had
no control over him. She had long been given aid by the Associated Charities.
Within a year, when he was 14 years of age, it was necessary to commit him to
the care of the Board of Children’s Guardians.
Alfred is now, a year later, in the home of a maternal aunt, where there are
two children younger than himself. The board of guardians pays $20 a month
for his care. The aunt’s husband shows much interest in the welfare of. the
boy, who though he has had to have a great deal of hospital treatment since his
commitment is steadily improving in health. Alfred repeated grade 6A three
times but is considered normal mentally. His retardation in school was prob­
ably caused by his physical condition. At any rate by voluntary attendance
at summer school he won his certificate for grade 7A. He now shows much selfrespect, is eager to do the right thing, and wants to go to work and learn a trade
if possible.
An effort will be made to induce the father, who is working in a southern State,
to help give the boy some trade education. The father is paying $25 a month
for the care of Alfred’s younger sister, now an attractive child of 13 or 14, who
is living with the grandmother mentioned, under the supervision of the board
of guardians. The father wants Alfred, but though he is said to have recently
married a good woman, his past reputation makes it seem unwise to send the
boy to him, away from an environment which is fostering his happiness and good
character.
The alcoholism and insanity of the father and the mental subnormality of the
mother have caused the B’s to be a continual burden on their relatives and on the
communities in which they have lived. The three little daughters— Minnie,
Irene, and Betty-—were committed four years ago to the Board of Children’s
Guardians because the father was not supporting the family and the mother
had degenerated almost into a beggar. At that time Minnie was only 1J years
of age, and the other girls were 5 and 7 years old. The oldest child, John, now
13, has lived with his maternal grandmother almost since birth, but she can give
no aid to the other children.
Soon after the commitment of the children the father was placed in the Govern­
ment Hospital for the Insane. The next year he was discharged, and Betty, then
8 years of age, was placed under the care of the woman ^ith whom he boarded.
When the board’s workers found that he was constantly intoxicated they removed
the child. He is reported to be again in the asylum. Nothing is known of his
relatives except his mother, who is said to have been an habitual drunkard.
Mary will soon reach her majority and be discharged from the guardianship
of the board. She has been holding the same clerical position for three years and
is now earning $20 a week. She was committed to the Board of Children’s
Guardians when she was 12 years of age, together with two brothers, one older
and one younger than herself. Though the family had been helped by the
Associated Charities and by their church and it is reported that some of the
children had been in an orphan asylum in Germany, destitution formed the least
part of the reason for their removal from the father’s home. The father eould
earn $20 to $25 a week at his trade, and the three older daughters were earning
fair wages according to the standards of the time, so that the family should have
been in good circumstances. But the mother had died, the father drank heavily,
and the older daughters had been compelled to leave home because the father
brought undesirable men into the house. The oldest girl lived where she worked,
one boarded, and one lived with a friend.
It was Mary’s oldest sister who appealed to the board for the protection of the
younger children. The older brother, who reached his majority two years ago,
has a good position and is studying for a profession. The younger, though he is
still under the supervision of the board, is making a good salary as a bookkeeper,
having graduated from a commercial school. The two boys and Mary are now
living with their oldest sister, who is married.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

88

CHILD1 DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

The way in which a family may be scattered after the mother’s death is
Illustrated in the history of a group of negro children. The mother died after
giving birth to twins, leaving seven children to the care of an alcoholic father
who had never properly supported the family. The oldest child was 10 years of
age when the mother died. Four children were taken to the home of the maternalgrandmother, who was living in a small town of a neighboring State. She has
since died, and there is no report of the present whereabouts of these children.
The twins were committed to the Board of Children’s Guardians when 6 months
of age. They were placed at board in a private home and when 2 years of age
were legally adopted. The remaining child, a boy 6 years old when his mother
died, was cared for by a friend for nearly three years and was then committed
to the board because the father failed to pay board for him. He is now 12 years
of age, in fair physical condition though considerably underweight, and is doing
well in school. He has been broken of the habit of taking small sums of money,
but he is easily influenced and has run away frequently from the homes in which
he has been placed, so that it has been found necessary to keep him in the In­
dustrial Home School. A maternal uncle, who is reported to have a good home,
now says that he would be glad to take charge of this boy.
In 1917 six children—three boys and three girls, ranging in age from 1 to 11
years—were temporarily committed to the care of the Board of Children’s
Guardians because of destitution. A few months later, with the help of various
agencies, the family was reestablished, and all the children except the oldest boy,
who was crippled, were returned to the parents. In the summer of 1919 the
mother brought a suit for divorce because the father had beaten her, his excuse
being that he “ found her drunk and the baby’s head in the drain.” The suit
was dismissed, for though the couple had lived together for over 15 years they
had not been legally married. In fact, the father had never been divorced from
his legal wife, who was still living in the West. At this time the children were
again temporarily committed to the board, the group now including two children
born since the former commitment. A ninth child was born early in 1920 and
was committed permanently when he was only 4 months old. At the same time
all the other children were made wards for minority. Meanwhile the mother
had married another man—whom she has since deserted, taking all his savings
with her.
About a year and a half ago a boy of 15 years was committed to the Board of
Children’s Guardians for minority. He had been charged by the uncle with whom
he was living with taking a small sum of money. This boy and his sister (who is now
12 years of age) are the children of a negro father and an Italian or Greek mother.
The father is reported to have earned a good living, but he led an immoral life,
neglected the mother, and showed no interest in his children. In 1910 the dis­
couraged mother followed the father’s example and deserted the family. There
has been no news of her since, and nothing is known of her relatives. Such is the
story as related by the paternal aunt of the children.
The case first came to the notice of the Board of Children’s Guardians in 1913,
when the aunt reported that the deserted children had been with their grand­
mother for over three years. The father was told by the board to make provision
for them but did nothing until about three years ago, when he placed the little
girl in a private institution in Baltimore. She is still there, supposedly being
supported by him. Two years ago the uncle with whom the boy was then living
sent him to Philadelphia to his father, who placed him in school. There the boy
was very unhappy, and he soon ran away and came back to Washington. He
went to live with another uncle, but the father refused to help in his support, and
it was soon after this that the child was committed to the custody of the board.
About two years ago a widow, who was working as maid in a hotel, applied to
the Board of Children’s Guardians for aid for her three children, then 8, 10, and
12 years of age. Her case was referred to the Associated Charities, and the two
younger children—both of them boys—were placed in a boarding home in the
country. Some time later they were returned to the mother, but early in the
present year she again applied to the board and was again referred to the Asso­
ciated Charities. Since she refused to cooperate with the association in any pla:
for the children’s welfare, it had the two boys placed in a boys’ home. Almost
immediately the superintendent of the home refused to keep them because they
had been detected in stealing. The juvenile court then committed the boys
temporarily to the care of the Board of Children’s Guardians; within a short
time the commitment was made permanent. The board placed them in the
Industrial Home School, where they still are. The sister has never been com
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

STORIES ILLUSTRATING CHILD-DEPENDENCY PROBLEMS.

89

mitted to the care of the board. The mother is known to have lived in homes
conducted by two district social agencies.
The mother of the H family was arrested and charged with vagrancy. Her
two men companions and three of her children—girls of 1, 7, and 16 years-—were
taken into custody at the same time. The father had deserted the family. The
day after the arrest of the mother the two younger girls were committed tem­
porarily to the guardianship of the board. They were both placed in an institu­
tion for a short period and were then removed to a boarding home. Within 10
months their 11-year-old sister also was received under temporary commitment,
after the women’s bureau of the police department reported the mother’s failure
to observe the terms of her parole. A short time later the commitments of all
three children were made permanent. Two are now in boarding homes. The
eldest of the three (now 12 years of age) and her 17-year-old sister are living with
their grandmother, the former being still under the supervision of the board.
The difficulty which a father often has in keeping a family of small children
together after the mother has died was exemplified in the case of an Italian shoe
repairer. He has a dull mind and little command of English, and owing to gen­
eral inefficiency his earning capacity is low. For a time he struggled to keep his
three children with him, but since he could not afford to hire a housekeeper he
became discouraged and lost interest, and some months after the mother’s death
the two younger children were committed to the Board of Children’s Guardians.
Three years later the oldest child, then a boy of 11 years, was removed by the
board, at a time when the father had in the home a woman who neglected the
house and caused the father to be indifferent about his children. ' The father
appears to be subnormal mentally, and not one of the children measures up to
normal intelligence.
Three of a family of four negro children were committed to the Board of
Children’s Guardians on the same day in 1917. The father, a school janitor,
who is reported to have been “ a good industrious man,” had died of pneumonia
about a year and a half before. The mother was granted a so-called “pension”
by the Associated Charities, and the workers tried to aid her with advice and
encouragement; but she steadily deteriorated in her care of the children and in
character—although her two younger sisters, who say she was “ almost a mother”
to them when they were orphaned, declare that during the husband’s life she
was a good woman and gave her children “ the best care she knew how to give.”
About two weeks before the children were removed from her she had given
birth to a baby girl, whose father she hardly knew. A year later she was stabbed
by another man with whom she had been living from time to time. Her young­
est child was then removed from her and placed at board, the charge being
“ lack of physical care.” Since then she seems to have had no regular work
and to have made no effort at improvement.
The family life of the D ’s was broken up by the alcoholism and immorality of
the father. He had never properly supported the children, and he was finally
sent to prison for five years for criminal assault. These facts, however, did not
prevent him from obtaining in 1915, in another city, a decree of divorce with
the custody of his children, although nothing was ever proved against the char­
acter of the mother. Fortunately his lawyer did not press his claim to the
custody of the children, because of his evident unfitness. He is now married
again and has two children by his second wife. The mother is ignorant, speaks
very little English, and is incapable by herself of making a home for her three
children.
kEarly in 1919, on the petition of the maternal grandfather, the 13-year-old
girl was committed to the Board of Children’s Guardians. Four months later
the 12-year-old boy was committed, because of his incorrigibility and the inabil­
ity of the mother to control him. Both children were placed in an institution.
At the age of 16 years the girl has a mental age of 10 years. She is still in the
fourth grade and has apparently reached her intellectual limit. The boy, now
15 years old, is diagnosed as 11 years of age mentally. He is said to enjoy
school, but he passed into the fifth grade only this spring. Both children are
in good physical condition, and they are well liked. The girl is good-natured
and enjoys housework.
The mother is anxious to reestablish the home. She is earning her living,
working by the day. She expects to marry a railroad employee when he returns
88962°—24t----- 7

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

90

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

from Italy, where he has gone to get his 14-year-old son. He is said by his
foreman to be an intelligent and trustworthy man.
In the spring of 1920 two children of a foreign-born father and a native mother
were taken from their home by the juvenile court and committed to the Board
of Children’s Guardians. They were boys 6 and 10 yearsof age. The father
was working away from home. The mother was living with a negro and was
pregnant. Between the years 1908 and 1919 she had been before the police
court a number of times. The two older children in the family were not living
at home at the time of the commitment—a boy of 18 was in the Navy, and
a girl of 16 was working and maintaining herself. The younger children are
now in a boarding home in the country, and the father has been ordered by the
court to pay $25 a month to the board toward their support.
Two little negro children, 1 and 7 years of age, a boy and his half sister, were
removed in 1904 from the custody of their mother. She had been going out
to work at 6 o’clock in the morning, leaving the children in the care of the father
of the boy, an old man who drank hard and abused the children and who later
served a jail sentence for larceny. The girl died in 1906. The boy spent all
but 10 days of the first six years of his commitment in two boarding homes.
He was then placed on trial for adoption; but two years later, when he was 9
years of age, the plan was changed and he was placed in the same home on
trial for indenture. He is now 18 years old and is being trained as a blacksmith.
The misfortune of being illegitimately born is keeping George from enjoying
a comfortable home with his half brothers and sisters. When he was 5 years
of age the Board of Children’s Guardians found that he had been living since
babyhood with a family known to be alcoholic and immoral and that they were
giving him very poor care. His stepfather has always refused to have anything
to do with the child. As an added excuse for keeping him out of the home, the
mother says that her younger children know nothing of his existence.^ Now, at
nearly 10 years of age and after placement in a number of homes, he is living in
a free home with a woman and her daughter, people of excellent reputation, who
may in time adopt him.
William’s mother, his five brothers, and two sisters lived in a near-by State,
while the father worked in Washington and kept William with him in the expec­
tation of teaching him his own trade. The father went home only occasionally.
Being away from his mother’s influence and supervision, William became incor­
rigible, and early in 1913 he was brought before the juvenile court. He was re­
turned to his father on condition that he be sent home to his mother. However,
he remained in the city with an aunt, who at the end of a year charged him with
taking money from a registered letter and with stealing other things. He was
then, at 14 years of age, committed to the care of the Board of Children’s Guard­
ians for minority. He absconded three times from the institution in which he
was placed; in fact, he spent there only five and one-half months of the nearly
six and one-half years between his commitment and his coming of age.
A boy who seems to have overcome a “ wanderlust” is the youngest of three
negro children who 18 years’ago were found living with their parents in one very
unclean room. They were committed to the care of the Board of Children’s
Guardians for minority, their parents being sentenced on a statutory charge to
six months’ imprisonment in the District jail. The two little girls were 2 and 5
years of age when received by the board. The older was discharged from care
on becoming of age-; the younger is now in a correctional institution, committed
for minority. Their brother, who was 1 year old when he was removed from the
home, is still under the guardianship of the board, though he has lived in the
home of his parents for a total of over 15 years since he was committed. When
not quite 15 years of age and while living with his parents, he ran away and was
gone for nearly a week. He was then placed in a free home; after living in it
seven months he again ran away, this time being absent five months. When
he returned he was placed with his parents, under the board’s supervision.
Robert is a negro boy who has been under the guardianship of the board for
six years. His parents had been dead four or five years when, in 1914, he was
charged before the juvenile court with stealing a child’s express wagon from the
shed of the home where his grandmother was employed. He was then 8 years
of age, and he and his twin sister were living with the paternal grandmother.
The court committed him to the Board of Children’s Guardians, who placed him

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

STORIES ILLUSTRATING CHILL-DEPENDENCY PROBLEMS.

91

in a children s institution. Here he remained for a year and nine months He
was then placed in a free home in the country. After one and one-half years
the foster mother complained that he was dishonest, and he was placed in an
institutional home for colored children. His stay in this institution lasted 10
months, at the end of which period he was again placed in a free home in the
country. From this place he ran away after he had lived in it a year and four
months. Four days later he was arrested, charged with stealing newspapers.
His own story is that a boy had given him the papers to sell, and he did not know
they had been stolen. This time he was placed in a boarding home.
When Robert was 14 years of age and had passed the fifth grade he secured
a place as waiter in a hotel, receiving very good wages and his meals. He con­
tinued to live in the boarding home, paying his own room rent, for a little over
two months, when he ran away leaving a debt of $12 for rent. He was found
four days later and placed in another home under the same conditions as in the
last until he lost his job, when the Board of Children’s Guardians resumed paying
his expenses. Soon after he had again secured work he became ill with pneu­
monia and was sent to a hospital. Leaving the hospital, he was placed in a
home where the board paid his expenses until he had recuperated. Then he
again got work and was expected to become self-supporting. He again ran away,
was apprehended after being at large four weeks, was placed in another home,
and_ ran away again three months later—just a few days before his case was
studied by the agent.
A negro boy was only 11 years of age when he was turned out into the street
by the woman who had cared for him after his mother’s death, because his father
was $25 in arrears in the payments which he had promised to make. The boy’s
parents had not been married, but the father Lad contributed to the child’s sup­
port- The homeless boy applied at the police station for protection and was
taken under the care of the Board of Children’s Guardians. His married half
sister felt that she could not be responsible for his support as well as that of the
brother who was already living with her, because her husband was out of work.
The child was therefore placed in a children’s institutional home, where he re­
mained for nearly three years. When he was 14 years of age his half sister
offered him a home. He continued to go to school until he was 15, when he
secured work as an assistant janitor.
A girl of 16 who was committed to the guardianship of the board had. been
brought before the juvenile court charged with immorality. Her father was at
the time in a hospital for the insane in a near-by State, and it was stated that
her mother had been for a year in a similar institution in the District. The
girl was diagnosed as a constitutional psychopathic inferior. The Board of
Children’s Guardians placed her in a private institution for delinquent girls, but
after three months her removal was requested because she had a disturbing influ­
ence over the other inmates. She was then placed successively in three board­
ing homes. The period which she spent in these homes covered in all only five
and one-half months. The last placement proving as unsuccessful as the others,
she was sent to the Industrial Home School. After a month there she was
placed in another institution for delinquent girls, where she is still living. The
mother is now reported to be in a hospital for the insane.
A negro baby boy only a few weeks old was placed by his mother in a home of
a woman whom she had promised to pay for his care. No payment was made, but
the mother after a while asked the caretaker to place the child in a home. He
was a little over 3 months of age when the Board of Children’s Guardians re­
ceived him for care. Upon communicating with the mother it was found that
she had an older child, who was living with a maternal aunt. The father of the
baby, to whom she had not been married, was dead, and she was a cripple and
unable to support the child. After two months in boarding homes the child
was placed on trial for adoption with a family living in a near-by State. A year
later these people returned him to the board, and for nearly a year and a half
he was again in a boarding home. At the age of 3 years he was placed on trial
for adoption for the second time. This status continued for nine years, when
At was changed to free placement with the same family. The boy is now 17
years of age and is still living in this home.
The story of Ralph shows how easy it is under some circumstances to lose
track of relatives. This negro boy was committed to the care of the Board of
Childrens Guardians in 1919, when he was 11 years of age. His mother had
died six years earlier. The father had attempted to kill his second wife. He

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

92

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA.

forfeited his bond and has never since been found. The stepmother was taken
to a hospital, and her grandmother, with whom the family had been living,
refused to keep the boy. She also declared that she could not control him, but
he has done well in the family where he was placed at board and later given a
free home. His foster mother and father seem to be patient with his general
slowness, firm in holding him to his tasks at home and at school, and able to
command his respect and affection. Though the boy is known to have at least
seven near relatives besides his father, it has been impossible to ascertain the
whereabouts of any of them.
The feeble-mindedness of the mother plays an important r61e in the history of
four negro children who were 2, 4, 8 , and 11 years of age when they were removed
in 1917 from an unclean and disordered home. They had constantly been
left alone while the mother went out to work and were found in a dirty and
neglected condition. Their paternity is very much in question, since the woman
has claimed several men in turn as the father.
A year after commitment to the board of guardians the 12-year-old boy stole
a horse and wagon and was sent to a correctional institution. The other children
under care are all tuberculous, no doubt as a result of poor diet and insanitary
living conditions. Two of them have responded to treatment and are going to
school. They are much retarded in grade, perhaps owing to their physical
condition. The youngest—now a boy of 5 years—will probably have to remain
in the hospital for an indefinite period. The decided subnormality of the mother
and the histories of the oldest brother and of two older half brothers and a half
sister are not hopeful indications for the possible development of these children.
Both half brothers have been in correctional institutions, and the half sister has
borne a child out of wedlock.
The mother has recently married a laborer who is making good wages, and
she herself is earning good wages as a cook. A daughter 2 years of age is living
with her, and she is anxious to have her other children with her. Though the
people for whom she works consider her industrious and trustworthy, her history
and her subnormality make it seem unwise to return them to her.
When Henry was 11 years old his mother deserted the family, leaving the
boy and his 9-year-old brother to the care of the father. At some time within
the next three years the younger brother was sent to an aunt in a distant State.
Henry and the father lived in a single room behind the shop in which the father
carried on a small business of his own. The father was a well-meaning man
but apparently unable to control his son. The sketchiness and insufficiency
of their meals may easily be imagined. When the boy was 14 years of age he
was brought before the juvenile court charged with stealing bread and milk.
He soon violated his probation and was then committed for minority to the
Board of Children’s Guardians. When he was nearly 17 years of age it was
discovered that the father had a cousin in the District, a fine, intelligent woman,
who for nearly a year did a great deal to help the boy. Toward the end of
1920 the aunt who had the brother sent for Henry. He is now reported to be
in good physical condition, doing fine work in school, and eager to complete
the education which his aunt can well afford to give him.
Marian came under the care of the Board of Children’s Guardians when she
was 10 years of age, having been committed on petition of the superintendent
of a children’s home because she was difficult to manage. She was born in a
southern State to a mother who had been deserted by the father. The mother
came to Washington and for a while paid board for the child in the children’s
home referred to. She soon left the city, and nothing has since been heard
from her. The institution placed Marian in the home of a childless couple
living in a near-by State. There she remained until the fall of 1919, when the
foster mother returned her to the institution because she herself was going
West with the intention of securing a divorce from her husband. This husband
had been "queer and erratic” for years, and there is good evidence that he was
unbalanced at the time the child was placed with the family. The wife, too,
seems to have become erratic.
Brought up in an exciting and_ unwholesome atmosphere, Marian has de­
veloped into an egotistic and undisciplined child, and it has been found impossible ^
to place her satisfactorily, though the board has made every effort to give her
an environment stimulating to her undoubted mental abilities. She is now an
ambitious, good-looking, well-grown, athletic girl, not yet 13 years of age, but
rather advanced in general mental development. At the present time she is in


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

STORIES ILLUSTRATING CHILD-DEPENDENCY PROBLEMS.

93

the Industrial Home School, and unless she can be induced to change her attitude,
no doubt it will be difficult to provide for her in a family home.
It was not easy to understand why Tom, who had a clean and comfortable
home in a fairly good neighborhood, should have been so incorrigible that he
had to be brought before the juvenile court several times. His mother, who was
visited recently, is a woman of good appearance and apparently manages her
house well. Two older brothers in the home are employed and contribute to
its expenses. It is said that when the father was in the home he gave all Ms
earnings to its maintenance, but he seems to have been in the habit of deserting
the family. He disappeared for the last time over two years ago. Shortly
after this, Tom, then 14 years of age, violated the terms of his probation and was
committed for minority to the Board of Children’s Guardians. While living in
the institution in which the board placed him he made a good record, was well
behaved, and became especially interested in greenhouse work. He is now 16
years of age. He has recently been returned to his mother and is said to be
very unhappy about it. The mother’s relatives now state that she has been
leading an immoral life, and it seems not improbable that this fact was at the
root of the boy’s trouble. _ A number of maternal relatives live in the city or in a
near-by State, but since it seems necessary for the boy’s happiness and well­
being to remove him from all association with his mother, possibly his best chance
will be with an uncle in the West.
The Board of Children’s Guardians has had under its care since early in 1912 three
of the children of the M family. At the time of their commitment the mother—
a negro woman—had been living in a house of prostitution for a week, leaving the
children in a most destitute condition. She was sent to a correctional institution
to work out a fine of $100. She has never been married to the father, but it is
reported that they have had 20 children, half of whom are living. The 70-yearold negro father spends his time partly with his Washington family and partly
with his family in Baltimore, where he has a legal wife who also has borne him
many children. Two other children were committed at the same time as the
three mentioned above, but they passed from under the guardianship of the board
when they reached their majority. The younger children (now 12 and 14 years
of age) are living in boarding homes, and the oldest (a girl of 16) is at domestic
service in a wage home.
. In 1912 a boy of 3 years was found living with his mother and grandmother in a
single unclean room. The mother was feeble-minded, the grandmother was
known to be a habitual beggar, and the father had disappeared. Every one of
the adults had police records. Aid had been given the family by a church, the
Associated Charities, and the Salvation Army. The child was committed to
the guardianship of the board, which placed him in a boarding home. He is now,
at the age of 12, in a prospective adoptive home. He has a record of being
untruthful and has run away twice in the nine years since his commitment.
The mother of four children was working as a servant and living in the home
of her employers, while the children were in the home maintained by the father,
who also was working. The youngest of these children was 3 years of age, and
the oldest was only 9. The conditions in the family were reported by the Associ­
ated Charities, and the children were committed by the court to the Board of
Children’s Guardians for temporary care. Two boys and a girl were placed in
boarding homes and the youngest boy was placed in a hospital, from which the
mother removed him without the knowledge of the board. After remaining
with her two weeks, he was placed by the board in a private institution for
children. A little more than a month after their temporary commitment all four
children were committed to the board during their.minority. They are now in
boarding homes, two of them living in the country, and the parents are contrib­
uting to their support. The father, who earns from $25 to $30 a week, is paying
$15 a week for their care; the mother, whose money wages are $6 a week, is
contributing $10 a month.
Eight years ago a family consisting of parents and six sons were evicted from
their home. The intemperance of the father had prevented him from ever
giving his family decent support. The Associated Charities placed 14-year-old
Tom and 10-year-old Martin in a private institution for dependent children and
made temporary provision for the mother and the three younger children (Fran­
cis, aged 7; Robert, aged 5; and Michael, a baby in arms) in a maternity home.
The oldest boy, Joseph, was working; he got a place to board and became an

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

94

CHILD1 DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT ÖE. COLUMBIA.

independent member of the community. Since there seemed to be no possibility
of reestablishing the family in an independent position the five younger children
were committed to the care of the Board of Children’s Guardians during minority.
After a few months the mother left the maternity home and was allowed to
take the baby with her. At about the same time Francis and Robert were placed
in a boarding home. Ten months from the time of commitment all the children
were reestablished with their parents, the Board of Children’s Guardians con­
tinuing supervision over them. At the end of three years, during which time a
sister was born and the father deserted, arrangements again had to be made for
the maintenance of the mother and her children. The mother, Michael, and the
new baby were sheltered in the maternity home; Francis, Robert, and Martin
were sent to the Industrial Home School; and arrangements were made for Tom
(then 17 years old) to work and pay his own board in a boys’ home.
The mother and the two children remained in the maternity home for six
months. Then she left and took with her the baby, who has never been under
the legal guardianship of the board. Michael was placed in a boarding home,
and he lived in such homes until he was returned to his mother, some three
years later, together with Francis and Robert. These two boys had remained
continuously in the institution in which they had been placed, except for volun­
tary absences—Francis had run away once and Robert nine times during the
three-year period.
Fourteen-year-old Martin, after nine months at the Industrial Home School,
was placed in a boys’ home. Here he w$s expected to go out to work and pay
his own board, except for a brief time during which he was given the chance to
go to a commercial school. Since he showed himself indifferent to this oppor­
tunity, he was soon returned to a working basis. When he was 16 years of age
he ran away and was at large for six weeks. Five months after he was found he
was returned to his mother. This was eight months before his younger brothers
were sent home and only a few days after his older brother, Tom, had run away
from the boarding home in which he had been living and paying his own expenses. ^Tom had not been found at the date of his majority, when he passed
automatically from under the guardianship of the board.
The mother has been employed in a Government office for three years, and
for a time before the children were returned to her she paid, by order of the
court, $12.50 a week for their care. The youngest of the four younger boys
who are now with her is nearly 9 years of age, and the oldest is 18; the little
girl is about 6 years old. The oldest boy and the father seem to maintain no
connection with the family, though the father is reported to be still living in
Washington.
The father of one little boy promised to marry the mother after she had brought
charges against him but instead married another woman. The mother is frail
physically and subnormal mentally. She has another son who is eight years
older than this child and is the child of a different father—to whom, also, she
was not married. This older child she has always supported. She felt, however
that she could not care for the baby, too, and so consented that he should live
with the father and his wife, who wished to have him. Later the father was.
sentenced to a five-year term in the penitentiary for robbery, and since neither
of the women could support the child, he was committed to the Board of Chil­
dren’s Guardians soon after he completed his first year. He is now a sturdy
little boy of 2 years, on free placement in the home where he was boarded for
a year.
Not quite a year ago three children of 8 , 5, and 3 years, the oldest a girl and
the others boys, were committed for a year to the care of the board, the mother
being sent at the same time to a maternity home to regain her health. The
mother s childhood and youth had not been happy; she had never known her
father, and her mother had practically deserted her. Until she was 12 years
of age she was cared for by a great-aunt. She was then placed in an institution
because the great-aunt had to be sent to the home for incurables. The girl
remained in this institution until she was nearly 20, at which time she left it in
the company of a man who was working on the building and who promised to
marry her. He told her that he was divorced from his wife and had a good
home for her. It is not yet known whether he had ever obtained a divorce;
at any rate, he never married the girl. When the children were committed the
family were living in an unfinished house in the suburbs, and the mother was worn
out by the father’s erratic and cruel treatment of herself and the children.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

ST'OKIES ILLUSTRATING CHILD-DEPENDENCY PROBLEMS.

95

Hannah was orphaned at the age of 2 years by the deaths of father and mother
two months apart. The father, said to have been a strong, healthy, industrious
man, died as the result of an accident. The immediate cause of the mother’s
death was pneumonia following influenza, though she had for some time been
under treatment for tuberculosis of the bones.
For nearly a year after the mother’s death Hannah was kept by different rela­
tives. When she was about 3 years of age, since she could not walk nor use her
hands and could talk very little, the relatives had her committed to the Board of
Children’s Guardians. The paternal grandfather paid $10 a month for her care.
He soon died, however, and the board assumed the entire charges for her main­
tenance. She is now 5 years of age; and after two years of treatment under the
care of the board, she can run about and play, use her hands, and talk freely, is
immensely improved in disposition (being now a happy child), and is probably
almost normal in mental development.
Three children in this family were not committed to the board. Twelveyear-old Jennie is in an orphan asylum, where her board is being paid by relatives.
Margaret, 9 years of age, is being cared for by a woman who is much interested
in her and plans to keep her permanently. The youngest child, a boy 3 years
old, was taken when only 2 weeks of age by a friend of the mother. The friend
died early this year, but her two young daughters are caring for the boy.
It was brought out in the study that the father had left property from which
was realized $5,000 in cash. This was placed in a bank for the benefit of the four
children. It became available for use in May, 1920, since which time $40 a
month has been distributed by an aunt" for the care of three children not com­
mitted to the board and $10 a month has been deposited to the credit of little
Hannah, the child for whom the board is caring. The grandfather also left a
sum of money to the aunt who was acting as guardian, with the understanding
that she would help to provide for the children after their own estate was ex­
hausted.
■> '-r>
And so these children of fine and thrifty parents are growing up separated from
one another. Not one is now living with relatives. Hannah was cared for by
relatives for a time. A great-aunt had Jennie for a while until her own children
compelled her to give up the little girl, fearing that the child would get some of
their mother’s money. The aunt who is acting as guardian and who has six
children of her own, ranging in age from 1 to 9 years, says that in another year
she expects to take Jennie into her home and that more money will then be
available for Hannah’s care. It is thought possible that the aunt who did most
for Hannah may consider taking Frank, who is now a fine little fellow, sturdy
and attractive. But neither aunt is willing to assume the care of Hannah.
The three uncles have never contributed in any way to the maintenance of
the children nor shown the least interest in them. All the relatives are in good
circumstances and, except one uncle, are living in Washington.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

AID TO DEPENDENT CHILDREN IN THEIR OWN HOMES.
THE EXTENT OF THE NEED IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

At the request of a mothers’ pension committee appointed by the
Twentieth Century Club of Washington, the Children’s Bureau
attempted to secure some information in regard to families that
might be eligible for aid if a law providing for public aid to children
in their own homes were passed in the District of Columbia. Ac­
cordingly, all the public and private child-caring agencies and insti­
tutions in the District were requested to furnish certain information
in regard to families known to them who in their estimation should
be given public aid of this kind. The following agencies cooperated
in this survey: Juvenile court, Associated Charities, Bureau of Catho­
lic Charities, United Hebrew Association, Visiting Nurses Association,
Juvenile Protective Association, Neighborhood House, Washington
City Orphan Asylum, Jewish Foster Home, and Salvation Army-.
I t will he noted that very little information was received from
children’s institutions and none from the large public child-caring
agency. I t is, therefore, evident that the resulting information
represents a very incomplete list of the families who might be eligible
for this form of assistance. Moreover, it has been the experience of
agencies administering such aid that a considerable proportion of
the f amibes on their lists were not previously known to relief agencies,
courts, and other organizations. The purpose of aid to dependent
children in their own homes is to prevent the breaking up of families
and to save the children from injurious deprivation. The adminis­
tration of the aid is therefore largely preventive, dealing with what
is sometimes referred to as u a new class of dependents.” The result
must be to reduce the dependency problem that would otherwise
have to be dealt with by agencies and institutions.
The lists of families secured from the agencies included a con­
siderable number that with the somewhat meager evidence sub­
mitted did not appear to come within the definition of probable
eligibility and others in which the information was too slight to be
of service. A total of 129 families was selected as illustrating the
need for aid to dependent children in their own homes. In these
families there was a total of 425 children, under 16 years of age, as
follows :
Age.

Number.

Total children____— ------ 425
Under 1 year--------------------- —
1 year___________ - - - _________
2 years___________________ ----3 years_______________________
4 years---------------5 years--------------6 years_______________________
7 years_______________________

96

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

9
13
20

26

22

24

21

28

Age.

8 years_______ - —

Number.

--------------- 35
9 years______________________ 24
10 years___________ M-------------- 39
11 years________________
36
12 years----- --------35
13 years______________________ 32
14 years__________ _______— 29
15 years______________
25
Ages not reported, but under 16__ 7

AID TO DEPENDENT CHILDREN IN THEIR OWN HOMES.

9.7

More than one-third of the families had four or more children under
16 7ea1rs of aSe* 0nly « 8 ^ of the families included had one child'
35 had two children, 38 had three children, 24 had four children
12 had five children, 8 had six children, 3 had seven children, and
1 family had eight children.
Less than two-thirds of the families were reported as being in need
because of the death of the father. Desertion by the father was
given as the reason in almost one-fourth of the cases. This would
seem to point toward the need of better provision than now exists for
enforcing the father’s responsibility to support the family. I t would
not be contemplated that public aid to those children should be
granted unless everything possible had been done by legal and other
measures to enforce this obligation of the father. This group of chil­
dren should not be permitted to suffer because of the lack of aid, but
er safeguards should be applied for the protection of the public
s' ^^e same is true in regard to cases of divorce and separation.
The following are the causes of dependency as reported for the 129
families:

a

Causes of dependency.

Total families.

Number.

___ 129
Death of father__________________ _____ ______ __
_ g2
Desertion of father_____________ L _ _ L ^ 4II j I l_3___~ ~~~ 29
Father physically or mentally incapacitated __________ _
8
Parents separated_______________ _________________
5
Parents divorced_________ _____ ______________
_ __ ~~ . 2
Father in hospital for insane__________________~~~ ~
2
Father in prison.Li____________________

In a considerable number of the families reported children had been
getting into difficulty because of the absence from home of mothers
who were working and who had to leave the children to their own re­
sources during the day or in the evening. In the 129 families 89
mothers were reported as having some earnings. Most of these
mothers were employed at domestic service, general housework, or
day’s work; a few were doing laundry work at home. There were
eliminated from the list of families reported by the agencies those in
which the mother was employed in Government offices or at other
work paying similarly high wages, since it would be assumed that the
amount of aid granted would not be sufficient to make it desirable for
these women to give up their employment to stay at home and take
care of their children. Children from most of these families had
been placed by the mothers in institutions. In the families that were
included the mothers were not able to earn enough to support the
c^ dreib and in many cases it seemed very desirable that the mother
should not be away from home as much as it was necessary for her to
be m order to earn this partial support for the family.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

CHILD DEPENDENCY

&8

in

THE DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA,

The sources of income were reported as follows:,
Sources of income

N um ber.

Total families____________________________________129
Earnings of mother--------- ----------------------- ---------------------- 45
Earnings of mother and children-------------------------------------- 14
Relief agencies----------------------------- --------------------------------- 14
7
Earnings of mother and rental of rooms----------------------------7
Earnings of mother and aid from relatives -------------------------8
Earnings of mother and aid from relief agencies--------------------3
Earnings of children---------------------------------------------------- 3
Aid from relatives and relief agencies-------------------------------Earnings of mother, aid from relief agencies, and rental of
2
rooms---------------------------------------- -----------------------------2
Aid from relatives------- \--------------------------- ------------------ Earnings of mother and children, aid from relief agencies, and
2
rental of rooms______ ----------- ------------ -------- -------------2
Earnings of children and aid from relief agencies------------------2
Aid from relatives and rental of rooms-------------------- ---------1
Rental of rooms---------------- --------------------------------------- ---1
Father’s life insurance. _ ----------------------------------------------1
Earnings of mother and children and rental of rooms-------------1
Earnings of mother and children and aid from relief agency----1
Earnings of mother and children and aid from relatives----------1
Earnings of mother, rental of rooms, and father’s life insurance
1
Earnings of children and aid from relatives------------------------1
Aid from relief agency and rental of_ rooms----------------------- Earnings of children, aid from relief agency, and rental of
1
rooms__________________________________ ____________
9
Not reported__________________________________________

The causes of dependency, the ages of the children, and the sources
of income for each family are shown in the following detailed table:
Causes of dependency, ages of children, and sources of present income.
Sched­
Ages of children under
Cause of dependency.
ule
16.
No.

Divorce of parents___
Desertion of father__
Divorce of parents---9 Desertion of father__
10
11
12 ........do..........................
13

6 months, 2,4,7,10,11,
13.
5 children between 2
and 8.
1,3,8,11.......................
4, 7, 9'._____ _______
3, s'<..............................
10,11____ ________ _
11, 1 3 ______________
7, 9,11
_________
5, 6 ,8,10
_______
3, 7,9,12...................
Z, 9| 10,12__________
12,15 _______ ____—
13..................................

14

13___ _____________

15

11,12.............................

16

5 ,1 3 .--........... ............

17

11,15_____ _________

1
2

Father physically incapacitated.

3
Desertion of father__

18

13,15.............................

19

11, 15............ - ...............

20

10, 12, 15......... -............

21

5, 12_______________


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Sources of present income.

Aid from relief agency.
Mother’s income from store; aid from relief agency.
Aid from relief agency.
Do.
M other’s earnings, domestic service.
M other’s earnings, clerk, $15 a week.
M other’s earnings, domestic service.
M other’s earnings, clerk.
M other’s earnings, waitress, $12 a week.
M other’s earnings, attendant.
M other’s earnings, clerk, $15 a week.
Not reported, mother unable to work.
Mother’s earnings, laundry work at home, $8-$10
a week. M other unable to work full time. Aid
from relatives.
M other’s earnings, day’s work (3 days a week);
aid from relatives.
Mother’s earnings, selling fruit on street; earnings
of 17-year-old boy.
M other’s earnings, housework and day’s work;
earnings of 16 and 18 year old boys.
M other’s earnings, matron at theater, $12 a week;
rental of rooms.
Mother’s earnings, domestic service, $10 a week;
earnings of 17-year-old boy.
M other’i earnings, day’s work; earnings of 16year-old boy.
Mother’s earnings, maid, $10 a week; earnings of
20-year-old boy.
Mother’s earnings, domestic service, $10 a week;
earnings of 18-year-old boy.

AID TO D E P E N D E N T C H IL D R E N IN T H E IR O W N H O M E S .

99

Causes of dependency, ages of children, and sources of present income—Continued.
Sched­
ule Cause of dependency. Ages of children under
16.
No.

Sources of present income.

22

Parents separated___ 12,14........................... . Mother’s earnings, laundry work, $4 a week;

23

Death of father_____

24

Desertion of father__

10,12,14.................. -

Father physically in­
capacitated.
26 Desertion of father__
27 ....... do...........................
28 ........do........... ..............

3,9,13..................... .

25

29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52

2,10,12...............

12,14,15....................... Mother’s earnings, cook in lunch room, $13 a week.
10,12,15 .
Mother’s earnings; earnings of boy over 16.
10,13| 15
Mother’s earnings, day’s work, $9.50 a week; aid

from relatives.
Mother’s earnings, domestic service, $10 a week;
rental of rooms.
___ do........... ' •............. 10,11,12
Mother’s earnings, cleaning; rental of rooms.
....... do................ .......... 6, 9,11,15...
Mother’s earnings, laundry work (irregular)
rental of rooms; father’s life insurance.
___ do......................... . 6, 7,12,14
Mother’s earnings, sewing; rental of rooms.
....... do........................... 8, 9,11,13,15.
Mother’s earnings, domestic service, $6 a week;
earnings of 18-year-old boy.
Desertion of father__ 1, 2, 4, 8, JO, 12______ Mother’s earnings, day’s work.
Death of father......... . 3, 8,10,11,13,15.
Mother’s earnings, domestic service; rental of
rooms.
Desertion of father__ 12...............................
Mother’s earnings, book bindery, $18 a week.
Death of father_____ 12,14............
Mother’s earnings, domestic service, $45 a month.
___ do.................. ........ io;i2........... ............ .
Mother’s earnings, laundry work, $9 a week.
___ do........................... 9,14.............
Mother’s earnings, laundry work at home, $8 a
week.
Desertion of father__ 6,13,13................... .
Mother’s earnings, laundry work, $10 a week.
Father mentally in ­ 7 ,8 ,1 2 ,1 4 ................. . Mother’s earnings.
Death of father......... _ 5,11,12...............

capacitated.
Separation of parents. 11,12,15......................
Death of father____ 3,8,10,13,14
___do........................... 10, 11, 15 (one child,
age not reported).
Desertion of father__ 1 month, 2,9________
Death of fa th e r......... 8,10,14___
___ do.................. ........ 1,4, 5, 7,8r 9,11,13
___do.......................... 4, 7,9,10,14
Father physically in­ 6 months, 2,3,9_____
capacitated.
Death of father_____ 3,13,14........
____do.... .................. . 10,13.
....... do........... .............. 2,4.......

53 ........do..................... .

8,11.......

54 ........do....................... . 12,14,14.
55 Desertion of father__ 8,10,13................... .
56 ........do........... ..........
57

Death of father.____

58 •___do..........................

2,5,7
10,11,12..
11,12,14

59

Desertion of father__ 8,10,15....................... .

60

Death of father........... 8,11,14_____

61

Father mentally in­
capacitated.
Death of father_____

62

2 ,3 ,4 ...........................
5,8,9,11,14...

63 ........do_____________ 7,9,11,13,15
64 ........do.............1........... 3,3,6,13
65 ........do........................... 5,7 (one child, age not
reported).
66 Father physically in­ 2,4,6,8,12,14________
capacitated.
67
68
69
70
71

earnings of 17-year-old girl.
*
Mother’s earnings, laundry work and cleaning,
$12 a week.
Moltier’s earnings, maid, $35 a month; rental of
rooms.
Mother’s earnings, cook, $30 a month.

Death of father........... 4,6,8,10,11,12...
........do...... ...................
____do........... ..............
....... do...........................
........dO-_.______ ____

3,5..................
13,15..............................
5,6.................................
11,12,15.

72 ........do........................... 5,7,11,14 .
73
6,7,9,14.............. . . . . .


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Mother’s earnings, maid, $7 a week.
Mother’s earnings, domestic service.
Mother’s earnings, dishwasher, $12 a week.
Earnings of 18-year-old boy.
Rental of rooms; aid from relatives
Not reported.
Do.
Do.
Aid from relief agency.
Earnings of 17-year-old girl; aid fromrelief agency.
Mother’s earnings, waitress, $45 a month; aid
from relief agency.
Mother’s earnings, laundry work at home; earn­
ings of 19-year-old boy; rental of rooms.
Aid from relief agency.
Mother’s earnings; earnings of .16-year-old boy;
aid from relief agency; rental of ro o m s
Mother’s earnings, laundry work; aid from
relief agency.
Mother’s earnings, book bindery, $15 a week;
aid from relief agency; rental of rooms.
Mother’s earnings, caretaker at school, $62 a
month; earnings of boys, selling papers.
Mother’s earnings, laundry; earnings of 17year-old boy.
Mother’s earnings, laundry; earnings of 17year-old boy; aid from relatives.
Mother’s earnings, maid, $11 a week; rental of
rooms; aid from relief agency.
Mother’s earnings, laundry work; earnings of
18-year-old boy; aid from relief agency.
Mother’s earnings, charwoman; aid from rela­
tives.
Mother’s earnings; aid from relief agency.
Mother’s earnings, laundry work; aid from rela­
tives.
Mother’s earnings, cleaning; earnings of 16year-old boy; rental of rooms; aid from relief
agency.
Mother’s earnings, day’s work, $20 a month;
earnings of 20-year-old boy.
Mother’s earnings, checker at hotel, $15 a week.
Mother’s earnings, laundry work.
Mother’s earnings, laundry work, $15 a week.
Mother’s earnings, day’s work; aid from relief
agency. .
Do.
*

Mother’s earnings, day’s work and laundry work.

100

c h il d

d epen d en cy

in

T H E D IS T R IC T O P C O L U M B IA .

@mm of d&pehd'ehcjj, ages of children, and source$ of pment iMome~-&m%iftm&,
Sched­

ule
No.

Cause of dependency.

74 D eath of fa t h e r .......
Diiseftibh 61fatliSf—..
jbf fathfei fz.zzt;
D&sbrtioh bf father-.-.
Death bffather.—---.
.——d b . . .........
Father id hospital for
insane;

Ages of children under
16.

Sources of present income.

earnings, laundry work and cleaning,
llia^ eek . .
M8ffieF§eaffiifig§;
)0.,
7,
let’s
8, M m I —
___ i V l U L lie jr ’S tJWI UAAlgO, . « v m o o o w w » ■
2 g ft, f. 9
4 m o n th s ; 2Z 4~,6( 8* 1 3 . Rental ®f focpSj hid froifi rel&tiV'feS;
Rarhings
I,
4,8, ii} 13) 15—
——— bfolder hoy, paper roiite; ftid from relief
M other’s

.........

10, 1% 1 4 ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; 4 , 8 , 9 r. - ^ - - - = ^ - = - ^ - ;

Earnings of 17-year-oid boy; rehtal of foOihS; aid
from relief agency.
AidIpsa reM&paey- .
„
Aid frOSrelatives jaid freta relief agency.
Aidfrofii reliefagencyjrental of rooms.
Aid froin reliefageney; ,
Eafflirip 6f,eld» daiightefj
Aid from relief apney.-

....d b ..- .....- - ..----

lb.ZZIIIIIIZIIIZIZ.ZI;

Aid frain relief ageneiesj aid frem fdatiyea.

Death of father.......

8.9.11.13

....

Rental ofroom.

II,

Mother’s earnings,
maid; earnings of 17-year-oid
14....................................
....................

D eath of fa th er.-.__

5 ,7 ,1 0 ,l3 ,U - - - - - 5t &

—

li 10,13) 15— — - - 7,10(l | ; - - - - - - rZ iZ a b Z rrim iiiiiiiii

88

——d b . --------- Desertibfl bffather—

..d o .. . . . . . . . . . . . . —
Earnings of i 7-year-old girl; aid from relatives.
D eath o ffa th e r ..* -..- I I , 1 3 - . . . .
3 - . . . . . . . . . . .Father’s
. . . . . . . life-instiraiice money.
. . „ -d O .... . . . . . . . — — I ,
Aid from relief agency.
Desertion of father— 13,15.-...-...... . .. .. .
Desertion of father—
D eath of fa th er... . . . .

8..........................

97 ___ do............ ...............

1 0 ,1 2 .................................. .

98

99

100
101
102

103
104

Desertion of father— 10.11.13 ..................
___ d o .......... ...........— 1 — .............. — _______
. ............
Separation of parents. 6.7..
___ do . . . . ........ ......... 8months, 2_______
Desertion of father— 1,1,3,6,8,10........ —
Father in hospital for 1 ,2 ,6 ............ — ...............
insane.
Death of father___... 2 , 3 , 5 , 6 ..................................

,

Mother’s earnings, selling lemons on street.
Mather's earnings, laundry work at home.
Not reported.
Do.

Do.
Do.
Aid from relatives.
Mother’s earnings, domestic servant, rental of
rooms.
;
earnings, chambermaid.
Separation of parents. 10months, 2............... Mother’s
Mother’s
earnings,
cleaning
cars.
Death of father_____ 2 5 9 14___________ Mother’s earnings, paper factory.
........do........................... . 10months, 3, 5, 6, 8...
laundry work.
6months, 2,4,7,8,12,14 Mother’s earnings,
earnings, office work, $16.50 a week.
6,8—.................. - Mother’s
Earnings
of
19-year-old
girl.
3.6.12.14..
. — d o ....................... !
Mother’s earnings,
waitress, $40 a month.
_________ _________
_________
___do.......................... 2.4
Notreported.
„
5,8________
_____
___do..........................
Aidfrom relatives; aid from relief agency.
___do.......................... 1, 3, 3, 4, 7, 7,10____ Aid
from
relatives.
3,
5,
6
,
8
,
10________
___do....................
Desertion of father__ 10, 12,15.................... Mother’s earnings, day’s work; aid from relief
agency.
from relief agency.
■
..
Death of father.......... 4, 7, 9,10,14............. . Aid
Mother’s
earnings, chambermaid, $50 a montn.
5.8.10.11..
—
Desertion of father__
Mother’s
earnings,
clerk
in
store.
..— ........
Father physically in­ 1.3.4
capacitated.
earnings, charwoman, $16 a week.
Death of father_____ 3, 7,10,12.................. Mother’s
Mother’s earnings, domestic service, $8 a week.
___ do______ . . . ----- 1„ .............................. Aid
from
relief
agency.
Father mentally inca­ 7 ,9 ,1 1 -— .- — . .

.

105
106
107

Mother’s earnings.

119
120
121

122

pacitated.
Death offather.........

126
127
128
129

.......d o ................... — 9 months, 3...............
.......d o .............. ........ 2 ,4 ,5 .............
___ do____________ 13,15..........................
Father in prison____ 7,10,12.— .............

1, 3, 8 , 10,12,15.........

123 Desertion of father... 4, 5........ ....................
124 ___ d o ........ .............. 7 7 8 r i 3 - z : z : : : : : z : : : z 125 Death of father____

Do.

Mother’s earnings; aid from relief agency.
Mother’s earnings; aid from relatives.
Mother’s earnings, clerk in store; earnings of 17year-old girl.
Mother’s earnings.
Mother’s earnings, clerk, $20 a week.
M other’s earnings, m aid, $45 a month.
Mother’s earnings, domestic service; aid from
relatives.

ESTIMATE OF APPROPRIATION NEEDED FOR THE DISTRICT OF
*
COLUMBIA.

The accompanying table shows the total annual appropriations for
public aid to dependent children in their own homes in 12 counties m
five different States, the number of families and number of children


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

AID TO D E P E N D E N T C H IL D R E N IN T H E IR O W N H O M E S .

101

aided, and the total child populations in each county, according to
the last Federal census. On the basis of the data given, comparing the
child population under 16 years of age of the District of Columbia with
the total for six of the counties listed 1 and assuming the same per­
centage of dependents, the number of children to receive such aid in a
year in the District of Columbia would be about 950. (Separate esti­
mates based on the figures for each of these six counties would give the
following approximate numbers of dependent children in the District
of Columbia who would require aid in their homes: 725, 970, 1,080,
880, 1,250, 1,910.)
Similarly, on the basis of the aggregate amount expended in the
six localities cited, the total appropriation for the District of Columbia
would approximate $100,000. (On the basis of the appropriations
in each of the six counties, the estimates for the annual expenditures
in the District of Columbia would range from $74,000 to $199,000, as
follows: $74,000, $78,000, $104,000, $108,000, $139,000, $199,000.)
Population, appropriation for public aid to dependent children in their own homes,
and number of children and families aided during one year, in each of 12 counties.
Number receiving
aid during year.
Total
appro­
Children priation.
Children. Families.
under
16 years.

Population, 1920.
District of Columbia and counties (year specified).
Total.

D istrict o f Colum bia......... .............................. ............ 487,571
Cuyahoga County, Ohio (Cleveland)—1921....... ...... 943,495
634, 688
Erie County. N . Y . (Buffalo)—1921_______ ______
Milwaukee County, Wis. (Milwaukee)—1921______ 539, 449
Hamilton County, Ohio (Cincinnati)—1919_______ 493, 678
Hennepin County, M inn. (Minneapolis)—1920____ 415,419
Westchester County, N . Y . (W hite Plains)—1920___ 344,436
Monroe County, N . Y . (Rochester)—1921_________ 352, 034
Ramsey County, M inn. (St. Paul)—1920______ :___ 244, 554
Albany County, N . Y. (Albany)—1922___________ 186, 106
Oneida County, N . Y . (Utica)—1921.......................... 182, 833
154, 029
Polk County, Iowa (Des Moines) 1920___________
Rensselaer County, N . Y. (Troy)—1921___________ 113,129

95,506
289,824 $264,166
193,112 210, 655
162, 804
91, 863
124,811 287, 554
110, 270
90, 228
109,146 123,871
84, 755
100,122
66,985 104,373
47,405
53,767
54, 066
78,942
42,462
32,809
27,763
57,875

11, 565
i 1,468
1,129
927
1,116
1,132
732
1,035
536
498
1 554
555

567
432
341
318
317
334
242
342
196
169
188
215

* Number of children not available in report for this year; estimated on the basis of figures reported for
previous year.
1 Report states th at owing to inadequate appropriation none of the 232 applicants in 1919 could be granted
aid because of waiting list from previous year..

ESSENTIALS OP A MOTHERS’ PENSION LAW.

In the consideration of measures for child care and protection in
the District of Columbia the provision of mothers’ pensions to
prevent the breaking up of homes because of poverty is only one of
several important subjects that must be given attention. I t has
been pointed out that the juvenile-court law of the District needs
amendment to bring it into line with the laws of progressive States.
The method of handling nonsupport and desertion cases is of par­
ticular interest at this time and has an important bearing on the
subject of child dependency. Child welfare in the District would be
promoted by the provision of a sufficiently large staff for the juvenile
court to permit the highest grade of service and of the number of
workers needed by the Board of Children’s Guardians in order to
iE rie County, N. Y.; Hennepin County, M inn.; Albany County, N . Y.; Oneida County, N. Y.; Polk
County, Iowa; Rensselaer County, N. Y.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

102

c h il d d e p e n d e n c y i n

t h e d is t r ic t oe coltjMS ia .

insure the grade of investigation and supervision essential to the
welfare of its wards. Another important need—the coordination of
the public charities of the District—is discussed briefly in this report,
on pages 12-13.
While legislation of this character must be drawn up with due
consideration of the conditions existing in each State or otner division
of government, and especially with regard to laws on related subjects,
there are certain fundamental principles that must be observed if
mothers’ pension laws are to be effective child-welfare measures.
These may be summarized briefly as follows:
1. Application broad enough to permit aid whenever by such means
a suitable home may be maintained.
2. Age limitation to conform with education and child-labor laws.
3. Amount of aid to be based on the needs of each individual
family, with due regard to other available resources.
4. Inquiry in each case to determine the home conditions and the
assistance needed for proper care of the children.
5. Continued oversight in order that the welfare of the children
may be protected and the aid adjusted to meet changing conditions.
6. Provision of safeguards necessary to protect the public treasury
against fraudulent or unwarranted claims and against burdens that
should be borne by other communities or by individuals legally
responsible and able to furnish support.
7. Administration lodged in the public agency best fitted to carry
out the provisions of the law as a constructive child-welfare measure.
8. Appropriation adequate to carry out the purpose of the law,
with respect both to funds required for aid and to expenses of
administration.
The following analysis of mothers’ pension laws in the United
States covers the legislation enacted prior to 1924 by 42 of the
States.
PERSONS TO WHOM AID MAY BE GIVEN.

The first state-wide law providing for public aid to children in
their own homes—passed in Illinois in 1911—was called a “ funds to
parents act.” This law was very broad in its inclusion, providing
that—
If the parent or parents of such dependent or neglected child are poor and
unable to properly care for the said child, but are otherwise proper guardians
and it is for the welfare of such child to remain at home, the court may enter an
order finding such facts and fixing the amount of money necessary to enable the
parent or parents to properly care for such child * * *.

The Colorado law, passed by popular vote in 1912, and still in
effect, incorporated this same provision. (The Illinois law has since
been changed.)
The trend of this legislation in the various States has been toward
widening the application of the law and giving the benefit of the aid
to dependent children wherever the circumstances are such that the
home should be maintained. While a few States still limit the aid
to children of widows, the prevailing method is either to permit aid
to be granted to any mother with dependent children or to define
certain types of cases, including: Mother widowed, deserted, or
divorced; father physically or mentally incapacitated, or imprisoned.
Such restrictions as are considered necessary are made in cases of
desertion and divorce.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

AID TO D E P E N D E N T C H IL D R E N IN T H E IR O W N H O M E S .

103

The following provisions are examples of the broad application
of these laws in seven-eighths of the States:
Delaware.—Any widowed or abandoned mother of a child or children under
* * * years of age who is unable, without aid, to support, maintain and
educate such child or children, or any mother of such child or children whose
husband is permanently, either physically or mentally, unable, without aid, to
support, maintain, and educate such child or children, or any mother of such
child or children whose husband has been sentenced to a term in prison of not
less than six months, and who is unable, without aid, to support, maintain, and
educate such child or children, shall be deemed to be within the class described
by this section. The term “ mother” as used in this section shall include any
woman standing in loco parentis to any child or children under 14 years of age.
[Laws of 1921, ch. 183.]
Maine.—Every city and town shall, subject to the provisions hereinafter
contained, render suitable and needful aid to any mother residing therein, with
a dependent child or children under the age of 16 years, who needs and desires
such aid to enable her to maintain herself and children in her home and who is
fit and capable, mentally, morally, and physically to bring up her children.
[Laws of 1917, ch. 222, sec. 1, as amended by Laws of 1919, ch. 17, sec. 1.]
Minnesota.—Whenever any child under the age of 16 years who is not law­
fully entitled to apply for and receive an employment certificate is found by
juvenile court to be dependent the court shall, when requested so to do, and in
the same proceeding, make its findings upon the following points:
(a) Whether the mother of the child is a widow;
(b) If her husband is living, whether he is an inmate of a penal institution
under a sentence which will not terminate within three months after
the date of such finding; or is an inmate of a State insane asylum or
hospital, or of a State hospital for inebriates; or is unable to labor
for the support of his family by reason of physical disabilities; or is
and for one year has been under indictment for the crime of abandon­
ing such child;
(c) Whether the dependency of the child is due to the poverty of the mother
without neglect, improvidence, or other fault on her part;
(d) Whether the mother is otherwise a proper person to have the custody
of the child;
(e) Whether the welfare of the child will be subserved by permitting him to
remain in the custody of the mother, if adequate means of support
shall be provided. [Laws of 1917, ch. 223, sec. 1, as amended by
Laws of 1919, ch. 328, and by Laws of 1921, ch. 435.]
Whenever the court shall be of the opinion that the welfare of a dependent
child will be best served by permitting him to live in the family of his grand­
mother, all the provisions of this act shall be so construed as to apply to such
grandmother and her husband in like manner as to the mother and her hus­
band. [Laws of 1917, ch. 223, sec. 10.]
* * * Provided, however, That no allowance shall be made when the hus­
band is under indictment for abandonment unless the court is satisfied that he
is a fugitive from justice and that the mother has in good faith assisted and will
continue to assist in all reasonable efforts to apprehend him. [Laws of 1921,
ch. 435, sec. 1 f,J*
Washington.—In every county it shall be the duty of the county commission­
ers to provide out of the moneys of the county treasury an amount sufficient to
meet the purposes of this law for the support of mothers who by reason of desti­
tution, insufficient property or income, or lack of earning capacity, are unable
to support their children under the age of * * *. [Laws of 1915, ch. 135,
sec. 1, as amended by Laws of 1919, ch. 103.]
R esidence and citizenship.

The eligibility requirements as to residence and citizenship vary in
the different States from a minimum of one year in the county to
citizenship in the United States with five years’ residence in the
State ana three years in the county. Most States do not require
citizenship or declaration of intention to become a citizen of the
United States, the laws of only 10 containing such a provision.
Twenty-six of the 42 States having mothers’ pension laws specify

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

104

C H IL D D E PE N D E N C Y I N T H E D IS T R IC T OF COLU M BIA .

residence in the State. This requirement is satisfied by a residence
of one or two years in 13 States, three years in 5 States, and four
or five years in 4 States. Four States require that the father must
have been a resident of the State at the time of his death or when he
became incapacitated.
Thirty-one States require residence in the local political unit, as
follows:
6 months____________

1 year

2 years.

____________

____

3 years_____________
5 years_____________

South Dakota, Idaho. ., T
T,
T ».
Arkansas, Colorado,Florida, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana,
Minnesota, Missouri (except Jackson County and
St. Louis), North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma,
Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Virginia,
Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Wyoming.
Nebraska, Nevada, New York, Ohio, Tennessee,
Texas, Utah, and Jackson County and St. Louis,
Missouri.
Illinois, Maryland.
New Jersey.

The following illustrate residence requirements of different types:
New Hampshire.—No aid shall be given to a mother unless [she] * * *
*has been a resident of this State for at least two years before she apphes for aid.
[Laws of 1921, ch. 85, sec. 40.]
Pennsylvania.—In order to prevent the alienation of the citizenship of those
who may receive the benefits of this act, no family shall be a beneficiary there­
under unless the mother has been a resident continuously of the Statfe for a period
of two years and of the county in which she applied for assistance for a period of
one year. No family entitled to receive the benefits of this act m any county
shall be deemed to have lost its residence in such county within one year after
removal therefrom, but any such family shall, if it returns to the county in which
it was entitled to receive assistance within said year, be immediately entitled to
assistance in such county. [Laws of 1919, No. 354, sec. 7.]
Wisconsin.—* * * ; the mother or grandparent or such other person must
have resided in the county in which application is made for aid for at least one
year prior to the date of such application. [Stat. sec. 573 (b), pp. 4ol—2, as
amended by Laws of 1919, ch. 308, sec. 1.]
Ownership of property.

In the majority of the States ownership of real esate and other
property is not specifically made a disqualification. Provisions on
this point are illustrated by the following:
Louisiana.—The mother shall not receive such relief who is the owner of real
property or personal property (other than household goods) exceeding one
thousand ($ 1,000) dollars in value; or when the child or children have relatives of
sufficient ability and means to support them. [Laws of 1920, Act No. 209, sec. o.J
Minnesota.—The ownership by a mother of personal property of the value of
one hundred dollars, exclusive of appropriate clothing and household furniture
and of such tools, implements, and domestic animals as in the opinion of the court
it is expedient to retain for the purpose of reducing the expense or increasing the
income of the family or of real estate not used as a home; or of real estate, when
used, as a home, of a value disproportionate to the actual needs of the family,
shall be a bar to any allowance under this act. [Laws of 1917, ch. 223, sec. 8.J
Nebraska.—A mother shall not receive such relief who is the owner of real
property or personal property other than the household goods of more than two
thousand dollars in value. [Laws of 1919, ch. 221, sec. 7.]
Wisconsin.—The ownership by a mother of a homestead shall not prevent the
granting of aid under the provisions of this section if the rental thereof would not
exceed the rental which a family of the same size as the family of such parent,
receiving aid, would be ôbliged to pay for livmg quarters. [Stat. 1919, ch. 48,
sec. 48.33 (5).]


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

ATT) TO D E P E N D E N T C H IL D R E N IN T H E IR O W N H O M E S .

105

TERMS AND AMOUNT OF ALLOWANCE.

Conditions of allowance.

Conditions determining the granting of aid refer mainly to economic
need and the mother’s ability to give the children proper care.
Examples of good provisions are found among the requirements in
the laws of a number of States (Arkansas, Idaho, Illinois, Louisiana,
Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, North Dakota, South Dakota,
Tennessee, Utah, Washington, and West Virginia). They include
the following:
Such allowance shall be made * * * only upon the following conditions:
(D The child or children, for whose benefit the allowance is made, must be
living with the mother of such child or children; (2) * * * and when by
means of such allowance, she will be able to remain at home with her children;
(3) the mother must, in the judgment of the probate court, be a proper person,
physically and mentally, for the bringing up of her children; (4) such allowance
shall, in the judgment of the court, be necessary to save the child or children from
neglect.

Sections regarding assistance by relatives are included in the
Illinois and Nebraska laws:
Illinois.—A mother shall not receive such relief if her child or children has or
have relatives of sufficient ability, and who shall be obligated by the finding and
judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction to support them. [Laws of 1913,
sec. 11, p. 137, as amended by Laws of 1921, p. 162.]
Nebraska.—A mother shall not receive such relief if her child or children have
relatives within the second degree of sufficient abilities to support them, said
relationship to be computed according to the method of determining intestate
succession to property in Nebraska. [Laws of 1919, ch. 221, sec. 7.]

An important item is included in the laws of Delaware and Ne­
braska in regard to safeguarding the education of the children re­
ceiving this form of public aid:
Delaware.—That the child, or children, if physically and mentally able, attend
school and have a satisfactory record from the teacher. [Laws of 1917, ch. 227,
as amended by Laws of 1921, ch. 183.]
Nebraska.—The relief granted shall, in the judgment of the court, be neces­
sary to save the child or children from neglect and to furnish such child with
suitable education. [Laws of 1919, ch. 221, sec. 7.]
Ages of children.

The most important consideration in regard to the age to which a
child may be granted aid is that it shall be in conformity with com­
pulsory school attendance and child labor laws. Michigan and
Tennessee have placed the age limitation at 17 years. In 26 States
children may be granted aid until they are 16 years of age, some­
times with the proviso that aid shall cease when the child is eligible
for an employment certificate, unless it appears to be desirable to
permit him to continue his education. Provision is also made in a
number of States for continuance of aid when a child over the age
limitation is incapacitated.
The following States permit assistance until the child is 16 years
old:
Iowa.
Arizona.
Louisiana.
California.
Maine.
Colorado.
Connecticut.
Minnesota.
Missouri.
Florida.
Montana.
Illinois.
New Hampshire.
Indiana.
88962°—24f----- 8

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Nevada.
New Jersey.
New York.
North Dakota.
Ohio.
Oregon.
Pennsylvania.

South Dakota.
Texas.
Utah.
Vermont.
Virginia.

106

C H IL D D E PE N D E N C Y IN T H E D ISTR IC T OF C O LU M BIA .

Three types of provisions follow:
Louisiana.—That whenever any child shall arrive at the age of sixteen (16)
years any relief granted to the mother for such child shall cease; Provided, how­
ever, That where a child of sixteen (16) years or over may be ill or incapacitated
for work, the mother shall receive funds for his or her care during such illness or
incapacity, which shall cease on his or her arriving at the age of eighteen (18),
provided that the court may, in its discretion, at any time before such child
reaches the age of eighteen (18) modify or vacate the order granting such relief
to any mother or child. [Laws of 1920, Act No. 209, sec. 7.]
Nevada.—Whenever any child shall reach the age of 16 years, any allowance
made to the mother for the benefit of such child shall cease, but when any child
on reaching the age of 16 years shall be incapable of self-support on account of
physical disability, the pension for the benefit of such child may be continued
for such time as may be fixed by majoritv vote of the board of county com­
missioners. [Laws of 1921, ch. 107, sec. 4 .]
Pennsylvania. It shall be the duty of the board of trustees to provide, from
the_ funds made available under the provisions of this act, as aid in supporting
their children in their own homes, assistance to poor and dependent mothers of
proved character and ability, who have children under the age of 16 years * * *.
All payments made under the provisions of this act shall continue at the wili
of the trustees but not beyond the time when any child under the provisions of
the law may secure employment, excepting where the child is physically unable
to earn wages or is at school with a satisfactory record of attendance and scholar­
ship, in which case such payment shall continue until such child has reached the
age of 16 years. [Laws of 1919, No. 354, secs. 6 and 11.]
Amount of allowance.

Experience in the administration of mothers’ pension laws has
shown that it is desirable to avoid strict limitation of allowance and
instead to permit assistance to be based upon the needs of each
family. In determining the amount of the grant required due con­
sideration should be given to the needs of the family as determined
by its composition, as well as to available resources of earnings and
aid from relatives. The laws of Colorado, Massachusetts, and
Rhode Island permit adjustment of the grants to the needs of each
family, specifying merely that the aid must be sufficient to care
properly for the child at home; in Arizona the amount of the aid
is fixed by the child-welfare board, and Maine leaves the amount to
be determined by the State and county boards.
The Ohio law (providing a maximum of $35 a month for the first
child and $10 a month for other children) and the Minnesota law
(with a maximum of $20 a month for the first child and $15 for each
additional child) are examples of the most adequate grants allowed
when the maximum aid is fixed by statute. In practice, in these
and other States, aid is granted to each family in accordance with
individual needs and resources, so far as the limitations of the law
permit.
Colorado.—If the parent or parents of such dependent or neglected child are
poor and unable to properly care for such child, but otherwise are proper guard­
ians, and it is for the welfare of such child to remain at home, the court may
enter an order finding such facts and fixing the amount of money necessary to
enable the parent or parents to properly care for such child, * * *. [Laws
of 1913, sec. 7, pp. 694-696.]
1
Massachusetts.—The aid furnished shall be sufficient to enable the mothers
to bring up their children properly in their own homes; and such mothers and
their children shall not be deemed to be paupers by reason of receiving aid as
aforesaid. [Laws of 1913, ch. 763.]
Minnesota.—The court shall further find, and order the payment of the sum
of money which it deems necessary for the county to allow the mother in order
to enable her to bring up the child properly in her own home, not exceeding


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

AID TO DEPENDENT CHILDREN IN THEIR OWN HOMES.

107

twenty dollars per month for one child and not exceeding fifteen dollars per
month for each additional child; * * *. [Laws of 1917, ch. 223, sec. 1. as
amended by Laws of 1921, ch. 435.]
Ohio.—The juvenile court may make an allowance to each of such women as
follows; Not to exceed thirty-five dollars a month when she has but one child not
entitled to an age and schooling certificate, and if she has more than one child not
entitled to an age and schooling certificate, it shall not exceed thirty-five dollars
a month for the first child and ten dollars a month for each of the other children
not entitled to an age and schooling certificate. [General Code 1910, sec. 1683-2,
as amended by Laws of 1921, sec. 1, p. 70.]
ADMINISTRATION AND PROCEDURE.

Administrative ageneies.

Differences in the types of administrative agencies are traceable
largely to fundamental differences in State and local conditions in
the various sections of the country. In the Middle West, where
mothers’ pensions had their origin, the administration was placed in
the juvenile court—the public agency that appeared to be best equipped
to handle the work through its staff experienced in social investiga­
tion and supervision. In other States the county, town, or municipal
board giving poor relief has been made the administrative agency in
granting aid to mothers of dependent children. County boards
created for the sole purpose of mothers’ aid administration are found
in New York and Pennsylvania; town or city boards or directors of
mothers’ aid may be appointed in Rhode Island; in Indiana aid may
be granted to dependent children in their own homes by the county
boards of children’s guardians. Administration is by a State board
in Arizona, California, Delaware, New Hampshire, New Jersey, and
Vermont. The Delaware Mothers’ Pension Commission was spe­
cially created. The Arizona State Board of Child Welfare and the
New Jersey Board of Children’s Guardians, agencies caring for all
dependent children who become wards of the State, also have the
administration of aid to dependent children in their own homes.
A law passed by New York in 1922 authorizes the establishment
of county boards of child welfare, responsible for the relief and care
of dependent children committed to them by the, courts and for the
granting of mothers’ allowances.
* * * A [county] board of child welfare when so established shall be respon­
sible for the relief and care of dependent children received by it as public charges
and of such children as may be committed to it by the courts, and it shall adminis­
ter public aid for dependent children generally. * * * The board may grant
an allowance to any dependent widow, or to any mother whose husband is an
inmate of a State institution for the insane, or confined under sentence of two
years or more actual confinement in the State prison, or to any mother whose
husband is totally incapacitated by physical disability or ailment. No such
allowance shall be made to any person unless the board of child welfare deems
such person to be a proper person mentally and morally and physically to care
for and bring up the child or children for whose benefit such allowance is made.
* * * [New York, Laws of 1922, ch. 546.]
Methods of making application for aid.

The following sections define methods by which application may
be made to boards having the administration of mothers’ aid laws.
When a court is the administrative agency the procedure in granting
aid is necessarily more formal and detailed:
Hawaii.—Applications for allowances under the provisions hereof may be made
directly to the local board of child welfare by the mother applying for such
allowance or by some suitable person acting on her behalf. [Laws of 1919,
Act 129, sec. 7.]

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

108

CH ILD ' D E PE N D E N C Y IN T H E D ISTR IC T OF CO LUM BIA.

New Hampshire.—An applicant for aid shall file a petition under oath with
the * * * asking for an allowance and setting forth in detail the^ facts on
which she relies and it shall be the duty of the * * * to investigate the
case. * * * [Laws of 1921, ch. 85, Part I, sec. 38.]
New York.—An application for allowance may be made directly to the local
board of child welfare or to any member of the board. [Laws of 1915, ch. 228,
sec. 153.]
Investigation of application.

The laws of the several States include a statement relating to
investigation of each application in order to determine eligibility
under the law, the character of the home, and the amount of aid
required.
Maine.—When such application has been made to the municipal board, it
shall forthwith make careful investigation by personally interviewing the mother
in her home, looking up her references, and pursuing such other sources of infor­
mation as are available, for the purpose of determining, first, the truth of the
statements contained in her application; second, whether she is a fit and capable
person to bring up her children, and whether the inmates and surroundings of her
household are such as to render it suitable for her children to reside at home;
third, whether the child or children of the applicant are attending school, and if
not, why; fourth, whether, under all the circumstances, considering her own
resources and the ability of any member of her family to contribute to her sup­
port, the possibility of receiving aid from other relatives, individuals, agencies,
or child-welfare organizations, and the possibility of compelling contributions by
any person under legal obligation so to do, such mother is in need of aid under
the provisions of this act, and if so, in what amount. [Laws of 1917, ch. 222.]
Massachusetts.—Before aiding any mother under the foregoing section, except
as hereinafter provided, the * * * shall determine that the mother is fit to
bring up her children and that the other members of the household and the
surroundings of the home are such as to make for good character, and that aid
from the * * * is necessary to enable her to bring up her children properly,
by making an immediate and careful inquiry including the resources of the family
and the ability of its other members, if any, to work or otherwise contribute to
its support, the existence of relatives able to assist the family, and of individuals,
societies, or agencies who may be interested therein; shall take all lawful means
to compel all persons bound to support the mother and children to support them,
and to enforce any other legal rights for their benefit; shall press all members of
the family who are able to work, other than the mother and her dependent
children, to secure work; shall try to secure work for them; and shall secure all
necessary aid for the'mother and children which can be secured from relatives,
organizations, or individuals. [Laws of 1913, ch. 763, sec. 2.]
Pennsylvania.—The trustees of the various counties shall in no case recommend
payment to any mother until they are satisfied that she is of proper char­
acter and ability and that for the proper maintenance of her children in her own
home monthly payments are necessary. For such purpose the board of trustees
shall cause to be made proper investigations. Nonpayment shall be made on
account of anv child of proper age and physical ability unless satisfactory report
has been made by the teacher of the school in which such pupil is enrolled stating
that such child-is attending school. [Laws of 1919, No. 354, sec. 8 .]
Supervision.

Continued oversight of the families granted aid is provided for
in the following sections:
Minnesota.—Every familv to which an allowance has been made shall be
visited at its home * * “* at least once in three months; and after each
visit the person making the same shall make and keep on file as a part of the
official record of the case a detailed statement of the condition of the home and
family and all other data which may assist in determining the wisdomof the
allowance granted and the advisability of its continuance. [Laws of 1917, Ch.
223, sec. 5.j
New Jersey.— I t shall be the duty of the State board of children’s guardians
to see that any widow committed to its care, pursuant to the provisions of this
act, is properly caring for her children, that they are sufficiently clothed and fed,

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

AID TO D E P E N D E N T C H IL D R E N I N T H E IR O W N H O M E S .

109

that they attend school regnjarly, and receive proper religious instruction; and
that said family shall be visited at least six times a year. [Laws of 1913, ch. 281,

sec. 6.]

Review of allowances.

In order to adjust the allowances to changing conditions it has been
found desirable to provide for review of the grants at regular inter­
vals—in most instances, once in six months.
Minnesota.—* * * and the court shall at least once in each year reconsider
every case in which an allowance has been made and take such action as the
facts then existing shall warrant. [Laws of 1917, ch. 223, sec. 5.]
Nebraska.—Provided further, No such order shall be effective for more than
six months, unless renewed by the court at or after the expiration of that period.
[Laws of 1919, ch. 221, sec. 6 .]
New York.—An allowance made by the board shall not be for a longer continu­
ous period than six months without renewal, which allowance may be continued
from time to time at same or different amounts, for similar periods or less, either
successively or intermittently or may be revoked at the pleasure of the local
board of child welfare. [Laws of 1915, ch. 228, sec. 153.]
STAFF FOR ADMINISTRATION OF MOTHERS’ PENSIONS.
The following table shows the staff administering'mothers’ pensions in several
counties in which large cities are located and also in Boston, Mass., together with
the population in each administrative unit according to the 1920 census:
Administrative unit.

Population.

Erie County, N. Y-------

634,688

Staff.

Principal city.

Domestic educator, 3 investigators, 2 stenog­
raphers, and 1 clerk; salaries, $11,500.
Secretary, 2 field workers, and part-time
183,833
clerical assistant; salaries, $4,300.
113,129 T ro y .......... ...... Secretary and investigator; salaries, $3,240.
Superintendent and 5 field workers.
943,495
415,419 Minneapolis----- Supervisor (part time) and 4 field workers.
Supervisor and 10 investigators.
748,060

Oneida County, N . Y _ ...
Rensselaer County, N . Y
Cuyahoga County, Ohio.
Hennepin County, M inn
Boston, Mass------------- -

BILLS INTRODUCED IN CONGRESS PROVIDING FOR AID TO DEPENDENT CHILDREN IN THEIR OWN HOMES.
Date.

Bill.

H .R . 11898(Mr. Gorman)_ Jan. 19,1914

Title.
To provide a pension for dependent mothers. (This bill would
provide aid for all mothers in the United States coming with­
in its provisions.)

H. R . 8348 (Mr. Johnson
of Kentucky).

Jan.

8,1916

An act to amend an act entitled “ An act to create a juvenile
court for the District of Columbia” and for other purposes.
(Section 24 of this bill provided for paym ent to the parent or
parents of any dependent or neglected child who are poor and
unable properly to care for such child.)

H. R. 11981 (M r. Tinkham).

M ay 8,1918

To provide allowances for mothers w ith children under 16
dependent upon them for support in the District of Columbia.

S. 4688 (Mr. Thompson) . . June 10,1918

Same title and text as H . R. 11981.

H. R. 13668 (Mr.Rhodes) - Apr. 17,1920

Providing pensions for needy mothers having the custody of
dependent children under the age of 16 years. (This bill
would, provid© aid for all mothers in the United States coming within its provision.)

H. R . 1397® (M r. Tinkhaw).

M ay 7,1920

Same title and text as H . R. 11981 and S. 4688.

S. 4358 (M r. C u rtis)..—- M ay 10,1920

Same title and text as H . R. 11981, H . R. 13979, and S. 4688.

S. 48§3 (Mr, Dillingham) - Jan. 17,1921

To establish the Department of Public Welfare and to deter­
mine its functions, and fof other purposes. P art V —Aid to
Mothers with Dependent Children.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

110

C H IL D D E PE N D E N C Y IN T H E D IS T R IC T OF CO LUM BIA.

Bills introduced in Congress providing for aid to dependent children in their own
homes—Continued.
Bill

Date

Title

H. R. 3186 (Mr. Rhodes). Apr. 14,1921

Same title and text as H . R. 13668.

H. R. 5029 (Mr. M ason).. Apr. 25,1921

Same title and text as H. R. 11981, H . R. 13979, S. 4688, and S.
4358.

H . R. 5358 (Mr. Tinkham).

Apr. 27,1921

Same text as H. R. 11981, H . R. 13979, S. 4688, S. 4358, and H. R.
5029.

S. 1357 (Mr. Curtis)

Apr. 28,1921

Same title and text as S. 4358, H. R. 11981, H . R. 13979, and S.
4688.

S. 3847 (Mr. Pom erene)... Apr. 20,1922

To provide for m others’ pensions in the District of Columbia,

S. 3898 (Mr. Calder)____ Aug.

3,1922

To provide home care for dependent children.

H . R. 12684 (Mr. Focht).. Sept. 16,1922

Same title and text as S. 3898.

S. 4196 (Mr. Brookhart).. Dec. 16,1922

Defining the legal status of all children under 18 years of age
m the District of Columbia; creating a Parental Court; and
providing for a child-relief allowance for the assistance of cer­
tain mothers.

H . R. 13537 (Mr. F re e)... Dec. 21,1922

Same title and text as S. 4196.

S. 724 (Mr. Capper)

Same title and text as S. 3898, H. R. 12684, and S. 3898.

Dec. 10,1923

TEXT OF PENDING “MOTHERS’ PENSION” BILL.

Following is the text of a bill to provide home care for dependent
children, as introduced in the Senate and the House of Representa­
tives by Sentor Calder and Representative Focht, in November and
December, 1922, and in the Senate by Senator Capper in December,
1923:

9
A bill to provide home care for dependent children.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of
America in Congress assembled, that when used in this act—
The term “ District” means the District of Columbia;
The term “ board” means an agency designated or established by the Com­
missioners of the District to carry out the provisions of this act;
The term “ mother” includes any woman, the custodian of a.child dependent
upon her for support, who is unable without the aid herein authorized to maintain
a suitable home and provide proper care for such child; and
The term “ child” means any child under the age of sixteen years in the custody
of a mother.
S e c . 2 . That the Commissioners of the District are authorized and directed
to designate or establish an agency to carry out the provisions of this act and
such agency is authorized to make rules and regulations necessary for the proper
administration of this act.
S e c . 3. That application for the benefits conferred by this act may be made by
any mother who has resided in the District for at least one year immediately
preceding the time of making such application.
Sec. 4. That upon application the board shall make an investigation to de­
termine (1) whether the mother is a fit person, capable of bringing up such child(2) whether conditions in the home are suitable for the proper upbringing of the
child; (3) what resources are available for the maintenance of the family; (4)
if the father of such child be living and able to provide support, whether legal
steps have been taken to compel the fulfillment of his obligation; and (5) the
amount of aid needed. If upon such investigation the board finds that the
mother would be able to maintain a home and give proper care to the child if
granted aid, and that such aid is necessary to save the child from neglect or from
separation from its mother, it is authorized to make a m onthly allowance in an
amount deemed necessary.
S e c , 5, That the board may award an allowance for a continuous period not
to exceed six months, shall review the award prior to the expiration of the period


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

AID TO DEPENDENT CHILDREN IN THEIR OWN HOMES.

Ill

for which the allowance is granted, and may renew any allowance for a con­
tinuous period not to exceed six months at the same, an increased, or a decreased
rate, but an allowance shall not be decreased in amount or discontinued unless
reasonable notice is given to the mother. If the mother refuses to comply with
the rules and regulations made by the board, the allowance may be immediately
discontinued.
S e c . 6. That payment shall not be continued after a child has reached the age
of 16 years, unless the board is satisfied that the mental or physical condition of
such child necessitates further aid.
S e c . 7. That the board is authorized to make an emergency payment to any
mother in an amount not to exceed $50, if such board is satisfied that an emer­
gency exists.
S e c . 8 . That the board shall cause every home for which an allowance is made
to be visited by its representative, who shall report upon the conditions of the
home.
S e c . 9. That any person who attempts to obtain by fraud or who fraudulently
obtains any allowance under the provisions of this act, or who receives any allow­
ance knowing it to have been fraudulently obtained, shall be guilty of a mis­
demeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine of not more
than $100 or imprisoned for not more than three months, or both.
S e c . 10. That there is hereby appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury
not otherwise appropriated, the sum of $ 100,000, or so much thereof as may be
necessary, to be expended by the board designated or established by the Com­
missioners of the District to carry out the provisions of this act. The board shall
have the power to appoint, remove, and fix the compensation of such officers
and employees, subject to the civil-service laws, and make such expenditures for
printing, telegrams, telephone, law books, books of reference, periodicals, furni­
ture, stationery, office equipment, travel, and other supplies and expenses as shall
be necessary to the administration of this act in the District of Columbia.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

THE DEVELOPMENT *OF CHILD-CARING WORK IN THE D IS­
TRICT OF COLUMBIA.
THE DEVELOPMENT OF PRIVATE CHILD-CARING WORK.

The report of the joint committee of the United States Senate and
House of Representatives^ appointed in 1896 to investigate the
charities and reformatory institutions of the District of Columbia,
gives the history of the public and private agencies and institutions
existing in the District at that time. Of the 18 private institutions
in the District caring for dependent children in 1923 all but 4 were
founded more than 25 years ago. The report gives the following in­
teresting description of the origin of the first institution in the Dis­
trict for the care of dependent children—the Washington City Orphan
Asylum, founded in 1815.
The sad results of the War of 1812 were not confined to the destruction of the
public buildings but left to the care and sympathy of the citizens a full share
of the orphanage resulting largely therefrom. The proclamation of peace sent
a thrill of joy through every household and elicited the warmest sympathy for
the fatherless children brought to public notice. Mrs. Gen. John P. Van Ness,
moved by the frequency of appeals to her charity, consulted 'with Mrs. Rev.
Obadiah Brown, of the First Baptist Church, as to the feasibility of effecting
an organization by which permanent relief could be assured for the helpless
orphans of the city and neighborhood. As a result of this interview a public
meeting was called through the press for “ the ladies of Washington and neigh­
borhood, to be held in the Hall of Representatives, on Tuesday, October 10,
1815, to consider the propriety of instituting an asylum for the relief and main­
tenance of orphans. ” At the time and place named a number of ladies responded
to the call. * * *
The institution being duly officered, a small frame house fronting on Tenth
Street west, near Pennsylvania Avenue, was rented, and in this unpretentious
structure the first organized effort on behalf of destitute orphans, it is believed,
was made in the Capital City, under the presidency of Mrs. James Madison and
her associates in office. The lady managers were for many years dependent upon
voluntary contributions and church collections to meet the expenses of their
growing family .2

The next institution founded in the District was the St. Vincent’s
Orphan Asylum, which was established in 1825 by the Roman Cath­
olics of .Washington. The report cited states that “ parents, guard­
ians, or friends of children may place them in the asylum until they
reach the age of 21 years, if males, or 18 years, if females; and the
asylum may receive children who have neither friend nor protector.
The power of binding out children was given, and provision was
made for schools. ” 3
The first Federal aid granted to private institutions in the Dis­
trict was provided for by an act of July 14, 1832, which directed
“ the commissioner of public buildings to select and value such of the
building lots and parts of lots owned by the United States in the city
of Washington as he shall think may be brought to market and sold
to the greatest advantage, to the amount of $20,000, which he shall
1 Early data based on report of the Joint Select Committee to Investigate the Charities and Reformatory
Institutions in the D istrict of Columbia: P art III.— Historical Sketches of the Charities and Reformatory
Institutionsin the District of Columbia. Edited and compiled b y Charles Moore, clerk of the joint select
committee, Fifty-fifth Congress, first session, Senate Document No. 185. Washington, 1898.
2 Ibid., pp. 107, 108.
3Ibid., p. 115

112

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

D E V E L O PM E N T OF C H IL D -C A B IN G W O RK .

113

divide and separate into two parcels of $10,000 worth each, one of
which, at his election, he shall convey to the Washington City Orphan
Asylum and the other to the St. Vincent’s Female Orphan Asylum
of Washington, and to the successors of each forever.” These lots
were exempted from taxes for five years, unless sooner disposed of,
and might be sold or leased, the proceeds of the sale or rents not to
be applied to any other objects than the purposes of the institutions
named.3
The St. Joseph’s Male Orphan Asylum was opened in 1856. The
asylum was established by the united contributions of the different
Roman Catholic congregations in Washington and placed under
charge of the Sisters of the Holy Cross. “ For 42 years after the
incorporation of the asylum the total amount of money received
from the Government was about $7,200, and the average number of
boys cared for was 127. Orphans come mainly from St. Ann’s Infant
Asylum, being turned over to St. Joseph’s at the age of 6 years and
retained until they are 14 years of age, when positions are obtained
for them if possible. ”4
The St. Ann’s Infant Asylum was started in 1860 by Sister Dyonisia, under the name of the Washington Infant Asylum. I t was
“ the first distinctly foundling asylum in Washington.” The report
states:
The objects of the institution as given in the act are the support and main­
tenance of foundlings and infant orphan and half-orphan children, and also to
provide for deserving indigent and unprotected females during their confinement
in childbirth. * * * Children are committed to its charge as fully and com­
pletely, to all intents and purposes, as if they were regularly indentured and
bound apprentices of the institution, until they shall attain the age, if males,
of 21 years, and if females, 15 years, or for any shorter period that may be agreed
upon; and to the corporation is given the power to bind out children as appren­
tices, to learn any trade or business, or to learn to be useful in housekeeping.
The corporation is not restricted in the exercise o f their powers in binding and
placing out in the District of Columbia; and Congress reserved the right to alter,
amend, or repeal the act. * * *
•
In 1877 the institution received its first appropriation from the Government,
and from that year to the present time it has been receiving an appropriation
from Congress. * * *
.
In case homes have not been found for children who have arrived at the age
of 6 years, they are sent to St. Joseph’s or St. Vincent’s Orphan Asylum, where
they continue until the age of 15 years. They are then sent to homes in the
country, if such homes can be found. If the girls show an aptitude for needle­
work, they are sent to St. Rose’s Industrial School.5

The National Soldiers’ and Sailors’ Orphans Home was organized in
1866 “ to provide a home and education for orphans and half orphans
of soldiers and sailors who have been in the service of the United
States.” 6 Boys and girls under 12 years of age were received.
The institution was at first entirely dependent for support on vol­
untary contributions and the proceeds of a large fair field m Washings
ton to raise funds for its maintenance. In 1867 Congress made an
appropriation for the support of the institution to the amount of
$5,000, and the later appropriations amounted to as much as $15,000
a year. In 1882 an act of Congress conveyed the property of the
orphans’ home to the Garfield Memorial Hospital.
The National Association for the Relief of Destitute Colored Women
and Children was incorporated in 1863 for the purpose “ of supporting
such aged or indigent and destitute colored women and children as
8 Ibid., p. 115.

4 Ibid ,p. 116.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

8 Ibid., pp. 102,103

8 Ibid., p. 117.

C H IL D D E PE N D E N C Y IN T H E D ISTR IC T OF CO LUM BIA.

114

may properly come under tlie charge of such association; to provide
them a suitable home, board, clothing, and instruction, and to bring
them under Christian influence.” The society was authorized to
receive “ any destitute child or children at the request of the parents
or guardians, or next friend, or the mother, if the father be dead, or
has abandoned his family, or does not provide for their support, or
is an habitual drunkard, such parents, guardians, or next friend, or
mother making a written surrender of such child or children.” This
institution has remained the one institution under private auspices
for the care of dependent negro children in the District.
The Industrial Home School was organized in 1879 “ by a few
benevolent ladies.” The transition of this institution from private to
public control is set forth as follows in the report of the congressional
committee:
During its first years the school occupied rented quarters, but in March, 1875,
the Commissioners of the District of Columbia set apart for its use the buildings
and grounds of the Georgetown almshouse * * *.
The trustees asked the commissioners to recommend to Congress the enact­
ment of a law, similar to that existing in several States, requiring the District of
Columbia to pay to the board of trustees of the school the amount of $2 per week
for each inmate of the industrial home. This amount, with some assistance from
charitable people, the trustees believed would suffice to carry on the institution
successfully, provided the requisite buildings were furnished for mechanical and
industrial purposes.
v
The school already had a steam engine and other machinery, secured by act of
Congress in June, 1871; but this machinery was in a rented building more than a
mile distant from the then location of the home, necessitating a payment of rent
of $250 a year and the loss of much valuable time, without affording the requisite
facilities for proper instruction in mechanical and other arts. Therefore an ap­
propriation of $ 10,000 was asked for the purpose of erecting a suitable building
for workshops in conformity with plans submitted. Such an appropriation had
passed the House of Representatives during the previous year, but owing to some
misunderstanding it failed in the Senate * * *.
[In 1878] the buildings occupied as a home were sadly in need of repair. The
industrial department was still in a rented building, more than a mile distant
from the home, and under the circumstances the trustees renewed their applica­
tion for $25,000 for the erection of a workshop and effecting the indicated im­
provements- upon the home, already the property of the Government. The
report for the year showed receipts of $7,091.02, of which amount $3,000 was the
first installment of an appropriation by Congress.
The first report of the Commissioners of the District of Columbia, appointed
under the act of Congress providing for a permanent form of government for the
District, approved June 11, 1878, commended to. the liberality of Congress the
Industrial Home School of Georgetown. “ This charity,” they say, “ has been
founded and chiefly sustained thus far by private benevolence. By permission
the school is occupying the Georgetown almshouse, where a small number of
District paupers are provided for by an arrangement between the Commissioner
of the Washington Asylum and the managers of the home school. The benevo­
lent ladies who have charge of this deserving charity have collected within the
walls of the dilapidated building about 50 indigent children of both sexes, whom
they are educating in various industries and for whom they provide homes as
'soon as they attain sufficient age and qualifications. The workshops connected
with the institution contribute largely to its maintenance, and experience thus
far has demonstrated the wisdom and beneficence of this plan.”
*

*

*

*

*

*

*

Although established and thus far chiefly maintained by private benevolence,
the school was destined, the commissioners believed, to solve successfully the
important problem of industrial education as a factor in our system of public
instruction * * *.
In the report of the school for 1883 the president and the secretary state that
the amount appropriated by Congress, $5,000, for the expenses of the school
was entirely inadequate properly to maintain it. Although economy was
practiced at every point, the unattractive and poorly adapted building, with the

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

DEVELOPMENT OP CHILD-CAKING WORK.

115

addition of one cottage, compared very unfavorably with the elegant modern
ui dings used by the reform school, “ where it must be a genuine pleasure for
those who go there to remain, and a temptation for them to commit offenses in
order to gam admission.”
in 1896 the school was transferred to the control of the District of Columbia
as provided m the District appropriation act of June 11 of that year, and thé
name was changed to the District of Columbia Industrial Home School.7

The following history is given of the beginning of St. John’s
Orphanage:
^ai? Church Orphanage
s parish nad its origin in the work begun
on All Saints Day, 1870, by Sister Sarah, who for 11 years continued to provide
tor a few destitute orphan children, with such assistance as she could obtain
from persons whom she interested in the work. In 1872 the institution had
been incorporated under the general incorporation law. In 1881 the Rev Dr
Leonard, now bishop of Ohio and then rector of St. John’s Church, undertook
the task of placing the orphanage on a firm foundation. An appropriation by
Congress of $10,000 was obtained for the purchase of lands and buildings, and a
considerable amount was raised from private sources.
The president of the orphanage is the bishop of the diocese for the time being
and the warden is the rector of St. John’s parish. The institution is managed
by a board
ad of whom, except the treasurer, must be communi­
cants of St._John s Church. A ladies’ aid, consisting of 25 ladies of the parish,
also assists m the management, and there are two physicians connected with the
orphanage.

The Washington Hospital for Foundlings was incorporated in 1870.
The object, as stated in the incorporating act, was to found in the
city of Washington a hospital for the reception and support of destituto and. friendless children. The children receiveu were to be
' wholly under the guardianship, care, and control of the institution
to be educated, apprenticed, and otherwise disposed of until they
cached the age of 18 years, when the care and control was to cease/’
The hospital was founded to carry into effect the bequest contained
in the will of Joshua Peirce, who died in 1869, by which land valued
at $95,550 was provided as a site for such an institution. Because
ol the difficulty of raising money to erect the necessary building
the institution, although chartered in 1870, did not begin operations
until 1887. The ^sum ^of $31,500 having been secured, Congress
appropriated the $3,500 necessary to complete the budding. § The
Government made an annual appropriation for the maintenance
of the institution.
St. Rose’s Industrial School was organized in 1872. Congress
appropriated $20,000 for the buildings, the total value of which was
reported as being about $30,000.
The school * * * receives orphan girls from St. Vincent’s Orphan Asylum
at the age of 14 and keeps them until 21, at which age they are expected to be
trained in housekeeping dressmaking, and sewing. After the girls attain the
age of 21 employment is found for them in Washington, Baltimore, Philadelphia
or other cities. If they are employed in the District, they are supported for one
montn; that is to say, they receive one month’s wages in advance, and if thev
time an° ther Clty they are Provided with a sufficient sum to keep them for a
Since the school was established in 1872
of Charity, six^ of whom * * * are on
as instructors m domestic economy, plain
dressmaking m its different branches.. A
devoted to study.

it has been conducted by the Sisters
duty at the industrial school, acting
sewing, practical housekeeping, and
certain amount of time each day is
J

In 1879 a German Lutheran Church made an appeal to the German-Amencan citizens of the District for the erection of a German
7 Ibid., pp. 122, 125.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

8 Ibid., p. 118.

Ibid., p. 125.

116

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

orphan asylum that should be nonsectarian in character. The
institution was incorporated within a month of the time the appeal
was made. The Government appropriated $10,000 for the cost
of the site, representing half the total amount paid. The institu­
tion was conducted partly as a farm, the produce of which supnlied
a considerable share of the maintenance.
In the next decade only two institutions were started. The
Women’s Union Christian Association opened the Home for Friendless
Colored Girls (later discontinued) “ in order that such girls, rescued
from destitution and vice, from earliest age to their fourteenth year,
might be cared for and trained in matters of housekeeping and made
self-supporting and self-respecting.”
The House of Mercy, organized as the Association for Works of
Mercy, was organized in 1884, under the Sisters of the Epiphany of
the Protestant Episcopal Church.
The Florence Crittenton Hope and Help Mission and the Bruen
Home for dependent children were started in 1895 and 1896, respec­
tively. The Central Union Mission, organized in 1884, early began
the care of a few children and a number of years later established the
Emergency Home for Children. The first work of which the Epis­
copal Home for Children is an outgrowth was begun about 1895 and
provided summer outings for children. Later a winter home was
opened, which was turned over to the diocese of Washington and
incorporated under its present name in 1908. The Jewish Foster
Home was established in 1911, the Swartzell Memorial Methodist
Home for Children in 1912, and the Baptist Home for Children in 1915.
THE DEVELOPMENT OF PUBLIC CHILD-CARING WORK.

With the development of higher standards of child-caring and
protective work the States have increasingly assumed as a public
obligation the care and supervision of certam classes of dependent
children and have taken their place alongside the steadily growing
private organizations providing for those who stand in need of
assistance. In 1893 the District of Columbia undertook as a public
duty the care of dependent children committed tor its guardianship
by court action. The Federal law creating the District of Columbia
Board of Children’s Guardians for the care of dependent children
followed in its general policy the precedent that had been set by a
number of States, including Massachusetts, Nevada, Michigan, Iowa,
Minnesota, Wisconsin, Rhode Island, and Kansas.
So steadily has this activity grown that there are at the present
time 27 States, in addition to the District of Columbia, in which a
State board or other agency provides direct care for dependent
children committed to it by courts or does home-finding work and
supervises placed-out children for county authorities. Placement in
family homes, either boarding or free, is the predominating method
of care.
Placement of children in foster homes and supervision of dependent
children has been assumed as a public function in Alabama, Arizona,
Colorado, Connecticut, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Massachusetts, Maine,
Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Jersey,
Ohio, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia,
Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia. In a number of these States

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

DEVELOPMENT OE CHILD-CARING WORK.

H 7

dependent children are provided for in State schools or homes, usually
for short periods, pending placement in family homes; in the others
the placement work is done without such intermediate institutional
provision.
THE BEGINNING OF PUBLIC SUPERVISION OF CHARITIES,

The report of the congressional investigation committee, describing
the beginning of the work of the Board of Charities of the District of
Columbia, stated that the Commissioners of the District in their re­
port for the year 1875 called the attention of Congress to the need
for the “ reorganization of the public charities of the District, to the
end of having them put under the control of a commission, to whom
shall be intrusted the disbursement of all moneys, whether appropriatedby Congress or contributed by the District for the support of such
charities, and who shall account for the same to the District authori­
ties, under such regulations as shall be prescribed by law.” 11
I t was pointed out that under the system then existing a few
«charitable institutions were maintained by the District of Columbia
and a number by the Federal Government, and private institutions
of like character were receiving support from both the District and
the Federal Government. It was recommended that all public
charitable institutions be placed under the control of the District
government and managed by a board which should have general
charge ; that all appropriations of public funds for charitable purposes
should be made in the aggregate and distributed by this board and
that it should have the right of inspection of all charities, public
and private. Similar recommendations were made in each succeed­
ing report of the commissioners of the District. In 1883 the sugges­
tion was made that, until a better system could be devised, the
commissioners should be authorized to appoint an inspector of
charities who should devote his whole time to the investigation that
devolved upon the commissioners by law. In their report of the
following year it was stated that the total appropriations for chari­
table purposes and chargeable to the District expense for the year
1884-85 amounted to $235,212, of which about $114,000 was appro­
priated for institutions managed by private boards of trustees,
1doubtless upon the theory that public money is only given to supple­
ment and encourage private donations.” The commissioners held
that this might be true in the case of four children’s institutions
mentioned but that the reform and industrial schools, one hospital,
and one institution for women and children were maintained almost
entirely from the public treasury. I t was stated that other institu­
tions were demanding aid but that the commissioners were not
sufficiently informed to judge of their comparative merits or necessi­
ties.
During the year 1883, acting under instructions of the superin­
tendent of police, the board of police surgeons visited the charitable
institutions of the District to ascertain their sanitary conditions.
In the following year the board made a reexamination and reported
correction of some of the bad conditions that had been discovered.
A clause in the District appropriation bill approved in 1884 pro­
vided that “ the commissioners should thereafter investigate the
management of all institutions of charity within the District which
» Ibid., p. 177.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

118

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

may be appropriated for out of the District revenues in whole or in
art and require an itemized report of receipts and expenditures to
e transmitted with the annual report of the commissioners to Con­
gress, together with such recommendations as they might deem
proper concerning the necessity for such institutions, together with a
plan for their organization and management and extent of appro­
priation necessary for their maintenance.” 12 In order to carry out
these provisions an agent was detailed by „the commissioners to
visit the various institutions. His report concluded with the follow­
ing recommendation:

E

I would call the attention of the commissioners to the fact that many of these
institutions are duplicating each other’s work and as a necessary consequence
are much more expensively managed than they would be if the efforts in favor
of the objects were more concentrated. It is my opinion that some plan of
general control and unification should be adopted whereby the large amounts
appropriated out of the District revenue for these various charities could be
more prudently, more economically, and more satisfactorily applied to the
objects for which the money was appropriated.

Finally, on August 6, 1890, Congress created the office of super­
intendent of charities, embodying this provision in the appropriation
bill for the District. The first superintendent of charities of the
District of Columbia was Amos G. Warner, well known as a student
of the methods of dealing with dependency problems and later the
author of a standard textbook entitled “ American Charities.” 13
Mr. Warner took office April 11, 1891.14
THE ORIGIN OF THE BOARD OF CHILDREN’S GUARDIANS.

The Board of Children’s Guardians of the District of Columbia
was established by act of Congress approved July 26, 1892, and
began to receive children under its care July 1, 1893. The act
authorized the judicial commitment to the board of all classes of
dependent and delinquent children, except those properly belonging
in the two “ reform schools” that had been established in the District
by the Government. The origin of the Board of Children’s Guardians
and the ideas that led to its establishment were described as follows
in the report issued by the joint congressional committee: 15
As soon as the first superintendent of charities had become familiar with the
methods of admitting children to the several institutions provided for the care
and education of destitute and abandoned children in Washington, with the
character of the work done with the children in such institutions, had observed
the want of authority and continuity in such work, and had witnessed the
embarrassment of the courts of the District in attempting to deal justly and
humanely with children charged with being vagrants or with petty offenses, he
became convinced that another agency was required in order that the reception
of children to be supported at public cost should have placed about it certain
safeguards; that the child-caring and child-saving work of the District should
reach those whose condition furnished the strongest appeal for protection, and
that those to be supported at public expense should become public wards, for
whom somebody should be responsible continuously during their minority.

The superintendent therefore prepared a bill later introduced in
the Senate “ to provide for the care of dependent children in the
18 Ibid., p. 182.
13 Warner, Amos G.: American Charities; a study in philanthropy and economics. Thomas Y. Cro­
well & Co., New York, 1894.
14 The Board of Charities of the District of Columbia, organized July 12, 1900, took the place of the
Superintendent of Charities, whose office was abolished June 30, 1900.
13 Joint Select Committee to Investigate the Charities and Reformatory Institutions in the District of
Columbia: P art III.—Historical Sketches of the Charities and Reformatory Institutions in the District
of Columbia, p. 185.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

DEVELOPMENT OE CHILD-CARING WORK.

119

District of Columbia and to create a board of children’s guardians,”
transmitting it to the Commissioners of the District on February
9, 1892. Mr. Warner’s letter in explanation of the purposes of the
bill includes the following :
(1) It is desirable that there should be some more accurate measure of service
rendered to the public by the subsidized charitable institutions for children
than at present exists and that the amount of public aid should then in each
case bear a fixed proportion to the amount of public service so rendered.
At present each institution admits such children as its managers or officers
think proper to receive. Frequently there is no adequate investigation of the
case, but the account given of the child and of its destitution by those who desire
its admission is accepted without verification. The institutions then base
their claims for public aid in a general way on the number of children cared for.
There is, however, no definite proportion established between the amount of
aid and the number of inmates; nor, while present diverse and irresponsible
methods of admission prevail, does it seem desirable that there should be. In
my recommendations of estimates last September I kept as close as possible to
the precedents of previous years; not because I considered this condition of
things satisfactory but merely to gain time until some proper method of appor­
tioning public aid in proportion to public service could be found. If the present
system were to continue there are other institutions for children receiving noth­
ing that would be equitably as much entitled to subsidies as those now receiving
them.
Most of the institutions for children do two classes of work—public work and
church and private work. By public work I mean the care of children who are
absolutely destitute and properly chargeable to the District, for whom no rela­
tive, or friend, or church, or private charitable association is willing to provide
and for whom the District taxpayers can therefore properly be asked to provide,
both as a matter of humanity and as a defense against the propagation of pauper­
ism. By church or personal work I mean the care of children for the purpose
of securing their education in a particular faith or for motives of personal sym­
pathy. To carry on church or personal work, as such, by means of public
money is improper, for it leads to a great increase in the number of dependent
children and needlessly burdens the taxpayers.
The board of children's guardians provided for by the inclosed bill will be
charged with the duty of investigating thoroughly the case of each dependent
child. ^If a child is found to be a proper subject for public care it will be placed
in an institution or otherwise provided for by the board, and each institution
will then be entitled to public money in proportion to the number of such children
that it cares for.
(2) It is desirable-that careful and thorough experiments should be made in the
placing out of children in the community.
The subject of placing out was briefly referred to in my annual report. It
consists of boarding children in private families instead of placing them in insti­
tutions, or in finding for the older children homes where their services are an
adequate return for their support. It also involves the adopting of children
into private families whenever this can be accomplished with safety. The
sooner a dependent child can be grafted into a good home the better it is for the
children and the community. Many children on becoming dependent can be
placed in homes at once and the evils of institution life avoided altogether. This
is true of all classes of children from nursing infants up. On leaving the institu­
tions, also, great care is needed in selecting homes for the children, and syste­
matic visiting is necessary in order to see that the child is adapted to the home
and to make sure that he is not neglected or abused. In Washington this work
of placing^ children when they can not be longer kept in the institutions is done
by committees and by matrons or other resident officials, chiefly during the
summer months. Such persons are hurried with other duties and at the best
are not experts in the work of placing out. It thus often happens that the time
and money spent in reclaiming a waif are eventually wasted and the future of
the child ruined because it is not properly placed and watched over on leaving
the institution. To secure good results it needs a specialist in this work who
can attend to placing and visiting his wards all the year round.
The considerations apply to the placing of children liberated from the reform
schools as well as to the dependent children who leave the charitable institutions.
The reform school for boys is overcrowded, and it is possible that, through the
Board of Children’s Guardians, many now sent to that institution might other
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

120

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

wise be provided for. The recent experience of the Children’s Aid Society of
Pennsylvania indicates as much. At any rate the creation of the board, as
herein proposed, would give our courts an option in the matter that might be
of use should first experiments have satisfactory results.
The board of guardians would be an efficient agent for the placing out of chil­
dren in this community, and this, as indicated, is the second reason for desiring
its prompt establishment.

Mr. Warner also recommended that there should be provision for
a suitable place of detention for juvenile delinquents pending trial
or before removal to the reformatory, such as a temporary home under
the management of the Board of Children’s Guardians.
The proposed bill was passed by Congress, after some amendments
had been made—includmg the elimination of the provision for a
temporary home—and eceived final approval on July 26, 1892.18
The judges designated as the appointing authority named the nine
members of the Board of Children’s Guardians, and the first meeting
of the board was held on January 11, 1893.
The report previously cited states that the board at its second
meeting, m February, 1893, decided to urge the appropriation of
$6,000 for administrative expenses. “ Thus early did the board
recognize the fact, ever since insisted upon, that its mission was the
accomplishment of a large amount of real work which must be done
by employees who gave their whole time to it, and who must be
persons of such character, judgment, and ability as to make their
services of great value, and only to be secured by offering such com­
pensation as would be offered for like service in any other great
business enterprise.” 17
The District appropriation bill passed early in 1893 carried an
appropriation of $5,000 for administrative purposes, making it
immediately available. The direct appropriations which had been
made for child-caring institutions in the preceding year were reduced
by 40 per cent, anci the funds so withheld from them were placed
at the disposal of the Board of Children’s Guardians. The board
engaged as its agent a man experienced in State child-placing work,
who undertook his duties* on May 1, 1893. Shortly thereafter a
letter was sent by the board to the managing boards of all institutions
whose direct appropriations had been reduced, setting forth the policy
of the board in regard to the relation between the institutions and the
Board of Children’s Guardians.18 The text of the letter follows:
W a s h i n g t o n , D. C., May 17, 1893.
The act approved March 3, 1893, making appropriations
for District of Columbia expenses for the fiscal year to end June 30, 1894, gives
your institution somewhat less for maintenance than was given for the current
year; and the institution is remitted, with others, to the act of July 26, 1892,
(Public No. 156), “ to provide for the care of dependent children in the District
of Columbia and to create a board of children’s guardians,” “ for all rights^ and
benefits which” it may have under the provisions of the latter act. Such rights
and privileges are deemed to be that your institution may enter into a contract
with the Board of Children’s Guardians for the care and support of children,
the wards of the board, at rates of compensation to be agreed upon. By such
means your institution may receive more than the amount by which the direct
appropriation has been diminished or it may receive less.
The Board of Children’s Guardians has now been organized, has secured an
office and appointed an agent, and is ready to consider applications from instituS ir s

and

M

esd am es:

18 For text of the law see Appendix, pp. 152-153.
k Joint Select Committee to Investigate th e Charities and Reformatory Institutions in the District of
Columbia: P art III.—Historical Sketches of the Charities and Reformatory Institutions in the District
of Columbia, p. 191.
is Ibid., pp. 192-193.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

DEVELOPMENT OF CHILD-CARING WORK.

y

121

tions with a view to the making of contracts. The board is not charged with
any duties or responsibilities in regard to the children now in institutions, these
children being already provided for and not having been committed to the board
by the methods specified in the act. Should your institution wish to transfer
to the board the control and responsibility for the support of any now in your
charge, it may apply to the courts to have the board declared the legal guardian
of such children. Should this application receive the approval of the court, due
proceedings being had, your authority over and responsibility for the children
and the authority and responsibility of parents and natural guardians would be
terminated. The board would then be in a position to board the children “ in
private families, to board them in institutions willing to receive them, to bind
them out or apprentice them, or to give them in adoption to foster parents,”
or it may leave them where they now are.
The board expects to have committed to it many children now in institutions.
For these it must provide places in private homes, institutions, or elsewhere. It
wishes to be able to so arrange that none of the institutions whose appropriations
have been diminished for the coming year may be injured or inconvenienced by
the change and to that end solicits the good offices and cooperation of all. It
can not undertake any charge for the support of children until July 1, 1893, but
wishes meanwhile to make all possible preliminary arrangements.
The agent of the board, Mr. Herbert W. Lewis, will call upon you at your
institution. We solicit for him a favorable reception, with the view of inception
of friendly relations,
By order of the board.
Very respectfully,
B. P ickman M a n n ,
Secretary, Board of Children's Guardians, District of Columbia.

The committee report stated that on July 7, 1893, eight hoys who
were inmates of the National Colored Home were committed to the
guardianship of the board by the police court and were “ speedily
provided with homes in the families of suitable persons willing to
receive them.” On July 20 officers of the Industrial Home School
resented 10 children for commitment to the guardianship of the
oard. A hearing on the question of commitment of children already
inmates of institutions resulted in the commitment of the children
to the board and their return by the board to the Industrial Home
School, the institution being paid for their maintenance from the
funds of the Board of Children’s Guardians until homes were provided
for them by the agent of the board. The same policy was carried
out in a later commitment of children from the National Colored
Home. “ Thus the commitment of institution children to the guard­
ianship of the board was formally approved by the courts authorized
to commit, and thus the institutions which were willing to yield to
the provisions of the new law suffered but little inconvenience from
it, while the children committed received the benefit of the continuous
guardianship of the board and the watchful care of its agent after
they were placed out.” 19 The report further states:

E

Other institutions, however, objected that they were unable to receive from
the board any considerable part of the amount by which their direct appropria­
tions had been reduced. Another letter was therefore sent out on September
13, by which it was sought to remove some of the difficulties which had attended
the commitment of children at first, and additional opportunities were offered
for any institution which was supporting from its reduced income any children
for whose support the District of Columbia was properly chargeable to make
known how many such children it desired to have transferred to the guardianship
-of the board, in order that the board might legally pay the institution for the
support of the children until homes for them were secured. To this letter there
was no response whatever.
» Ibid., p . 194.

88962°—24t----- 9

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

122

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

In its first report to the superintendent of charities, August 22,
1893, the Board of Children’s Guardians pointed out the economy of
the new plan and indicated its willingness to undertake the care of all
children who could be shown to be necessarily dependent upon the
D istrict:20
During the present year a fraction of the sum hitherto usually appropriated
to charitable institutions in the District of Columbia has been appropriated to
the use of the board, while the remainder has been appropriated to the institu­
tions as before. There is now no occasion for the courts to send a single child
properly chargeable upon the District of Columbia to any private institution
for care and support. The Government has established an agency of its own
competent to care for every such child, and as a matter of fact, since the courts
have had the authority, they have thrown the whole burden of the support of
such children upon the board. There is no public reason, therefore, why the
Government should subsidize in future any private charitable institution for
the care of children in this District.

Prior to the creation of the Board of Children’s Guardians there
was no arrangement by which the courts of the District could commit
children to charitable institutions. The institutions reserved the
right to say which and how many children they would receive, the
court could not commit without their consent, and no such com­
mitment had taken place in several years.
THE FIRST YEARS OF PUBLIC CHILD-CARING WORK.

The congressional-committee report gave the following facts indi­
cating the character of the investigation and supervisory work done
by the board during its first year:20°
By the close of its first fiscal year there had been committed to the guardianship
of the board 203 children, of whom 90 had been already removed from the depend­
ent class, having been received as members of their families by persons found upon
investigation to be such as could safely be trusted to perform the duties of parents
toward the helpless little children placed in their custody.
The supervisory work provided for by the statute had been faithfully per­
formed, and the record being kept regarding each child under guardianship,
showed that notable success had been attained in securing permanent settlement
of children placed out.
The provision of free homes for this large proportion of the children received
had resulted in considerable economy of funds appropriated for their support, and
the board returned to the Treasury of the United States the sum of $6,054.45 as
an unexpended surplus.
During this year the agent of the board was called upon to consider applica­
tions on behalf of 290 children whom it was desired should be taken in charge
with the result that 96 of them were presented before the courts of the District
for further and more authoritative examination as to their necessities, the remain­
ing 194 being, in the judgment of the agent, in no such condition as demanded the
intervention of public authority for their protection or relief.
* * * During this year the board also began the practice of placing all in­
fants committed to its care in the hands of hired nurses and of providing skillful
medical attendance for all such children. At the close of the year the indications
were that this experiment would be highly successful.

Reports for the following years tell the same story of thorough in­
vestigation and careful consideration of the propriety of accepting as
public wards the children who were reported to the board as in need
of such action. During the year ended June 30, 1895, 307 applica­
tions were received on behalf of children who were said to be in need of
provision by the board. For 89 of these the board began proceedings
m court, recommending commitment. These recommendations re­
sulted in the final commitment of 58 and the giving of authority for
30 Ibid., p p . 194-195,


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

30a Ibid., p. 195.

DEVELOPMENT OF CHILD-CARING WORK.

123

the temporary care of 17. In 14 cases the court did not commit the
children to the board (these were mainly cases in which it was sought
to remove children from parents alleged to be intemperate or other­
wise unfit). The reasons ior commitment of the 58 children were as
follows: Destitute, no suitable home, 47; abandoned by parents, 10;
vicious and immoral associations, 1. Of the children found by the
agent of the board not to be proper subjects for public care, the greater
number were reported as “ not dependent,” a number were found to be
nonresidents, and for about one-eighth the report was “ referred to
other agencies ” or “ private arrangements made.” The total number
of final commitments to the board during the year was 110; about
one-half were recommended by the agent of the board, one-fifth by
police officers, and the remainder by a number of institutions and
agencies.21
The agent of the board pointed out that nearly all the commit­
ments recommended by the board were for “ simple destitution,” but
this was apparently due to the fact that it is easier to prove that a
child “ is destitute of suitable home and adequate means of earning an
honest living,” than to prove such underlying causes as the “ unfit­
ness” of his parents or vicious and immoral surroundings. I t was
stated that no incorrigible children were presented by the board for
commitment during the year, for the reason that “ it has been known
throughout the year that the funds at the disposal of the board would
not be sufficient to meet the demands upon it, and this class of chil­
dren are always most expensive and troublesome to deal with. There
are several reasons why the board could not give them ternis of insti­
tution training, and to place them in free private homes without such
training would simply be to turn them loose upon unsuspecting per­
sons entitled to better treatment.” However, 12 children classed as
“ vicious or incorrigible ” were committed to the board, and 8 girls were
transferred to the board from the reform school. In contrast with the
statement regarding the placement of delinquent children, the report
relates the difficulties met with because of the limitation of the intake
of one institution to children under 10 years of age and the refusal of
the Industrial Home School to receive any child who had been guilty
of larceny, resulting in the enforced care of such children in boarding
homes. “ Whatever may be thought of the classification of human
beings in this manner rather than by ascertained character, disposi­
tion, and capacity, we are not sure, but it will prove in the end to have
been a good thing for the board, for it has forced us to find boarding
homes for a number of apparently bad boys, in which the results have
been most delightful.” This appears to have been the beginning of
the later extensive work of the board in placing out children who had
come before the courts because of delinquency.
The selection of foster homes was also a subject of special concern
during the first years. The 1895 report states :22
The persons who seek to secure children are not always the ones best calcu­
lated to be of service to them. To be restricted in the selection of homes to those
voluntarily offered is to fail of the best work. There are multitudes of people
whose homes would be thrown open to dependent children and in whose homes
such children would receive excellent care and training, if a personal appeal were
made to them. * * * A distinct effort should be made in order to extend
the work of placing children into such homes. * * * .
21 Report of the Board of Children’s Guardians for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30,1895. Washington,
1895.

22Ibid., p. 14.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

124

* * * no carelessness or loose methods have been allowed to affect the
investigation of the homes offered.

The agent was assisted by members of the board in supervising
homes in which children had been placed, but the supervision was ^
necessarily inadequate because of the number of children under care.
The agent reported that “ at the close of the fiscal year no ward of
the board had resided in any family home for longer than 10 months
without having been visited,” most of them having been seen during
the last six months of the year. The thoroughness with which the
board went into conditions surrounding the children is shown by the
data included in the statistical analysis in the annual reports from
the very beginning of the work. Special attention was given to the
care of infants committed to the board. Practically all wards of
the board 2 years old and under were placed in private homes during
the first years. Not more than two were placed under the care of
any one person.
The number of children under temporary care increased rapidly.
Under the law creating the Board of Children’s Guardians agents of
the board were permitted to take charge of children for not longer
than one week, without authority of the court, and the law was
construed to imply that children might be given “ temporary care”
for any length of time by the authority of the courts.
Under the provision of a law passed m 1875 (Forty-fourth Congress)
certain feeble-minded children in the District were taken in charge
by the Secretary of the Interior and provided for at District expense
at the training school at Elwyn, Pa. On March 3, 1893 (Fiftysecond Congress), Congress included in the District appropriation
bill a provision transferring to the Board of Children’s Guardians the
authority for placing feeble-minded children.
The magnitude of the task was early apparent and was summed up
by the board in its second report:23
We know of no instance wherein any other body, public or private, has been
charged with the variety of duties and responsibilities which has been laid upon
this board. The care of infants; the care of dependent and neglected children;
a share in the care of wayward and criminal children; the care of feeble-minded
persons, who are always children, no matter what their age, and with all these
classes the duty of investigation prior to reception, as well as of guardianship
during minority, makes up a series of opportunities and responsibilities certainly
not equaled in the District of Columbia, and not to our knowledge anywhere.
THE PROBLEM OF ADEQUATE SUPPORT.

One unvarying note runs through, the successive annual reports of
the Board of Children’s Guardians—the urgency of more adequate
appropriations for the work delegated to the board. Repeatedly the
officers of the board have called attention to the need for funds that
would permit the quality of work required for the proper safe­
guarding of its wards. The annual report issued in 1897 contains
the following statement:
The imperative need of an appropriation larger than any of those heretofore
made for administrative purposes in proven by the statistics and statements
rendered in another part of the report. The most urgent needs are those of an
increased number of employees and an increased amount available for expenses
of placing and visiting children. Aside from all considerations of economy, the
welfare of the children demands that it should be practicable to place the children
in homes where they may grow up to become adult citizens in the normal way.
**Ibid., p .

2L


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

DEVELOPMENT OE CHILD-CARING WORK.

125

The consideration of the importance of increased administrative funds from
the point of view of economy is most readily to be expressed, as this is susceptible
of statistical treatment. The per capita cost of maintenance of children in board­
ing homes and in institutions was $124.10 in 1894, $118.66 in 1896, $113.15 in
1896, and $120.14 in 1897. Children above the period of infancy, and who have
no special needs and receive no special training, may be boarded in institutions
for $96 per annum. If it were desirable to place the children in institutions and
leave them there unsupervised, the only administrative expense of their care
would be that of reception and placement, incurred once and finally; but if they
be placed in free homes, under the conditions of family life, and be properly
supervised, the cost of such supervision will be the only expense incurred in their
behalf. Administrative expenses per capita were $35.68 in 1894, $16.75 in 1895,
$13.45 in 1896, and $11.67 in 1897. It appears, therefore, that for every child
removed from an institution charging the lowest rate and placed in a free home
an annual saving of about $75 may be made. Of the 51 children in institutions
where board is paid, some of them of the more expensive class, at the close of the
year probably as many as 40 might have been placed out had proper means been
at hand, resulting in a reduction of expense at the rate of more than $3,000
annually. * * *
The law establishing the board authorizes the employment of two agents, but
the appropriation bills have never provided funds sufficient for the employment
of more than one competent person to that position.24

The executive of the board further emphasized the lack of adequate
supervision of wards because of insufficient funds in the following
statement:
This is a very unsatisfactory showing in comparison with the records of the
three preceding years, when the number of children was not so great and when
the work of placing out was permitted a healthy growth in the hope that Con­
gress would recognize its value, both for the children and the taxpayers, and give
the means to foster and extend it. During the first half of the year a consider­
able number of children were placed in free homes; but when relief for our over­
burdened administrative fund was not obtained from the general deficiency bill
the work of placing out was practically suspended.
The act of Congress creating the board requires visitations to be made to
placed-out children at least once a year, but we have not been able to obey the
mandate. * * * Efforts have been made to offset the lack of personal super­
vision of the placed-out children by correspondence and by requesting frequent
reports from the foster parents. * * * These, however, can not be expected
to disclose any faults in the homes themselves or any failures on the part of foster
parents to come up to the high standards of care expected by the board, and
which can only be secured through careful personal supervision.26

Again in the following year the agent of the board reported that
the board had been compelled to leave undone things which ought to
have been done because the appropriations for the year were no greater
than for the preceding year, whereas the demands were largely in­
creased. “ Only a few absolutely necessary or especially desirable
placements could be made, and a very large number of children pre­
viously placed out could not be visited.” 26
The 1906 report gives figures on the comparative per capita cost
of administration and supervision for a period of years and points
out that much of the implied saving actually represented a danger­
ous lowering of the standards of protection for the wards.
An examination of this table shows the progressively diminishing per capita
cost of administration and supervision from $58.80 in 1894 to $9.34 in 1906. It
is well understood that with a complete plant and a small population the fixed
harges assume an excessive proportion, and thus it was that in the first year
of the board’s work this per capita cost was $58.80, while in the second year it
24 Report of the Board of Children’s Guardians of the D istrict of Columbia for the Fiscal Year Ended
June 30, 1897, p. 5.
s Ibid., p. 10.
226 Report of the Board of Children’s Guardians of the District of Columbia for the Fiscal Year Ended
June 30, 1898, p. 14.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

126

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA.

was $22.87, and in the third year $16.99. At this time it began to be imprac­
ticable for the agent and the assistants provided for him to comply with the
terms of the law in regard to the visitation of children, and such difficulty has
existed ever since, becoming aggravated as time went on. While the number of
children placed out in free homes who have not been visited as often as once
in a year has not been large, the number of those who have not been visited as
often as they should be has increased, and the obvious impracticability of making
the number of visits that would have been imperative if more of the children of
the character who need the most supervision had been placed out has made it
necessary to keep-these children in institutions or at board. This is^poor econ­
omy, and when the advantages to the children of being removed from institutions
to free family homes are considered it is a great injustice.
The pressure to care for the children in the best manner has resulted m the
diversion of so much of the available resources of the board from the performance
of other duties imposed by the law and good practice that the records have
fallen far in arrears and it has been impossible to make such investigations to
serve as a basis for action and record as should be made.27

The annual reports of 1908 and 1909 reiterate the plea for adequate
funds to carry on the work in such a way that the welfare oi the
children under guardianship of the board, might be safeguarded,
through the provision of a sufficiently large staff of well-qualified
and properly compensated workers.
The most important part of the work of the board is the placing of its wards in
homes and their supervision. This work being once properly accomplished,
the wards of the board take their place in the community on a par with normal
children and self-supporting citizens. For the accomplishment of this work the
board needs not only competent placing officers, but a sufficient number of them,
so that none of its wards nor the homes in which they are placed shall be neglected.
The rate of payment at present authorized for the salaries of the placing officers
is insufficient to compensate properly employees who possess the necessary
qualifications, and the number of placing officers whom the board is authorized
to employ is insufficient to enable the board to place its wards in homes as rapidly
and to keep them there as safely as should be. As has been pointed out several
times in the past, the total expenditures of the board might be largely diminished
if more could be paid for the administrative force, especially in the employment
of additional placing officers.
The act establishing the board requires records to be kept, which can not be
kept in a proper manner because of the insufficiency of the clerical force in the
office. Much work that the board should do can not be done at all.28
The process of selecting homes involves several steps. In the first place,
offers of homes or solicitations of children for homes are received, and in the
second place, confidential correspondence is conducted with clergymen, business
men, local officials, and other persons in regard to the homes. Then the home
should be visited personally by the placing officer, at least as soon as the child is
placed. But it is evident that this process involves much time and labor. For
the mere placement the present office force is inadequate.
It is considered by competent authorities that such an organization as this
board should have 1 visiting employee for each 100 of its wards placed in private
homes. To maintain such an average the board should now have 12 placing
officers and visiting inspectors. * * *
.
.
Among the most pressing faults of the present field service of the board is the
lack of visitation of placed-out wards. Some of these wards are placed in distant
States, such as Maine, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Ohio, Michigan, Colorado,
and California. It is evident that if the placing officers of the board must visit
these wards even once a year, an inordinate expenditure of time and car fare will
be necessitated. All these States, however, have child-caring agencies or philanthropic citizens who may be within easy access of wards of the board and who,
if commissioned officially for the purpose, may make visitations to these wards
in behalf of the board. The board is forbidden by law to accept voluntary
27

Thirteenth Annual Report of the Board of Children’s Guardians, for the fiscal year ended June 30,

*^%ifiteenth Annual Report of the Board of Children’s Guardians, for the fiscal year ended June 30,1908,
p. 6.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

d e v e l o pm e n t oe c h il d - caring w o r k .

i

127

services and, if it were permitted to accept such, could not properly expect its
aids to defray their own expenses in the- service of the board, nor would it prob­
ably be authorized to reimburse such expenses to persons not officially connected
with it.29 For these reasons a contingent appropriation for personal services is
solicited, the amount of such appropriation being tentatively placed at $200.
Undoubtedly, if such method of procuring temporary services succeeds, a large
increase of effectiveness in visitation of wards may be secured at small cost.
The appropriation asked for administrative expenses aside from cost of personal
services is the same as heretofore made. The contemplated increase in number of
placing officers, if granted, should be followed by an increased amount of travel.
Although a considerable balance of the appropriation for these purposes for the
present year was returned to the Treasury, the conditions during the year were
unusual. A change of agent and of one placing officer and other conditions
interfered with the normal execution of the work of placement and visitation.
The board has for the coming year one more placing officer than for the past,
which should enable a larger amount of travel and visitation to be made. Against
the possibility that a balance may result from such an appropriation as may be
made is the certainty that if the appropriation were insufficient the work of the
board would have to be suspended, for whereas the board is not responsible for
such cost as may be imposed upon it by the courts in committing children to its
care, and if it were unable to place and visit them in free homes could bring them
back to the District and board them out, incurring debt therefor, it has within
its control the cost of administration and may be held to account for exceeding
the appropriation.30

In the report for 1921 the agent of the board pointed out the
economy of making it possible to place children in well-supervised
free homes:
The additional inspectors and placing officers allowed in the current appropria­
tion act are enabling the Board of Children’s Guardians to place more children in
free homes. It is expected that the report for the current fiscal year will show a
reduction in the cost of maintenance for board and care of children. The board
of guardians still needs additional investigators and inspectors. We have sub­
mitted estimates for this purpose and urge their favorable consideration. If the
board is supplied with a sufficient force to enable it to place in private family
homes all children that are fitted for such homes and also to supervise properly
these children when so placed, a very marked saving will be effected in the
amount necessary for the board and care of children, who, if not placed in free
homes, must be maintained in institutions and boarding homes. It is now
generally recognized that the system of placing in family homes, under proper
inspection and supervision, is greatly to the benefit of the children, inasmuch as
it insures their upbringing under more nearly normal family environment.31
INCREASE IN THE WORK.

I t was shown in a preceding section that the ratio of dependent
children under the care of the Board of Children’s Guardians to the
child population of the District was about the same in 1904, 1910, and
1922. The ratio was 15 per 1,000 of the population in the District
under 21 years of age in 1910 and also in 1922, the ratio for the year
1904 having been 12 per 1,000. In actual numbers under care, how­
ever, there has been a very considerable increase since the early years
of the board’s work. This is best shown in the following table, which
gives for the period from 1894 through 1923 the number of wards
received by the Board of Children’s Guardians during each year, the
» On M ay 18,1910, a bill was passed which permits the board to accept assistance of voluntary workers.
80 Sixteenth Annual Report of the Board of Cmldren’s Guardians, for the fiscal year ended June 30,
1909, pp. 25-27.
81 Report of the Board of Charities of the District of Columbia, 1921, p. 7.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

128

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

number under care at the end of each year, the number cared for each
year, and the expenditures for each year:
Number of wards received by the Board of Children’s Guardians during each year,s
number under care at end of each year, total number under care in each year
and total expenditures for each year: 1894 to 1928.
Number of wards received.
Year ended June 30—
Total.
1894___________ ____ ________
1895___________________ _
1896__________________________
1897..___ ________________
1898....... ..................... ....................
1899_________ _______ ______
1900_______________ . . .
1901____________________
1902................................. ..........
1903..____ ____________
1904_____ _________
1905_____________________
1906___________________
1907_____ __________________
1908_____________________
1909_____ __________________
1910_____________________
1911_____________________
1912......... ..................................
1913..........................................
1914___ ___________________
1915____ ______________________
1916_______________________
1917______ ___ _________________
1918______ ____ ____________
1919_____________________
1920......... ..............................
1921_____ _______________
1922___ _____________________
1923___ ____ ___________ .

8 251
8172
8163
143
170
186
214
229
285
380
350
359
309
320
518
468
340
363
453
610
592
595
422
572
1,119
565
645
582
476
222

Perma­
nent.
8 203
8 110
8 93

‘ 89
95
135
126
146
227
214
213
250
200

147
254
202

125
119
183
277
426
145
135
145
151
153
223
178
126
27

Tem­
porary.
8 48
8 62
8 70

54
76
51

88

83
58
166
137
109
109
173
264
266
215
244
270
333
166
450
387
427
968
412
422
404
350
195

Number Number
under
Expendi­
under
care at
for
care dur­ tures
end of ing
year.
year .8
year . 1
198
255
339
422
496
612
688

791
959
1,061
1 ,2 0 0

1,331
1,437
1,536
1,753
1,822
1,712
1,652
1,746
1,803
1,826
1,860
1,928
1,997
2,159
2,026
1,988
1,914
1,809
1,561

8 251
8 370
8 418

482
592
682
826
917
1,076
1,339
1,411
1,559
1,640
1,757
2,054
2,2 2 1

2,162
2,075
2,105
2,356
2,395
2,421
2,282
2,500
3,116
2,724
2,671
2,570
2,390
2,036

$15, 000. 00
21,728. 48
23,801.36
27) 420. 00
3 i 710.15
44; 750. 00
35,540. 76
51,950.00
57,431. 36
56,061.12
67i 447. 54
76,949. 39
74,152. 35
6 i; 854.45
68,109. 98
72,378. 84
64,105.07
6 < 139. 35
76,053. 98
93, 785. 74
100,942. 95
106,554. 70
113,985.44
138,422. 72
173; 798. 02
211,072. 54
213,309.35
248, 750.80
217,607.06
223,906.43

1 Excluding feeble-minded nonwards.
8 The figures here given are based on the

number of children under care at the beginning of the year plus
the number received during the year (except feeble-minded nonwards). For 1918, 1919, and 1922 the
numbers are not the same as those given in the reports of the board.
* Some of those received as temporary wards were made permanent later in the year. These are counted
among the temporary and among the permanent also, thus causing some duplication in the total.
* The small number of permanent commitments in 1916 may due be to a decision of the court of appeals
in 1915, th at the juvenile court was without authority to set aside a commitment after the expiration of the
term of court m which the commitment was made.

The best guide to the amount of work handled by the board is the
number of wards cared for during each year. I t will be seen that
this number was 2,031 in the year ended June 30, 1923. With 100
as the index number representing wards cared for during the year
ended June 30, 1897, the proportionate numbers for wards cared for
during each fifth year and during 1923 are as follows: 1897, 100;
1902, 223; 1907, 365; 1912, 437; 1917, 519; 1922, 496; 1923, 421.
The funds expended for the administration of the work of the board
showed the following ratios, 100 being used as the base for 1897:
1897, 100; 1902, 185; 1907,239; 1912, 323; 1917, 418; 1922, 643;
1923, 825. In contrast with these figures the increases in expendi­
tures for maintenance of wards are shown by the following index
numbers: 1897, 100; 1902, 262; 1907, 252; 1912, 311; 1917, 630;
1922, 1,085; 1923, 1,262.
t In considering the expenditures for maintenance of wards in
relation to the increase in the number of wards under care it is neces­
sary to take into account two important facts: First, prior to 1910

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

DEVELOPMENT OF CHILD-CARING WORK.

129

the Board of Children’s Guardians paid from its appropriation for
the maintenance of wards cared for in both the industrial home
schools; after that time the appropriations for the maintenance of
the children in these institutions were made direct to the schools.
Second, the amounts that had to be paid for the board of children,
both in institutions and in family homes, were very appreciably
increased in the years during and following the war.
The needs of the administrative work are indicated in a com­
parison of the number of children in family homes under supervision
of the Board of Children’s Guardians of the District of Columbia on
one date with the number under care of the division of child guardian­
ship of the Massachusetts Department of Public Welfare.32 On June
30, 1923, the District board had under supervision in family homes
1,233 wards; 10 placing agents were looking after these children. On
November 30, 1922, the Massachusetts agency had 5,209 children
under care in family homes and 53 agents for the work of super­
vision. Thus if the District board had the same proportionate
number of supervising agents as Massachusetts its staff would include
13 agents instead of 10. The Massachusetts agents supervising
children placed in family homes had an average of less than 100
children per agent. The District board had an average of 123
children to each agent. In addition, the placing agents of the Dis­
trict board are charged with a considerable amount of work in con­
nection with the children who are temporarily in institutions. I t is
generally agreed among child-caring agencies that the number of
children in family homes supervised hy one agent should not exceed
50 to 75.
The staff of the Board of Children’s Guardians, especially for its
home-finding and supervisory work, is dangerously small in relation
to the board’s field of work. In 1921 the staff totalled only 17, and
even this was an increase of 5 over the staff five years previously.
From 1904 through 1915 the total number of workers was from 8 to 11.
CONGRESSIONAL INQUIRIES CONCERNING THE CARE OF DEPENDENT
CHILDREN.

In the history of public child-caring work in the District of Co­
lumbia a number o f special inquiries have been made by congres­
sional committees to determine the District’s needs or to secure a
basis for action on proposed changes in law. The congressional
documents containing reports of such hearings or of special data
submitted to Congress furnish especially valuable source material
on the history of public and private child-caring work in the District
and on the policies that have determined the development of the
public charities.
The most extensive of the congressional inquiries was made by a
joint committee of the Senate and the House of Representatives
appointed in 1896. The resulting report dealt with the activities of
the public institutions of the District and the private organizations
that received Government subsidies in any form. Compiled soon
after the institutions and agencies were created, this report is an
especially valuable source of information on the early history of
child care and protection in the District.
82
For area covered by the District board in its child-placing work see pp. 63-64. The travel incident
to supervision probably compares fairly w ith th at of the Massachusetts department.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

130

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN TH E DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

A second document of very great interest in tracing the develop­
ment of child-caring work is the report submitted to Congress by the
Commissioners of the District in 1904, in accordance with a require­
ment contained in an annual appropriation bill. This report dis­
cussed “ a plan for the future care of delinquent and dependent
children in the District of Columbia.” Special consideration was
given to the work of the Board of Children’s Guardians and to the
relation of the Government to the work of private institutions caring
for dependent children.
The need for establishing a special court for children’s cases was
discussed in this report, as it had been in the report of the 1896 joint
congressional committee, and the recommendations made by the
commissioners were soon thereafter incorporated into the law creat­
ing the Juvenile Court of the District of Columbia. Many of the
findings of these special inquiries by Congress, however, were not
so quickly converted into law. Some of the provisions that were
urged in 1896 and in 1904 have been debated before congressional
committees at intervals up to the present time. One of the most
important recommendations of the early reports was accepted by
Congress in 1922, when an appropriation was made for an institution
for the care and training o f the feeble-minded of the District. On
certain questions concerning policies of public child-caring work in
the^pistrict hearings have been held by congressional committees
within the last year or two.33 In the light of recent discussions relat­
ing to the methods of public child-caring work in the District the
earlier congressional documents are of special interest as showing
the origin of some of the present policies of the Board of Children’s
Guardians. The early congressional reports furnish particularly
interesting opinions on such questions as the use of institutional and
family-home care for public wards, the need for more adequately
safeguarding dependent children, and the importance of measures
for the prevention of child dependency and neglect.
In 1909 there took place in Washington a gathering of people from
all parts of the country who had been invited by President Roosevelt
to discuss the question of the best methods of caring for dependent
children. The report of the so-called White House Conference on
Dependent Children was submitted to Congress by President Roose­
velt and was made available as a Senate document.34 While this
conference did not primarily concern itself with conditions in the
District of Columbia, the President made special reference to the
child-caring problem in the District in his message to the Senate
and the House of Representatives. These recommendations are still
among the debated issues in the District, none of them having as yet
been incorporated in law or practice.35
The three reports dealt with above are the most significant of the
congressional documents concerned with child-caring work in the
District and will therefore be discussed further in this section.
Among the source material listed in the appendix to this report
(pp. 158—160) will be found references to other hearings by congresn,83 ? A t ? ° ^ ®n bearmgs cited in Appendix, pp. 168-160. Investigation of the Board of Children’s
F ^efo/ l t,he J“nt Subcommittee of the Senate and House of Representatives Comrmttee on^the ^ ^lct^of^Columbia, Sixty-seventh Congress, fourth session, on the Brookhart-Free hill

0/o P r°e^ d™?s,?f,tuhe Conferenee on the Care of Dependent Children, held at Washington, D. C., Jan.
25-26, 1909. Sixtieth Congress, second session, S. Doe. No. 72i. Washington, 1909.

60¡?66 pp< lo o “ lo 9 .


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

DEVELOPMENT OF CHILD-CARING WORK.

131

sional committees and to reports on special subjects, most of them
relating to bills introduced in Congress.
JOINT CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE OF 1896.

The District of Columbia appropriation act approved in June,
1896, provided for the appointment of a joint select committee, to
consist of three Senators and three members of the House of Repre­
sentatives, to make an investigation of the charities and reformatory
institutions in the District of Columbia, especially those maintained
in part or entirely at public expense. As specified in the act, the
inquiry was to include the relation of these institutions to the Federal
and District Governments; their efficiency, management, and
resources; “ whether such charitable or reformatory institutions are
effective and economical in their organization, methods, and expendi­
ture to provide for the poor and destitute;” and whether it might
be practicable for the commissioners or other authority in the District
to make contracts or other arrangements with these institutions to
provide such care. The report of the committee was presented to
Congress July 21, 1897.36
Of the series of 11 hearings held by the committee, 4 dealt with the
care of dependent children. The topics outlined for discussion at
the hearings show the detail with which the congressional committee
went into the questions concerning the care and protection of depend­
ent children:
F

ourth

H

e a r in g .

Subject: Dependent children.
To be heard: Officers of the Board of Children’s Guardians; officers of the
Humane Society; judges of District courts.
TOPICS.

1. What children are, properly speaking, dependent; and what are the duties
of the District toward such as are dependent?
2. Has the District a duty toward children not officially declared dependent?
3. Methods of taking up dependent children; the limits of guardianship.
4. The proper training for dependent children.
5. The disposal of dependent children; in homes; in boarding places.
6. The need of visitation in the case of children placed out.
F if t h H

e a r in g .

Subject: Dependent children; Institutional training.
To be heard: Officers of the Board of Children’s Guardians; officers of the
Industrial Home School; officers of the National Association for the Relief of
Destitute Colored Women and Children; officers of the Humane Society.
TOPICS.

1. The facilities offered by aided District institutions to care for dependent
children.
,
2. What coordination of existing institutions and agencies is possible and
desirable (a) for taking up children, (b) for training children, (c) for placing
out and visiting children.
3. Changes in existing institutions necessary to adapt them for the care of all
' dependent children, properly so called.
4. Industrial training for dependent children.
5. The possibility of securing homes.
Joint Select Committee to Investigate the Charities and Reformatory Institutions in the District of
Columbia: P art I—Hearings; Statements; Reports from Cities; Suggestions for a Board of Chanties.
P a rt II—Report. P art III—Historical Sketches of the Charities and Reformatory Institutions m the
District of Columbia. Fifty-fifth Congress, first session, S. Docs., vol. 8 , Doc. 185. Washington, 1898.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

132

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.
S ix t h H

e a r in g .

Subject: Dependent children; Foundlings.
To be heard: Officers of the Children’s Hospital; officers of the Washington
Hospital for Foundlings; officers of St. Ann’s Infant Asylum; officers of the Board
of Children’s Guardians.
TOPICS.

1.
2.
3.
4.

The work of the foundling institutions in the District of Columbia.
Extent to which public aid may properly be granted.
Mortality.
Placing out and adoption of children.
5 . Visitation of children.
6. Private foundling asylums.
Sev en th H

e a r in g .

Subject: Dependent children; Charity.
To be heard: Officers of the German Orphan Asylum; officers of the Church
Orphanage of St. John’s Parish; officers of St. Rose Industrial School; officers
of St. Joseph’s Male Orphan Asylum; officers of the Newsboys’ and Children’s
Aid Society.
TOPICS.

1. May public funds properly be used to support sectarian or private insti­
tutions?
2. Where grants of public money are made, ought not the District to have the
right to place dependent children in the institution so aided?
3. What would be the effect of carrying out the declared policy of Congress
to make no appropriations of money to sectarian institutions?
4. Does the policy of taking children from and returning them to parents
stimulate dependency?
5. What becomes of children discharged from the sectarian and private insti­
tutions?
6. What is the length of time children are maintained at public expense and
is the expense per child unduly large?87

In the discussion of the charities of the District of Columbia it was
brought out that the board of trade in 1895 adopted resolutions
asking Congress to abolish the office of superintendent of charities
and to create a board of charities which should have supervisory
control over all charity work in the District.38 The representative
of the board of trade also recommended that the Board of Children’s
Guardians should have general supervision over child-caring work,
and that no child should become a charge on the charity appropria­
tions made by Congress until he had been made a ward, either per­
manent or temporary, of the board and subject to a proper court.
He also urged that the Board of Charities should have supervision of
the work of other institutions to bring into harmony, as far as pos­
sible, institutions that had grown up independently of each other.
I t was pointed out in the hearings that nearly all institutions that
received public funds began as private institutions.
Emphasis was given to the importance of judicial determination of
dependency when public funds were to be used.
The duty of the Government toward dependent children being established, the
Government itself should determine what children are to be classed as objects of
its care in the various aspects in which that care is to be given. No children
should be regarded as dependent without careful and authoritative determina­
tion of the question of their status, which determination is impracticable in its
most adequate sense without recourse to judicial inquiry and decision. The
courts alone have power to elicit that full information which is requisite to a
87 Ibid.,


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

P art I, pp. 3-4.

Ibid., Part I, p. 14.

DEVELOPMENT OP CHILD-CABING WOBK.

133

proper determination of the status of the citizen. In all cases, therefore, in which
the dependency of the children is in question, the question should be determined
by the courts.39

This question of the determination of dependency was also urged
by the agent of the Board of Children’s Guardians, as follows:
There should exist in every well-regulated city one official agency to which
should be referred all reports and complaints of the condition of children alleged
to be in any such situation as to make them proper subjects for public protection
and support. This agency should make a tentative investigation of the case,
so as to ascertain whether it probably falls within the intent of the law governing
the public support of children. If in the judgment of the agent it is properly such
a case or might be such a case, it should be his duty to present the case before the
court designated for that purpose for an authoritative examination. The court
should summon before it the child and parents, if either are living, and should
make a thorough investigation under oath of the facts relating to the necessity
of the child, and the judgment should rest with the court as to whether the cir­
cumstances were such as made it absolutely necessary for the protection and
safety of the child that it should be placed under public support and public
guardianship. In my judgment the necessity for public support carries with it
the right of public guardianship.40

ly

\

Attention was called in the hearings to the fact that it was a great
handicap to the work for children that dependency cases had to be
brought before the police court, and mention was made of the de­
sirability of having them come before a tribunal “ not connected
with criminals.”
The statement of the president of the Board of Children’s Guardians
thus described the situation that existed in 1897 in connection with
the care of dependent children:
At present there are two systems of admitting children to public support and
protection: One through the courts and the Board of Children’s Guardians, the
other through officers and managers of institutions without any formality which
has effect at law. The first involves legal guardianship, permanent responsibility
of the guardian, and a practical guaranty against subsequent distress and de­
pendency. The second involves nothing but temporary shelter and care, the
child being liable to recall at the whim of the parent. The two are inimical and
mutually exclusive. Since the close of 1894 the second has increased and the
grg^
decreased.
One or the other should receive final official approval and support. The
attempt to operate both will hereafter, as heretofore, lead to confusion, con­
tention, and unnecessary expense.
Public funds should only be disbursed in the form of specific payments for
specific services rendered, and a plan embodying this principle can not be put
into operation without taking charge of the admission and discharge of children.
It is desirable that all applicants for care and support of children at public
expense should submit to a uniform test of dependency and necessity. This can
only be secured when all are received through one authority.
It is desirable that the entire field be adequately covered, so that there shall
be always available prompt and sufficient provision for child dependents of all
sorts. This can only be secured through the maintenance of a public agency,
some being undesirable subjects, not sought as inmates by any institution, such
as cripples, the feeble-minded, the epileptic, and the morally depraved.
It is desirable that records be kept of all child dependents, in order that their
conduct and history may be known. Only through such records can we here­
after ascertain what has been the result of our efforts for their preservation.
The only real test of general efficiency in child-saving methods is the proportion
of the children dealt with which is saved to honorable self-support and the reason­
able performance of civic duty. Now each chartered institution works out its
own ideas as to records, and there are not now in existence any records which
show satisfactorily the results of their work in the past.

*

*

*

a* Ibid., Part I, p. 92.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

*

*

*

*

« Ibid., Part I, p. 110.

134

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

There is now invested in the real estate of the various child-caring institutions
of the District of Columbia, exclusive of the Industrial Home School, which the
District owns, over $162,000 of public money, and the appropriation bill for
1898 gives the same institutions $37,700 for maintenance. Yet there is no court
of justice and no public official who has authority to put in or take out a single
child, except that a child might possibly be released through proceedings under
a writ of habeas corpus. The parents of these public dependents, however, can
demand, and frequently do secure, the release of the children to them when the
institution officers know that such parents are both unfit and unable to properly
care for their children.41

The president of the board also referred to the need for different
court provision and for proper detention facilities, a condition that
was not corrected until many years afterward. He recommended
on behalf of the board that commitments be made to the board “ by
the police court or the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia
holding session for orphans’ court business,” and that such courts
be empowered to make and enforce orders for maintenance of children
by their parents.43 I t is interesting to note that this recommendation
was made two years before the establishment of the first juvenile
court (in Chicago, in 1899) and almost 10 years before this suggested
procedure was put into operation in the District of Columbia.
The committee’s report on its findings called attention to the
generosity of private benevolence in the District of Columbia, especi­
ally in view of the peculiar conditions affecting the District—the
short residence on the part of so many people and also the large
influx of persons who have no real claim to the charity of the citizens.
I t was pointed out that Washington was every year attracting more
persons of wealth and leisure from all parts of the country .and that
it might be assumed that the amount of money available for charity
in the District would increase, provided some system could be ar­
ranged whereby individuals could be assured that their gifts would
be used wisely and effectively.43
As the first step toward efficient reorganization of the District
charities the committee recommended the appointment of a board
of charities which should have the power to visit and inspect all in­
stitutions receiving appropriations from Congress. I t stated that
in 1896 there were 1,014 children in private institutions subsidized
by Congress and more than 60,000 adults receiving some form of aid
or medical attention in institutions or hospitals supported wholly
or in part by the public treasury. None of these institutions was
under public control or supervision. The committee recommended
that where there is public support there should be public control.
An interesting summary was presented of the two systems of
caring for dependent children, which the committee defined as “ the
asylum system and the placing-out system.”
In this District two systems are at work—the asylum system and the placingout system. In theory, however, the asylums recognize the placing-out system;
each of them has provisions in its charter for the indenture of children, and each
practices that system so far as its resources will allow. On the other hand, the
Board of Children’s Guardians, which makes the placing-out system its founda­
tion, is compelled by the nature of things to use the asylum for the reception
and for thè preparation of children for homes.
The mutual antagonism of the two systems appears in their practical opera­
tion. The placing-out system insists that before a child becomes properly a
dependent—that is, a proper charge upon the public—the courts or some other
official authority shall investigate the case and decide as to the facts of such
dependency. The asylum system—so called for convenience—maintains that
« Ibid., P art I, pp. 450, 451.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

« Ibid., P art I, p. 452.

‘a Ibid., P art II, p. 3.

D E V E L O PM E N T OF C H IL D -O A R IN G W O RK .

135

it is the duty of the State to assist in caring for children whose parents may for
any reason be unable to care for them; and in case the parents become able to
resume the care of their offspring, under this system the children may be returned
to them. Children are received without official investigation, each institution
^ or organization having its own rules in regard to the admission and dismission of
children.
' .
. .
Again, the placing-out system is based on the theory that where the natural
parents of a child have proved remiss in their duty it may be for the .best inter­
ests of both the child and society to have the child placed in a new home where
it will grow up as a part of the community and in this way be trained in habits
of self-reliance and in the duties and privileges of citizenship. Retention in an
institution is contemplated only to the extent of training the individual child,
so far as may be necessary, in habits of veracity, cleanliness, and order, so as to
fit it for entrance into a home. The asylum system practically prolongs the
training for years, during which the child is supported by the community; and
endeavors in the institution to give such a training as the public schools would
provide for persons placed out. Often these institutions are connected with and
in part supported by religious organizations. * * *
.
A third difference between the placing-out and the asylum systems is found
in the fact that the latter system in effect maintains no supervision over the
child after it leaves the institution, whereas it is an essential part of the placingout system to visit at intervals the children so placed out and to retain control
over the welfare and the persons of its wards, to the end that they shall be prop­
erly cared for, educated, and trained.
.....
As has been said, the difference in the two systems is rather practical than
theoretical, since the asylum does not intend to provide for the unworthy, nor
to keep children beyond the time when good^homes can be found for them, nor
to neglect children placed out. The weak point in the system is that it is not so
organized as to protect.itself against fraud, to search for suitable homes, or to
make systematic visitations. Its entire energies and resources are required to
maintain the institution itself.43a

The placing-out system is credited with a much lower mortality
rate for children under 2 years of age than is found among children
of the same age group in institutions. During 1896, of the children
under 2 years of age who were under the care of the Board of Chil­
dren’s Guardians, 35.9 per cent died; for an institution which placed
out with nurses a considerable proportion of the babies under its
charge, the percentage of children who died was 56.3 and for a
second institution the percentage was given as 70.44
.
One of the largest institutions, it was said, as a rule and seemingly
as a result of policy, had no knowledge of the parents of the children
received by it.45 Another institution secured information regarding
the parentage of its children, many of whom were half orphans
cared for temporarily. The Board of Children’s Guardians investi­
gated each case coming to its attention and if possible induced the
parents to provide support for their children. Attention was called
to the need for combatting the evils of the “ foundhng-asylum
system by finding homes where mothers and children could be placed
together.
.
The last section of the publication by the Congressional committee
contains historical sketches of the institutions in the District and
brief outlines of their fields of activity. The descriptions include 14
private institutions caring for dependent children and the Board ot
Children’s Guardians.

<»* I b id ., P a r t I I , p p . 24-25.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

« I b id ., P a r t

II,

p p . 38-39.

« I b i d ., P a r t I I , p . 40.

136

C H IL D D E PE N D E N C Y IN T H E DISTRICT OF COLU M BIA .

to report to Congress at the first regular session of the Fifty-eighth
Congress a general plan for the future care of the delinquent and
dependent children in the District of Columbia.” In compliance
with this provision, the commissioners submitted a report early
in January, 1904, which was printed as a House document and re­
printed as a Senate document.46
The first recommendation made in this report related to the
establishment of a separate court for children’s cases:
Congress should provide for a juvenile tribunal before which all children,
delinquent or dependent, who are to become a charge upon the public funds
should be brought. This tribunal should be entirely separate from all existing
courts. It should be accommodated in a separate building, which should also
contain the house of detention. The District government should own the
building to be thus used for a house of detention and a juvenile tribunal.
No child should be placed in any institution at public expense until the fact
of delinquency or dependency has been first ascertained and declared by the
juvenile tribunal.
All children of the class now committed to the Reform School for Boys and the
Reform School for Girls should be committed by the juvenile tribunal to those
schools.
All other children, delinquent or dependent (with exception of a class noted
later), should be placed by the tribunal in the care of the Board of Children’s
Guardians, which board should be appointed by the Commissioners of the
District of Columbia. Thejuvenile tribunal should place upon probation under
the care of the Board of Children’s Guardians and its probation officers, who
should be as numerous as may be necessary, such children as are now so placed
by the police court. All other children committed to the care of the Board of
Children’s Guardians should be made its wards until maturity, as is now done,
with provision for the relinquishment of the guardianship in individual cases by
the Board of Children’s Guardians with the approval of the juvenile tribunal.
Most cases where a parent (or parents) desires to have a child temporarily cared
for in some period of family distress can, and would, be handled by private
charitable institutions without public aid.47

The commissioners recommended that the Board of Children’s
Guardians, which had been in operation for 10 years, be given what­
ever additional authority and enlargement of its force was necessary.
Approval was given to the board’s policy of providing homes m
families for its infant wards and for other children “ who are fitted for
home life and for whom fitting homes with due regard for racial and
religious considerations can be found,” and it was added that “ in
general, in the future as in the past, the board should place in institu­
tions only those who are not fitted for home life or for whom suitable
homes can not be immediately provided.”
The report stated that the board, applying these principles, would
place the larger number of its wards in families, either as boarders
or otherwise, and would place in institutions only special classes of
children, and these usually for limited periods. I t was pointed out
that the board should be given an adequate number of employees to
supervise properly the care of its wards in families and that ample
institutional facilities should be provided, under the control of the
Commissioners of the District of Columbia, to care for the children
who could not be placed in families immediately. I t was also rec­
ommended that the board be authorized to make contracts for serv­
ice that it might require from institutions supported by private
funds.
« C a r e o f D e lin q u e n t M id D e p e n d e n t C h ild r e n in t h e D is t r ic t o f C o lu m b ia ; le t t e r fr o m t h e C o m m is ®* j ^ D ^ t r i c t o f C o lu m b ia s u b m it t in g a p la n fo r t h e f u t u r e c a r e o f d e li n q u e n t a n d d e p e n d e n t
in *
° * G o t a n b f a . F if t y - e ig h t h C o n g r e ss, s e c o n d s e s s io n , S . D o c . N o . 8 5 , J a n . 6 , 1904.
7 l b id ., p . 1 . T h e J u v e n ile C o u r t o f t h e D is t r ic t o f C o lu m b ia w a s c r e a te d in 1906 b y a c t o f C o n g r e ss.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

D E V E L O PM E N T OF C H IL D -O A R IN G W O RK .

137

An especially urgent need reported was more adequate provision
for colored wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians. The
establishment of two institutions for negro children was suggested,
one a temporary home for children who would be returned to their
parents within a short time (such care being provided for white
children in private institutions) and the other an industrial home
for negro children to accommodate both boys and girls.48 Attention
was called to the need for institutional provision for feeble-minded
children and for children afflicted with epilepsy.49
The need for individual case work and the relation between the
public and private organizations for child care were stated by the
commissioners as follows:
So far as the children are concerned the object to be kept in view should be
the development of the individual from a state of dependence to a state of inde­
pendence, including a reformation in case of delinquency—and excluding the
hopelessly feeble-minded—by such education through the environment and
formal instruction as will best fit the child for good citizenship and private
usefulness. Each case must be treated separately so as to be treated appro­
priately; therefore it should first be sifted out by a proper tribunal and then
having been committed to a public guardian, the child should be placed for
nurture and instruction wherever in the whole range of the system it may be
most advantageous for the child.
The State can not and would not discourage private philanthropy, and the
outhned system leaves a perfectly free field for private institutions; but they
should receive neither public dependents nor public money, except through
public channels and under public supervision.

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

The declared purpose of Congress in establishing the Board of Children’s
Guardians was to reform the administration of the public child-caring work
in the District of Columbia, then in the hands of private institutions, not coordi­
nated into a system and not under governmental control, and also to improve
the treatment of dependent children. The principle Congress had in view Was
to provide for a judicial ascertainment of the need of public support for children
and then to centralize authority and responsibility for the care of children properly
chargeable to public funds. All classes of dependent and delinquent children
except those properly belonging to the reform schools, and including the feeble­
minded, were placed in the care of this board.50

The commissioners’ report listed six institutions maintained or
aided by public funds which cared for dependent children.51 The
Industrial Home School was the only public institution. In spite
of the fact that it was supported entirely by public funds, this school
could not under the law at that time be required to admit children
W any public authority. I t received wards of the Board of Children’s
Guardians and also received other children with no other action
than that of its own committee on admissions. The one institution
for colored children was conducted under private auspices but was
maintained almost entirely at public expense (receiving $9,800
annually). I t was not, however, under public control and received
children through its own board of management without reference
to public authorities. The daily average number of children cared
for was about 100.
Four other private institutions, receiving from the Government
annual appropriations of $1,000 to $6,000, also received children
48 T h e Industrial Home School for Colored Children was established as a public institution in
has been equipped to care for boys only.

1907-

it

« I t w a s n o t u n t i l 1922 t h a t C o n g r e s s m a d e a n a p p r o p r ia t io n fo r a n in s t it u t io n fo r t h e f e e b le -m in d e d
80 C a re o f D e lin q u e n t a n d D e p e n d e n t C h ild r e n in t h e D is t r ic t o f C o lu m b ia . F if t y - e ig h t h C o n g ress
s e c o n d s e s sio n , S . D o c . N o . 85, p . 4 .
’
61 I b i d ., p p . 5 -6 .

88962°—24t-

-10


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

138

C H IL D D E PE N D E N C Y IN T H E D ISTRICT OF CO LU M BIA .

without reference to public authorities. In regard to one ^of^ these
institutions it was stated, “ I t receives an annual appropriation of
$6,000, and about $1,500 is contributed from private sources.
The daily average number of children cared for was 35. An insti­
tution receiving $5,400 annually from public funds had a daily
average number of about 100. The third institution received
$1 800 annually from Congress. I t had “ a considerable endowment
fund, and for years the private contributions had been more than
sufficient to meet the running expenses.” The fourth had a daily
average of about 25 children and received $1,000 annually from
public funds, having a somewhat larger income from private sources.
Besides these institutions there were some conducted under
private auspices in which the Board of Children’s Guardians boarded
children, making contracts for payment for the care needed.
_#
In 1906 the recommendations that had been made by the joint
congressional committee in 1897 and by the commissioners m their
1904 report to Congress, bore fruit in the enactment of a law creating
the Juvenile Court of the District of Columbia and providing for
the court commitment to the Board of Children’s Guardians ot
children who were not proper subjects for the two national training
schools.
T H E “ W H IT E H O U S E C O N F E R E N C E ,” 1909.

•Closely related to the foregoing inquiry by Congress into the
care of dependent children was the conference called by President
Roosevelt in 1909, popularly known as the “ White House Con­
ference on Dependent Children.” 52
..
. ,
In the request for such a conference made to the President ot me
United States by a number of the leading child-welfare workers of
the country the introductory sentences referred to progress in the
District of Columbia, The letter addressed to the President began:
In your message to Congress December 6, 1904, urging the establishment u fa
juvenile court for the District of Columbia you said: ‘ No Christian and civilized community can afford to show a happy-go-lucky lack of concern for the
youth of to-day; for, if so, the community will have to pay a terrible penalty
of financial burden and social degradation in the to-morrow. ^
Congress promptly responded and enacted an excellent juvenile-court law.
The wisdom of this step has already been proven by the work of the court.

In his special message to the Senate and House of Representatives,
February 15, 1909, presenting the conclusions of the Conference on
the Care of Dependent Children, President Roosevelt included the
following special references to the needs of the District of Columbia.
I further urge that such legislation be enacted as may be necessary in order to
bring the laws and practices in regard to the care of dependent children m all
Federal territory into harmony with the other conclusions reached by the
Congress took a step in the direction of the conclusions of this conference in
1893, when, on the recommendation of the late Amos G. Warner, then superin­
tendent of charities for the District of Columbia, the Board of Children s Guar­
dians was created, with authority, among other things, to place children m
family homes. That board has made commendable progress, and its work should
be strengthened and extended.
* '
;
... „
I recommend legislation for the District of Columbia in accordance with the
fifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth sections of the conclusions of the conference, as
follows:
62 p r o c e e d in g s o f t h e C o n fe r e n c e o n t h e C a r e o f D e p e n d e n t C h ild r e n , h e ld a t W a s h in g t o n , D . C ., J a n ­
u a r y 2 5 -2 6 , 1909. S ix t ie t h C o n g r e ss, s e c o n d s e s s io n , S . D o c . N o . 721. W a s h in g to n , 190».
»«I b i d ., p. 17.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

D E V E L O PM E N T OF C H IL D -C A R IN G W O RK .

139

1. That the approval of the Board of Charities be required for the incorpora­
tion of all child-caring agencies, as well as amendments of the charter of any
benevolent corporation which includes child-caring .work, and that other than
duly incorporated agencies be forbidden to engage in the care of needy children.
This legislation is needed in order to insure the fitness and responsibility of those
who propose to undertake the care of helpless children. Such laws have long
been in satisfactory operation in several of the larger States of the Union.
2. That the Board of Charities, through its duly authorized agents, shall in­
spect the work of all agencies which care for dependent children, whether by
institutional or by home-finding methods, and whether supported by public or
private funds. The .State has always jealously guarded the interests of children
whose parents have been able to leave them property by requiring the appoint­
ment of a guardian, under bond, accountable directly to the courts, even though
there be a competent surviving parent. Surely the interests of the child who is
not only an orphan but penniless ought to be no less sacred than those of the more
fortunate orphan who inherits property. If the protection of the Government-is
necessary in the one case, it is even more necessary in the other. If we are to
require that only incorporated institutions shall be allowed to engage in this
responsible work, it is necessary to provide for public inspection, lest the State
should become the unconscious partner of those who either from ignorance or
inefficiency are unsuited to deal with the problem.
3. That the education of children in orphan asylums and other similar insti­
tutions in the District of Columbia be under the supervision of the Board of
Education, in order that these children may enjoy educational advantages equal
to those of the other children. Normal school life comes next to normal home
life in the process of securing the fullest development of the child.
4. That all agencies engaged in child-caring work in the District of Columbia
be required by law to adopt adequate methods of investigation and make per­
manent records relative to children under their care, and to exercise faithful
personal supervision over their wards until legally adopted or otherwise clearly
beyond the need of further supervision; the forms and methods of such investition, records, and supervision to be prescribed and enforced by the Board of
Charities.
I deem such legislation as is herein recommended not only important for the
welfare of the children immediately concerned but important as setting an
example of a high standard of child protection by the National Government to
the several States of the Union, which should be able to look to the Nation for
leadership in such matters.54

The summary of the conclusions reached by the conference in­
cluded the following:
1. Home care.— Children of worthy parents or deserving mothers should, as a
rule, be kept with their parents at home.
2. Preventive work.—The effort should be made to eradicate causes of depend­
ency, such as disease and accident, and to substitute compensation and insur­
ance for relief.
3. Home finding.—Homeless and neglected children, if normal, should be cared
for in families, when practicable.
4. Cottage system.—Institutions should be on the cottage plan with small units,
as far as possible.
5. Incorporation.—Agencies caring for dependent children should be incorpo­
rated, on approval of a suitable State board.
6. State inspection.—The State should inspect the work of all agencies which
care for dependent children.
7. Inspection of educational work.—Educational work of institutions and
agencies caring for dependent children should be supervised by State educa­
tional authorities.
8. Facts and records.—Complete histories of dependent children and their
parents, based upon personal investigation and supervision, should be recorded
for guidance of child-caring agencies.
9. Physical care.—Every needy child should receive the best medical and
surgical attention and be instructed in health and hygiene.
10. Cooperation.—Local child-caring agencies should cooperate and establish
joint bureaus of information.55
6< I b id ., p p . 7 -8 .


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

“ I b i d ., p p . 8 -9 .


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

APPENDIX A.—GENERAL TABLES.
T able 1 .— Number and per cent distribution in various types of placement at end of each

fiscal year; wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians under minority commitment.
T o t a l.»

B o a r d in g
hom es.

Free
h o m e s .3

I n s titu ­
t io n s .

Y ear.

T o ta l:
1895............
1896______
1897............
1898............
1899............
1900______
1 9 0 1 ...........
1902............
1903______
1904______
1905............
1906______
1907______
1908______
1909______
1910............
1911............
1912............
1913______
1914______
1915______
1916______
1917______
1918______
1919............
1920............
1921............
1922............
1923............
W h ite :
1904............
1 9 0 5 ......
1906_____
1907............
1908______
1909............
1910______
1911............
1 9 1 2 ......
1913............
1914______
1915............
1916______
1917............
1 9 1 8 ...........
1919............
1920______
1921............
1922............
1923............
C o lo re d :
1904............
1905............
1906............
1907______
1908______
1909______
1910______
1911:...........
1 9 1 2 ...........
1913............
1914______
1915............
1916............
1 9 1 7 ..
.
1918______
1919............
1 9 2 0 ......
1921............
1922
1923............

I n d e n tu r e ,
a p p r e n tic e ,
and w age
h o m e s .3

H o s p it a ls .

N o.

Per
ct.

N o.

Per
c t.

N o.

Per
c t.

N o.

Per
c t.

N o.

Per
c t.

N o.

255
312
380
445
552
634
720
898
993
1,134
1,267
1 ,364
1,390
1 ,526
1,625
1,523
1 ,452
1 ,439
1,515
1 ,732
1 ,644
1,587
1,593
1 ,664
1 ,530
1, 537
1, 610
1, 535
1 ,370

100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100

58
66
89
129
108
109
114
141
135
152
157
122
113
137
121
144
132
153
243
292
238
278
344
333
377
428
328
375
240

23
21
23
29
20
17
16
16
13
13
12
9
8
9
7
9
9
11
16
17
15
17
22
20
25
28
20
25
18

47
64
59
72
111
155
175
202
275
291
425
551
588
648
713
637
582
520
503
541
514
461
454
599
545
501
690
682
814

18
21
16
16
20
24
24
22
28
25
34
40
42
43
44
42
40
36
33
31
31
29
29
36
36
33
43
44
59

46
47
57
73
104
110
138
146
158
237
192
168
138
166
198
177
209
256
284
413
444
397
326
272
188
234
233
214
132

18
15
15
16
19
17
19
16
16
21
15
12
10
11
12
12
14
18
19
24
27
25
20
16
12
15
15
14
10

96
124
159
147
200
227
245
357
375
394
438
457
473
478
464
446
407
375
339
313
286
218
188
177
125
109
119
79
65

38
40
42
33
36
36
34
40
38
35
35
34
34
31
29
30
28
26
22
18
17
14
12
11
8
7
7
5
5

4
1
3
2
3
3
1
4
7
6
7
2
7
13
. 7
10
5
15
23
11
27
36
38
21
29
37
26
30

400
436
486
493
532
565
515
473
463
488
599
578
560
542
532
520
531
606
583
512

100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100

17
22
24
21
24
16
22
23
30
33
42
31
47
58
70
71
107
126
176
107

4
5
5
4
5
3
4
5
7
7
7
5
8
11
13
14
20
21
30
21

107
168
211
223
252
280
244
216
191
178
208
198
181
190
197
224
184
256
278
312

27
38
43
45
47
50
47
46
41
36
35
34
32
35
37
43
35
42
48
61

108
87
91
82
84
96
98
102
117
152
227
234
204
153
122
93
117
111
62
41

27
20
19
17
16
17
19
21
25
31
38
41
36
28
23
18
22
18
11
8

155
144
144
152
151
143
128
111
97
91
88
86
64
65
66
50
40
35
21
21

39
33
29
31
28
25
25
23
21
19
15
15
12
12
13
9
8
6
4
4

4
3
3
1
3
8
2
2
4
7
7
5
5
10
6
5
7
9
8
8

734
831
878
897
994
1 ,060
1 ,008
979
976
1 ,027
1 ,1 3 3
1 ,066
1 ,027
1,051
1 ,1 3 2
1 ,0 1 0
1 ,0 0 6
1 ,0 0 4
952
858

100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100-

135
135
98
92
113
105
122
109
123
210
250
207
231
286
263
306
321
202
199
133

18
16
11
10
12
10
12
11
13
20
22
19
23
27
23
30
32
20
21
15

184
257
340
365
396
433
393
366
329
325
333
316
280
264
402
321
317
434
404
502

25
31
39
41
40
41
39
37
34
32
29
30
27
25
36
32
31
43
42
58

129
105
77
56
82
102
79
107
139
132
186
210
193
173
150
95
117
122
152
91

18
13
9
6
8
10
8
11
14
13
17
20
19
16
13
9
12
12
16
11

239
294
313
321
327
321
318
296
278
248
225
200
154
123
111
75
69
84
58
44

33
35
36
36
33
30
32
30
28
24
20
19
15
12
10
7
7
9
6
5

3
3
4
1
4
6
6
8
1
8
16
6
22
26
32
16
22
28
18
22

Per
ct.

A bscon d ­
er s.

N o.

Per
ct.

1

8
7
15
21
27
30
45
51
46
53
49
59
76
90
116
112
112

8

1
1
1
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
2

131
150
151
206
245
245
274
236
203
159
89

9
9
9
13
15
15
18
15
13
10
6

1
1

9
12
13
14
18
22
21
19
24
27
27
24
59
66
71
77
76
69
38
23

2
3
- 3

44
37
46
62
72
94
91
. 93
106
104
123
127
147
179
174
197
160
134
121
66

6
5
5
7
7
9
9
10
11
10
11
12
14
17
15
20
16
13
13
8

i
i
i
i
i
i
1

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
2
1
2

1
1
1
2
3
3
2
2
3
2
3

3
2
5
6
6
5
4
7

3
4
4
4
5
6
4
4
11
12
13
15
14
11
6
4

1 F r o m 1916 o n , in c lu d in g fe e b le -m in d e d w a r d s.
2 I n c lu d in g w o r k in g c h ild r e n w h o w e r e p a y in g th e ir o w n b o a r d a n d c h ild r e n w h o w e r e i n t h e h o m e s
o f th e ir p a r e n ts .
3 B e g in n in g w it h t h e y e a r 1914 n o c h ild r e n w e r e p la c e d o n in d e n t u r e a n d a p p r e n tic e a g r e e m e n t.

143

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

C H IL D D E PE N D E N C Y IN T H E D ISTR IC T OF COLUM BIA,

144

T able 2. — Number and per cent distribution in various types of placement at end

of each fiscal year; wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians under temporary
commitment.

T o t a l.1

F ree
h o m e s .2

B o a r d in g
h o m e s.

In d en tu re,
a p p r e n tic e ,
and w age
h o m e s .3 '

I n s t it u ­
t io n s .

A b scon d ers.

H o s p it a ls .

Y ear.
N o.

T o t a l:

Per
ct.

N o.

P er
c t.

71
142
182
174
190
197
102
132
80

39
42
45
35
38
44
34
48
42

11
16
12
24
45
49
75
50
32

6
5
3
5
9
11
25
19
17

122
101
62

100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100

12
23
39
41
33
50
47
58
43

16
16
26
24
17
29
38
57
69

11
14
9
15
30
28
24
23
14

14
10
6
9
16
16
20
23 .
22

107
200
254
225
206
279
122
173
129

100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100

59
119
143
133
157
147
56
74
37

55
59
56
41
51
53
31
43
29

2
3
9
15
21
51
27
18

1
1
3
5
8
28
15
13

404
495
49fi
451

1 9 2 2 . . . ____
1923..............
W h ite :

274
191

1 9 2 2 .............

N o.

100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100

1917..............
1918..............
1919
1920_______

1917..............
1918..............

Per
c t.

76
141
150
170
190

C olored:

1918
1010
1920..............
1 9 2 2 .......
' 1923..............

Per
c t.

N o.

94
171
182
223
201
155
96
76
70

51
50
45
45
41
34
31
28
37

50
98
91
94
97
76
40
16
3

66
70
61
55
51
44
33
16
5
41
36
36
40
34
28
31
35
52

44
73
91
129
104
79 56
60
67

Per
ct.

N o.

Per
c t.

N o.

2
3
1
3

1
1

4
2

1
1

2
1

1
1

2
1

2
2

2
1
3

1

2
1

1
1

Per
c t.

2
1
1
5
2
2
3
3
1

4
7
20
44
48
36
22
4
5

2
2
5
9
10
8
7
1
2

1
2
4
1
8
7
4
1

1
1
3
1
4
4
3
1

2
4
5
18
22
11
7
1
1

3
3
3
10
12
7
6
1
2

2
3
2
26
3
4
4
7
2

2
2
1
8
1
1
2
4
2

2
3
15
26
26
25
15
3
4

2
2
6
8
9
9
8
2
3

3
5
6
27
11
11
8
8
2

1

N o.

■

1 F r o m 1916 o n , in c lu d in g f e e b le -m in d e d w a r d s .
_
.
a I n c lu d in g w o r k in g c h ild r e n w h o w e r e p a y in g th e ir o w n b o a r d a n d c h ild r e n w h o w e r e i n t h e h o m e s o f
le ir p a r e n ts .
v
,
_ ■■
* N o n e w in d e n tu r e or a p p r e n tic e c a se s, a s n o c h ild r e n s o p la c e d a fte r 1916.

T able 3. — Color and sex of dependent and delinquent children under care of the

Board of Children’s Guardians, May 16, 1920-May 15, 1921, by type of com­
mitment.
C o lo re d .

W h ite .
T y p e o f c o m m itm e n t .

T o t a l------- -------- ---------------- -----------

T o ta l.

B oys.

G ir ls .

2 ,4 4 4

1 ,5 5 8

886

G irls.

T o ta l.

B oys.

G ir ls.

T o ta l

B oys.

916

567

349

1 ,5 2 8

991

537

1 ,6 8 6

945

741

706

396

310

980

549

431

M in o r it y c o m m itm e n t - ....................... 1 ,3 1 6
280
T e m p o r a r y c o m m itm e n t --------------2 90
F e e b le - m in d e d 1.................................... -

741
160
44

575
120
46

521
149
36

296
82
18

225
67
18

795
131
54

445
7§
26

350
53
28

D e lin q u e n t ...........................................................

758

613

145

210

171

39

548

442

106

M in o r it y c o m m itm e n t .........................
T e m p o r a r y c o m m itm e n t _________
F e e b le - m in d e d 1___________________

382
334
342

298
286
29

84
48
13

96
100
14

80
82
9

16
18
5

286
234
28

218
204
20

68
30
8

D e p e n d e n t ............................... ................... —

1 T h e fe e b le -m in d e d a r e c o m m itt e d n o t
w a r d s ; i t h a s b e e n c o n s id e r e d a d v is a b le ,
s p e c ia l c a r e
2 I n c lu d in g 7 w h o h a d b e e n c o m m itt e d
3 I n c lu d in g 5 w h o h a d b e e n c o m m itt e d


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

o n ly a s d e p e n d e n t o r d e lin q u e n t b u t a s te m p o r a r y o r p e r m a n e n t
h o w e v e r , t o m a k e a s e p a r a te g r o u p o f t h e s e c h ild r e n m n e e d o f
a s t e m p o r a r y w a r d s.
a s t e m p o r a r y w a r d s.

T able 4.— Institutions caring for wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians on June 30 of each year.1
W a r d s o n m in o r it y c o m m itm e n t .
N a m e o f in s t it u t io n .2
1897

1898

1899

1900

1901

1902

1903

1904

1905

1906

1907

1908

1909

1910

1911

1912

1913

46

57

73

104

110

138

146

158

237

192

168

138

166

198

177

209

256

284

413

12

8

14

14 .

26

26

19

23

37

38

42

30

18
32

15
47

34
36

44
43

40
44

55
42

93
50

22

26

35

43
1

38

32
63

21
44

19
68

15
47

24
45

43
50

29
35

29
31

39
39

55
26

60
55

42
13

47
4

52
4

48
6

60
8

60
6

57
3

8

8

5

5

8

6

21

1
1

4

8

10

11

9
1

9
4

6
3

4
1
5

6
1
7
3
4

10

1
'1

7
4
3

2
4
3

1
18

22

23

14

12

17

8

3

1

5

6

14

1
3

1
5

4
1
1

2
2
1

2
3
1

2
11

3
14

4
8

3
5

2
10

4
7

6
20

1
1

1
1

1
1

1
1

5

5

9

36

7
47

11
49

1895
T o t a l------ --------------------------------------------------------

1896

U n d e r p u b l ic co n tr o l:
U n d e r p r iv a t e co n tro l:

1914

2
21
5

H o u s e o f t h e G o o d S h e p h e r d , B a ltim o r e (C o l.)
2
1

M a n a s sa s I n d u s t r ia l S ch o o l, M a n a s sa s , V a .
(C o l.)

1

2

1
6
S t . J o s e p h ’s M a le O r p h a n A s y l u m __________
2

29

15

16

2
1

4
1

4

3

3

3

6

5

4

1

Ì

2
1
1

S t. P a u f s N o r m a l a n d I n d u s t r ia l S c h o o l ( C o l.)

T u s k e g e e N o r m a l a n d I n d u s t r ia l, T u s k e g e e ,
A la . ( C o l )

S c h o o ls fo r t h e fe e b le -m in d e d :
T r a in in g S c h o o l for F e e b le -m in d e d B o y s a n d
G ir ls , V in e la n d , N . J ________________________

1
1
18

10
1

*6
1

5
1

1
1
1

4

1

3

1

8

1

3

1

1

2

2

27
53
—

2

1

145

1 I n c lu d in g w a r d s p la c e d i n t h e s e in s t it u t io n s b y t h e b o a r d w h e t h e r “ o n e x p e n s e ” or “ n o t o n e x p e n s e .” S o m e o f t h e s e i n s t it u t io n s r e c e iv e d lu m p - s u m s u b s id ie s th r o u g h a p p r o ­
p r ia tio n s b y C o n g r e ss, b u t c h ild r e n ca r e d for b y t h e m n o t w a r d s o f t h e b o a r d a r e n o t i n c lu d e d i n t h is t a b le .
2 L o c a tio n i n W a s h in g to n u n le s s o th e r w is e s p e c ifie d . A n u m b e r o f t h e in s t it u t io n s u s e d d u r in g t h e ea r lier y e a r s h a v e g o n e o u t o f e x iste n c e .
3 C a r in g o n ly fo r w a r d s o f t h e b o a r d .
4 I n t h e 1895 r e p o r t o f th e b o a r d d e s ig n a te d a s “ N e w s b o y s a n d C h ild r e n ’s A id S o c ie t y H o m e ” ; i n t h e 1897 a n d 1898 r e p o r ts a s “ G e o rg e M a u ls b y M e m o r ia l H o m e .’
3 I n t h e e a r lie r r e p o r ts o f t h e b o a r d d e s ig n a te d a s “ S t . R o s e ’s I n d u s tr ia l S c h o o l.”
3 I n t h e 1895 r e p o r t o f t h e b o a r d d e s ig n a te d a s “ N a t io n a l A s s o c ia tio n for t h e R e lie f o f D e s t it u t e C o lo r e d W o m e n a n d C h ild r e n ” ; i n 1912 a n d 1913 r e p o r ts as “ N a t io n a l A ss o c ia ­
t io n H o m e .”


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

a p p e n d ix e s .

H o u se o f t h e G ood S h ep h erd , W a s h in g to n ...

3

T able 4.— Institutions caring for wards of the Board of Children's Guardians on June SO of each year—Continued.

i—*

Wards on minority and temporary commitment.

•

Total...................................................

1917

1918

1919

1920

1921

1922

1923

Tem­
Tem­
Tem­ Minor­ Tem­ Minor­ Tem­ Minor­ Tem­ Minor­ Tem­ Minor­ Tem­
Minor­ Tem­
po­ Minor­ po­ Minor­ po­ Minor­
po­
po­
po­
po­
po­
po­
ity.
rary. ity. rary. ity.
rary. ity. rary. ity.
rary. ity. rary. ity. rary. ity. rary. ity. rary.
444

94

397

171

326

182

102

18

3
99

27

2
68

47

78

13

68

18

79

22

45
39

9

12

3
40

1

40

15
23

3
39

6

1

4

21

33

272

223

188

59

51

60

40
49

214

76

27

1

4

66

20

69

32

31

52

201

234

155

233

96

47

52

61

45

57

48

42

49

35

36

54

52

38

132

70

17

53

37

40

26

29

1

1

1
1
1
20
1

12
1

2

15

1

1
1

11

10
1

2

2

24

5

1
22

2

5

1

6

2

1

1

3

1

2

1

1

5

18

5
7

1

3

5

i
1

1

7
7

1
2

1

6

8
8

i

6

2

14

4

17

i
3

7

1

7

4

1

2

9

3

5

2

3

1
1

4
16

3
1

1

1
2

1

1

12

3

2

9

4

9

12

8

11

2

ÌÌ

16

ÌÒ

10

8

\

I

Co l u m b ia .

5
5

2

4

2
1

6

1
1

6

4

t h e d is t r ic t o f


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

1916

in

Under public control:
National Training School for Girls.........
Industrial Home School_________
Industrial Home School for Colored
Children......... - ........ ...... ..................
Under private control:
Bruen Home_________ ______ _______
Children’s Temporary Home (Col. ) 3___
Convent of Our Lady, Baltimore (Col.).
Elizabeth Ricks Foundation (Col.)____
Franciscan Convent, Baltimore (Col.)
Holy Cross Academy............................
House of the Good Shepherd, New York
C ity....................... .............. .............. .
House of the Good Shepherd, Baltimore
(Col.)._____ _____ ________________
House of th e Good Shepherd, Baltimore.
House of the Good Shepherd, Philadelphia (C o l.)..._____ _______________
House of the Good Shepherd, Philadelphia............. ......................... .
House of th e Good Shepherd, Washingto n ..........................................................
House of Mercy.........................................
Industrial Home for Colored Girls, Melvale, M d......... .........................
Jewish Foster Hom e........... .................
National Junior Republic, M d....... ........
St. Emm a Industrial School, Rock Castie, Va. (Col.)........................................
St. Francis dó Sales Institute, Rock
Castle, Va. (Col.)_____________ ;
St. Joseph’s Institute, Manassas, V a___
St. Joseph’s Male Orphan Asylum___
St. M ary’s Industrial' School, Baltimore.

1915

c h il d d e p e n d e n c y

Name of institution .2

)
St. Michael’s Home..............................................
St. Rose’s Technical School8...................
1
St. Vincent’s Female Orphan A sylum ...
4
Suburban Training School (Col.)____________
Free institutions (names not indicated).
33
National Colored Home 6.................. ......
61
St. Ann’s Infant Asylum....... ..............................
Washington Home for Foundlings..... .............. .
Schools for the feeble-minded:
Grundy Home and Training School for
Feeble-minded, Falls Church, Va_________
Training School for Feeble-minded Boys
and Girls, Vineland, N . J ..................................
Training School for Feeble-minded,
Elwyn, P a...........................................................

2
1

3
7
8

4
14
35
38

1
1

38
28

5

1

3

36

35

33

8
11

11

15

11
6

1

4

1

1

2

3

2

3

17

1

20

1

33
16

13
24

2

1
8

2

4

2

6

1

5

1

9

11

1

13

1

10

7

5

1

9
1

8

4

1

4

8
8

4

11

3
1

1

1

2

2
1

7

1

12

15

10

6

1


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

APPENDIXES,

1 Including wards placed in these institutions by the board whether “ on expense” or “ not on expense.” Some of these institutions received lump-sum subsidies through
appropriations b y Congress, b u t children cared for by them n ot wards of the board are not included in this table.
2 Location in Washington unless otherwise specified. A num ber of the institutions used during the earlier years have gone out of existence.
* Caring only for wards of the board.
8 In th e earlier reports of the board designated as “ St. Rose’s Industrial School.”
6 In the 1895 report of the board designated as “ National Association for the Relief of Destitute Colored Women and Children
in 1912 and 1913 reports as “ National Asso­
ciation Home.”

148

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN T H E DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA,

T able 5.— Age at time of commitment of children under care of the Board of

Children’s Guardians, May 16, 1920-May 15, 1921, hy type of commitment.
Type of commitment.
Dependent.

Age at commitment.
Total.

Delinquent.

Tem­
Total. porary.

Per­
ma­
nent.

Total..............................

2,444

1,6 8 6

280

1,316

Under 6 m o n th s....................
6 -11 m onths..................»........
1 year.......................................
2 years......................................
3 years.................... ................
4 years................... ..................
5 years......................................
6 years......................................
7 years................. ....................
8 years..... ................................
9 years___ ________ ______
10 years..... ..............................
11 years____ _____________
12 years.......... .........................
13 years.................... ..............
14 years___ ______________
15 years........ ........ ..................
16 years...................................

128
69

128
69

24
13
16
16
18
16

99
53
83
87
83
74
99
91
106
108
82
81
71
53
54
53
38

100

105
109
95
119
113
129
152
153
209
199
208
214
196
123
23

100

105
109
95
119
113
127
134
102

113
98
77
75
71
49
2

12

18
11

19
15
21
21

19
17
15
9

1

Feeble­
Tem­
mind­ Total. porary.
ed.»
»90

758

334

Per­
ma­
nent.

Feeble­
mind­
ed . 1

382

»42

5
3
1
2
8

5
8

4
10

7
5

11
6

5
4
3
2
1

2

18
51
96

g
21

2
10

24
33
44

*
6

131
139
125
74

59
50
56
67
40
25

82
43

3

21

8

10

3

101

68
66

4
7
7
6
6

1 The feeble-minded are committed not only as dependent or delinquent b ut as temporary or permanent
wards; it has been considered advisable, however, to make a separate group of these children in need of
special care. The figures do pot include feeble-minded children who were voluntarily placed under super­
vision of the board by their parents without court commitment.
» Including 7 who had been committed as temporary wards.
3 Including 5 who had been committed as temporary wards.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

APPENDIXES.

149

T aele 6. Age when received, type of commitment, color, and sex• children re15, *1921 ^ Board f Chlldren s Guardians during the year May 16, 1920-May
Age at commitment.
Type of commitment, color,
Total.
and sex.

Under
year.

1

T otal............

520

Perm anent___
W hite..
M ale..............
Female...........
Colored__
M ale___
Temporary...........
M ale___
Female..............
Colored........
M ale........
Female..

1

year.

2

years. 3 years. 4 years. 5 years.

34

223

8

98
51
47
125
75
50

7

18

12

3

2
1
1
2
1
1

i

295

26

142
91
51

15

6

6

5

153
113

11

9

10

17

7

6

3

11

3

2
1
1
1

2
6

2

1
2

3

2
1

,

■
--------- ■
13
-5

---

5
3

3
1
2
2

1

i

2
1

1

i

2

8

ii

11

7

6

8

2

8
2
6

3
3

5

5
3

4

1

2

5
3

1
1

1

4
3

years. 7 years.

5
3

6

3

6

2

3

Feeble-minded 1_

17

6

i

6

2
2

4
3

1

2

1

1

2

White: Male....................
Colored: Male.

1
1

Age a t commitment.
Type of commitment, color,
and sex.

'

8

10

years.

years.

23

43

TotalPerm anent.

11

years.

15

12

years.

13
years.
68

65

62

32"

ÜT

ÜT

7

8

15
9

19
7

3

6

12

2
1

2
2

Colored___
M a le...
Female.
27

27

W hite..........
Male__
Female..
Colored........

Male__

F em aleFeeble-minded i.
White: Male__
Colored: M a le..
. irie feeble-minded are committed as temporary or permanent wards- it ha
however, to make a separate group of these ^ i l d r e n i ^ ™ o f s p e c i f l c a r e


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

16
years.

18

4
4

17

15
years.

44

W hite____
M a le ...
Female-

Temporary.

14
years.

14

24

19

12
12

8
11

19
14
5

35

31

24

7

11
10
1

17

10

12

5
14

3
7
14

. 4

10

11

24
19
5

4

3

4

1

3
3
1
2

1

............. ............

CHILD DEPENDENCY IN T H E DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

150

T able 7 .— Type of placement, by color and sex and by age, of children under care

of the Board of Children’s Guardians, May 15, 1921.
Type of placement.

Color and sex,
and age.

House
of
Inden­
tured Own Insti­ Hospi­ deten­
tion
or ap­ homes. tu ­
tions. tals. (tem­
pren­
po­
ticed.
rary).

Pro­
spec­
Board­ Free Wage tive
Total. ing homes, homes. adop­
homes.
tive
homes

TotalBoys.
Girls.

1,941

440

527

18

95

Army,
Navy, Type
or M a­ not re­
rine ported.
Corps.

29

270

29

1,215
726

297
230

251
189

180
90

344
106

736

204

132

125

204

24

130
74

24

COLOR AND SEX.

W hite...............
Boys.........
G irls.........

447
289

110

Colored...........

1,205

323

308

Boys.........
Girls.........

768
437

187
136

179
129

3
9
24

12

94
45

246
214
32

AGE.

Under 6 months
6 -1 1 m onths—
1 year..........
2 years.........
3 years____
4years.......
Syears........
6 years-----7years........
Syears___
flyears........
10 years---11 years---12 years---13 years---14 years---15 years---16 years---17 years—
18 years---19 years—
20 years—
21 years or over.

21

32
38
38
51
42
71
62
85
104
122

159
183
183
183
153
134

112

119
13


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

2
6

11

17
30
25
36
31
35
28
35
43
40
47
43
43
18
12

4
3
5

1

2

7
8

1

2
2

6

5

12

18
23

12
22

33
43
34
49
52
41
32
46
4

10

5
7
5

2

7
5
3

1
2

3

17
37
39
60
67
65
47
32
23
19
21

4

T able 8.— Length of time under care of children who were wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians at some time during the year May 16,

1920-May 15, 1921, by age at discharge or at the end of the year.

21 years or

242

218

165

146

116

121

138

159

183

183

183

153

134

112

119

13

2
2
1

4
4
3
4
4
4
9
5
7
7

2
2
1
6

3

2
1
1
10

2

2

4

6

8

0
21

1
2
2

11

19
13

6
10
11
21

6

9

9
14

25

29

3
7
7

4
3
7

2
8
12

4

5

ft

0

8

6

13
3
7

173
227
155
166
116
67
119
214
141
84
197
81
3

Discharged..........................................................

503

7

7

7

Less than 1 m o n th ................... ...... ........
1 -2 m o n th s.............................................
3-5 m onths........................ ...........................
6 -1 1 months______ _____ __________
1 year, less than 2 .......................................
2 years, less th an 3_______ ___________
3 years,less than 4........... .........................
4 years,less than 5..................... ................
5 years,less than 6 ............................ ........ .
6 years, less than 7.......................................
7 years, 1ess than 8 ........................ ............
8 years, less th an 9......................................
9 years, less th an 10______ ____________
10 years, less than 15____________ _____
15 years or over_________ _______ ____

65
48
33
38
44
76
26
15
7
27

3

1
1
2

4


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

50
80

3

68

22

9
17
37
39

3

1
1
1

7

3
2

9
9

2
1

2
1

5

3

8

ft

3
1

9

5
7
7
3

6

8

8

4

5
9
4
8

4
3

9
4
4
4_
2

4
4

4
14
gl
s
7
5
17
4

5
5
14

4
3
5
4
7
ftj

11

4
4

2

ft
1

2
1
1

3

1
1
1

5

13

6

4

9

10

1
2
1

1

1

1

1

1
1
1

2

1
1
2
1
2

3
1

3
4
2
1

1
1
.....

3

3
1

2

1
1
1
1

1
1

7

4
3

12

16
9
7

11
11
21

7

lift
U
4

9
13

10

23

5
19
4
1

8
1

19

11

1

17

19

12

12

4

2

1
1
1

1

0

17
10

10

34

37

64

59

35

6

5
7

8
11

12
8

0

3

4
3
4

2
1

1

1

1
1

1

5
3
1

4
1

1

5
3
11 .
3

4
7

1

10
2
1

5
5
7
16
0

4

5
0

7
17
1
2

1
1

1
2

3
■7
5
3

1

4
2
2
1

19

1

1

125

1

3

8
1

1 1

23

21

3

1

14

11
1
1
1

'

4
12

15

12

20

6

8
2
2

APPENDIXES

Less than 1 m onth..................... .............
1 -2 m onths..................... .......................
3-5 m onths....... ........ .............................
6 -1 1 m onths.................................... ......
1 year, less than 2 .................................
2 years, less th an 3 . ........................... ........
3 years, less th an 4............. .......................
4 years,less th an 5____________ _____
5 years, 1ess than 6 ........... ............... ...........
6 years, 1ess th an 7_______ ___________
7 y ears,lessth an 8 . . ....... ..................... .
8 years,less th an 9 . ..................... .............
9 years, less th an 10.______ ___________
10 years, less than 15..................................
15 years or over..........................................
Time not reported_________ __________

over.

196 247

122

years.

156

104

19 years.

125

85

18 years.

100

17 years.

15 years.

74
62

16 years.

14 years.

81
71

13 years.

10 years.

12 years.

11 years.

9 years.

51
42

years.

54
51

7 years.

42
38

years.

44

32 . 38

5 years.

4 years.

45

21

years.
26

24

2

31

9

year.

16

3

1

10

6 -1 1

Total........ ................................... ............ 2,444
Under care M ay 15,1921.................. ................. 1,941

Total.

3 years.

months.

Length of time under care.

Under 6
months.

1

Age at discharge or on M ay 15,1921

mm

1

3

2

2

7

1
1

17

1

27

APPENDIX B.—LAWS RELATING TO THE BOARD OF CHIL­
DREN’S GUARDIANS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.
[27 Stat. 268-270 (Act of July 26, 1892).]
An Act To provide for the care of dependent children in the District of Columbia and to create a board
of children’s guardians.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of
America in Congress assembled, That there shall be created, in and. for the
District of Columbia, a board to be known as the Board of Children s Cuardians,
composed of nine members who shall serve without compensation, the said, board
to be a body politic and corporate and to have the powers and to be constituted
in the manner hereinafter provided.
mu
,
f
S e c . 2. Appointment; sex representation; term; removal.—lh a t the members ol
the Board of Children’s Guardians shall be appointed by the judges of the police
court1 and the judge holding the criminal court of the District of Columbia, met
together for that purpose; the assent of a majority of such judges being neces­
sary to appointment in each case: Provided, That there shall always be at least
three representatives of each sex upon the board. Of the nine members first
appointed after the passage of this act, three shall be appointed for one year,
three for two years, and three for three years. Thereafter all appointments,
except such as shall be made for the remainder of unexpired 4erms, shall be for
the term of three years. The judges of the police court and the judge holding
the criminal court, or a majority of them, when met together for that purpose,
may remove for cause any member of the boards Pvovidedy That such member
shall be given an opportunity to be heard in his own defense.
S e c . 3. Officers; agents.—That the board shall elect from its own members a
president, vice president, and secretary, who shall severally discharge the duties
usual to such offices, or such as the by-laws of the board may prescribe, lh e
board shall have the power, subject to the approval of the commissioners, to
employ not more than two agents,2 at an annual compensation not exceeding
two thousand four hundred dollars for the two, and prescribe their duties, and
to conclude arrangements with persons or institutions for the care of dependent
children at such rates as may be agreed upon.
S e c . 4. Duties; children committed.—That said board shall have the care^ and
supervision of the following classes of children: First. All children committed
under section two of the act approved February thirteenth, eighteen hundred
and eighty-five, entitled “ An act for the protection of children in the District
of Columbia, and for other purposes.” Second. All children who are destitute
of suitable homes and adequate means of earning an honest living, all children
abandoned by their parents or guardians, all children of habitually drunken or
vicious or unfit parents, all children habitually begging on the streets or from door to
door, all children kept in vicious or immoral associations, all children known by their
language or life to be vicious or incorrigible, whenever such children may be
committed to the care of the board by the police court or the criminal court of
the District; 3 and power is hereby given to these courts to commit such chil­
dren when not over sixteen years of age to said board: Provided, That the laws
regulating the commitment of children to the reform schools of the District shall
not be deemed to be repealed in any part by this act. Third. Such children as
the board of trustees of the reform school for boys or the reform school for girls
may, in their discretion, commit to the Board of Children’s Guardians; and power
is hereby given the board of trustees of the said reform school to commit any
inmate of their respective institutions to the said board of guardians, condition­
ally upon the good behavior of the child so committed. Fourth. Under the rules
to be established by the board children may be received and temporarily cared
for pending investigation or judgment of the court.
i After Feb. 28, 1923, appointed by Commissioners of the District of Columbia. See 42 Stat. 1361 (Act
of Feb. 28, 1923).
.
f
...
.
a The number and salary of agents have been changed by later appropriation acts.
8 The juvenile court has exercised this jurisdiction since 1906.

152

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

APPENDIXES.

153

S e c . 5. Legal guardian of children committed; supervision of wards.—That the
board shall be the legal guardian of all children committed to it by the courts,
and shall have full power to board them in private families, to board them in
institutions willing to receive them, to bind them out or apprentice them, or to
give them in adoption to foster parents. Children received from the reform
school shall be placed at work, bound out, or apprenticed, and at any time
before attaining majority may be returned to the school from which they came
if, in the judgment of the board of guardians, such a course is demanded by
the interest of the community or the welfare of the child. All children under
the guardianship of the board shall be visited not less than once a year by an
agent of the board, and as much oftener as the welfare of the child demands.
Children received temporarily may not be kept longer than one week, except
by order of the police court or the criminal court.
i Sec. 6. Investigations^ to he made.—That the antecedents, character, and con­
dition of life of each child received by the board shall be investigated as fully as
possible and the facts learned entered in permanent records, in which shall also
be noted the subsequent history of each child, so far as it can be ascertained.
S e c . 7. Records; annual reports.—That the Commissioners of the District
shall have authority to prescribe the form of records to be kept by the board
of guardians, and the methods to be employed by them in paying bills and audit­
ing accounts: and an annual report of its operations hereunder shall be made
by the board to the superintendent of charities.4 The superintendent of chari­
ties shall have full powers of investigation and report regarding all branches of
the work of the board, as well as over all institutions in which children are placed
by the board; and it shall be his duty to recommend annually the appropria­
tions which in his judgment are necessary to the carrying on of its work.

[23 Stat. 302 (Act of Feb. 13,1885).]
An Act For the protection of children in the District of Columbia and for other purposes.
Sec. 2.
* * * And such agents or officers shall have power to arrest,
without warrant, all persons violating in their presence or sight any law relating
to or affecting the protection of children, or other parties so offending by virtue
of a warrant issued by the police court of the District of Columbia, which of­
fenders shall be taken by such agents or officers before the said police court of
the District of Columbia for trial. Said agents or officers are also hereby em­
powered to bring before the said court6 any child who is subjected to cruel treat­
ment, willful abuse, or neglect, or any child under sixteen years of age found
in a house of ill fame; and said court may commit such child to an orphan
asylum or other public charitable institution in the District of Columbia, with
the consent of the constituted authorities of such asylum or institution, or make
such other disposition thereof as now is or hereafter may be provided by law
in cases of vagrant, destitute, or abandoned children: Provided, That any parent,
guardian, or near relative who may feel aggrieved by any order of said court
m the premises may appeal therefrom to the criminal court of the District of
Columbia.

[27 Stat. 552 (Act of Mar. 3, 1893).]
An Act Making appropriations for the expenses of the government of the District of Columbia for the
fiscal year ending June thirtieth, eighteen hundred and ninety-four, and for other purposes.

Placing the care of feeble-minded children under the hoard of children's guardians.—
* * * Provided, Tha,t the authority for placing feeble-minded children of
the District of Columbia, heretofore given to the Secretary of the Interior, is
hereby transferred to the Board of Children’s Guardians.
[31 Stat. 1095 (Act of M ar 3,1901) .]
An Act To enlarge the powers of the courts of the District of Columbia in cases involving delinquent
children, and for other purposes.

Children■convicted of petty crimes and misdemeanors may be committed to board
of children s guardians; authority of board in regard to such children; nonsupport
proceedings, authority of board to receive and pay funds.— Be it enacted by the Senate
ttTia House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembledy
That the judges of the criminal and police courts 6 of the District of Columbia
t
6

Superseded b y the Board of Charities in 1900.
The juvenile court, created by Act of March 19,1906, now exercises this jurisdiction.
The juvenile court now exercises this jurisdiction.

88962°—24t-----11

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

154

C H ILD DEPEND ENCY IN T H E DISTRICT OF COLUM BIA,

are hereby authorized and empowered, at their discretion, to commit to the
custody and care of the Board of Children’s Guardians of the District of Colum­
bia children under seventeen years of age who shall be convicted of petty crimes
or misdemeanors which may be punishable with fine or imprisonment; and said
Board of Children’ll Guardians shall place, under contract, such children in such
suitable homes, institutions, or training schools for the care of children as its
may deem wise and proper.
S e c . 2. That no court shall commit a child under seventeen years of age,
charged with or convicted of a petty crime or misdemeanor punishable by fine
or imprisonment, to a jail, workhouse, or police station, but if such child be
unable to give bail or pay a fine, it may be committed to the Board of Children’s
Guardians temporarily or permanently, in the discretion of the court, and said
board shall make some suitable provision for said child outside the inclosure of
any jail, workhouse, or police station, or said court may commit such child to
the Reform School under the laws now providing for such commitment.
S e c . 3. That for the purpose of aiding the court in a proper disposition of
cases referred to in section one the Board of Children’s Guardians is hereby author­
ized and directed to designate one of its employees as a probation officer,7 whose
duty shall be to make such investigation in cases involving children under seven­
teen years of age as the court may direct, to be present in court in order to repre­
sent the interests of the child when the case is heard, to furnish the court such
information and assistance as the judge may require, and to take charge of any
child before and after trial as may be directed by the court.
S e c . 4 . That any person within the District of Columbia, of sufficient financial
ability, who shall refuse or neglect to provide for any child under the age of
fourteen years, of which he or she shall be the parent or guardian, such food,
clothing, and shelter as will prevent the suffering and secure the safety of such
child, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof
shall be subject to punishment by a fine of not more than one hundred dollars,
or by imprisonment in the workhouse of the District of Columbia for not more
than three months, or both such fine and imprisonment.
S e c . 5. That whenever petition or information shall have been filed in any
court of the District of Columbia authorized to commit children to the care,
custody, and guardianship of the Board of Children’s Guardians for such com­
mitment of any child, and upon the hearing of the same before said court it shall
appear to the satisfaction of the court that such child is entitled to be committed
as aforesaid under or by virtue of any of the provisions of the act of Congress
approved July twenty-six, eighteen hundred and ninety-two, entitled “ An Act
to provide for the care of dependent children in the District of Columbia and to
create a board of children’s guardians,” and if said evidence tends to show that
such child has a father or a mother, either of whom is able to contribute to the
support of such child, either by reason of having means or property or having an
income consisting of wages or salary due for personal services or labor or other­
wise, but fails or neglects so to do, then the proper prosecuting officer shall file
in the police court of the District of Columbia an information charging said father
or mother, or both, with such failure or neglect, and upon conviction thereof
the said court shall require the father or the mother of such child, or both such
father and mother, to contribute by stated payments, to be made to said board
of children’s guardians, toward the support of such child such sum or sums,
monthly, weekly, or otherwise, as in the judgment of said court either or both
such father and mother should and may be able to pay; and the courts aforesaid
may at any time hear and determine any petition for an order for contribution
toward maintenance of any child who has heretofore been or who may hereafter
be committed to the guardianship of the board of children’s guardians, or for
modifying or suspending the operation of any such order previously made.
S e c . 6. That any person against whom an order for contribution toward main­
tenance may have been made, as provided for in this a<?t, who shall refuse or
neglect to make such payments as ordered, shall be deemed guilty of contempt
and upon conviction thereof*shall be sentenced to suffer imprisonment in the
workhouse of the District of Columbia for not less than three months nor more
than one year; and such imprisonment shall not exempt such person from addi­
tional imprisonment for further neglect or refusal to make contribution as afore­
said: Provided, however, That if, after such conviction, any such parent sha
appear before the court before which such conviction shall have taken place and
shall show to the satisfaction of the court that the amount due under such order,
up to the time of conviction, has b^en paid, and further, with good and sufficient
¡r ftinpA 1906 the probation officers of the juvenile court have performed these duties.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

A P P E N D IX E S .

155

surety, to be approved by said court, shall enter into bond to the United States
in the penal sum of five hundred dollars, conditioned that he will thereafter pay
such sums as may have been ordered or that may thereafter be ordered to be paid
by said court until such order shall be revoked, the said court may suspend
sentence therein during the continuance of such bond.
S e c . 7. That the disbursing officer of the board of children’s guardians shall
receive and shall be responsible under his bond for all moneys paid to said board
under the provisions of this act, and shall pay the amount so received by him into
the Treasury of the United States, within twenty days after the close of each
fiscal quarter.
S e c . 8. That all acts and portions of acts inconsistent with the provisions
mentioned above are hereby repealed, and the terms of the provisions in the
above sections shall become law on and after the date of approval.
[31 Stat. 843 (Act of Mar. 1,1901).]
A n A c t M a k in g a p p r o p r ia tio n s t o p r o v id e for t h e e x p e n se s o f t h e g o v e r n m e n t o f t h e D is t r ic t o f C o lu m b ia
for t h e fisc a l y e a r e n d in g J u n e th ir t ie t h , n in e te e n h u n d r e d a n d tw o , a n d for o th e r p u r p o s e s .

Religious faith of parents to be regarded in placing children in 'private families.—
* * * Provided, That when the Board of Children’s Guardians place any of
such children in private families, as far as practicable, such children shall be placed
only in such families as are of the same religious denomination or belief as the
parents or last surviving parent of the child.
[34 Stat. 73-78 (Act of Mar. 19, 1906).,
A n A c t T o c r e a te a j u v e n ile c o u r t in a n d for t h e D is t r ic t o f C o lu m b ia .
S e c . 8 . That the juvenile court of the District of Columbia shall have original
and exclusive jurisdiction of all crimes and offenses of persons under seventeen
years of age hereafter committed against the United States, not capital or other­
wise infamous, and not punishable by imprisonment in the penitentiary, committed
within the District of Columbia, except libel, conspiracy, and violations of the
post-office and pension laws of the United States, and also of all offenses of per­
sons under seventeen years of age hereafter committed against the laws, ordi­
nances, and regulations of the District of Columbia, and shall have power to
examine and commit or hold to bail all persons under seventeen years of age,
either for trial or further examination, in all cases, whether cognizable therein
or in the supreme court of the District of Columbia. Said juvenile court shall
have all the powers and jurisdiction conferred by the act entitled “ An act for
the protection of children, and so forth,” approved February thirteenth, eighteen
hundred and eighty-five, upon the police^ court of the District of Columbia, and
shall also have original and exclusive jurisdiction of all cases involving the legal
punishment of children under the provisions of “ An act to provide for the care of
dependent children in the District of Columbia and to create a Board of Chil­
dren’s Guardians,” approved July twenty-sixth, eighteen hundred and ninetytwo (Twenty-seventh Statutes, page two hundred and sixty-eight), and of the
acts amendatory thereof; also of all cases under the provisions of “ An act to
enlarge the powers of the courts of the District of Columbia in cases involving
delinquent children, and for other purposes,” approved March third, nineteen
hundred and one (Thirty-first Statutes, page ten hundred and ninety-three [ 1095]),
and said juvenile court may hereafter, concurrently with the criminal court, have
and exercise all the powers and jurisdiction conferred by said last-mentioned act
upon the police court of the District of Columbia in the case of parents or guard­
ians who shall refuse or neglect to provide food, clothing, and shelter for any
child under the age of fourteen years. And it is further provided, That the court
may impose conditions upon any person found guilty under the said lastmentioned act, and so long as such person shall comply therewith to the satisfac­
tion of the court the sentence imposed may be suspended, and may impose
similar conditions in all cases of dependent or delinquent children cognizable
under existing laws in any court of the District of Columbia, except in the cases
hereinbefore already excepted; and the said juvenile court may also hear, try,
and^determine all cases of persons less than seventeen years of age charged with
habitual truancy from school, and in its discretion to commit them to the Board
of Children’s Guardians, who are hereby given the care and supervision thereof
when so committed. No person under seventeen years of age shall hereafter be
placed in any institution supported wholly or in part at the public expense until
the fact of delinquency or dependency has been ascertained and declared by
the said juvenile court. All children of the class now liable to be committed to the


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

156

CHILD DEPEND ENCY IN T H E DISTRICT OE COLUMBIA.

Reform School for Boys and the Reform School for Girls shall hereafter be
committed by the juvenile court to said schools respectively. All other children
delinquent, neglected, or dependent (with the exceptions hereinbefore stated)
phaD hereafter be committed by the juvenile court to the care of the Board of
Children’s Guardians, either for a limited period on probation or during minonw,
as circumstances may require, and no child once committed to any puhnc insti­
tution by the order of the juvenile court shall be discharged or paroled therefrom
or transferred to another institution without the consent and approval of tbe
SalSEC°9 That the terms “ dependent” or “ neglected” children as used in this
act shall be held to mean and include any child who is destitute or homeless or
abandoned or dependent upon the public for support, or who has not the proper
parental care or guardianship, or who habitually begs or receives alms, or whose
home, by reason of neglect or cruelty or depravity of the parents, is^an unnt>
place for such a child, or any child under eight years of age found peddling on
the streets. The term “ delinquent” child or children as used in this act shall be
held to mean and include any child who has been convicted more than once of
violating any law of the United States, or any laws, ordinances, or regulations in
force in the District of Columbia.
Sec. 10. T h a t any unlawful removal or attempt to remove any child committed
by the juvenile court to any institution or agency shall be a misdemeanor, which,
if committed by any person or persons over seventeen years of age, shall be
punishable, on conviction in the police court, by a fine not exceeding fifty dollars,
or imprisonment not more than three months; but if committed by a person or
persons under seventeen years of age, shall be punishable, on conviction m the
juvenile court, by a like fine, or by imprisonment in some correctional institution
to be designated by said court, other than the jail or workhouse, for such reason­
able period as such court shall direct.
[41 Stat. 1137 (Act of Feb. 22,1921).]
An Act Making appropriations to provide for the expenses of the government of the District of Columbia
for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1922, and for other purposes.

Wards of the hoard placed outside the District of Columbia, Maryland, and
Virginia, visitation; hoard authorized to discharge from guardianship child committed
to its care.— * * *, and no part of the moneys herein appropriated shall be
used for the purpose of visiting any ward of the Board of Children’s Guardians
placed outside the District of Columbia and the States of Virginia and Maryland,
and a ward placed outside said District and the States of Virginia and Maryland
shall be visited not less than once a year by a voluntary agent or correspondent
of said board and that said board shall have power, upon proper showing, m its
discretion, to discharge from guardianship any child committed to its care.
[42 Stat. 1361 (Act of Feb. 28,1923).]
An Act Making appropriations for the government of the District of Columbia and other activities chargeable in whole or in part against the revenues of such District for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1924, and
for other purposes.

Board of children's guardians appointed hy commissioners; powers of trustees of
industrial home school transferred to board.—* * * Provided, That the board of
trustees of the Industrial Home School of the District of Columbia is abolished
on and after the date of the approval of this act, and thereafter the powers and
duties of such board as specified and restricted by law shall be transferred to and
vested in the Board of Children’s Guardians: Provided further, That on and
after the date of the approval of this act the authority to appoint and remove
members of the Board of Children’s Guardians is transferred from the judges of
the police court and the judge holding the criminal court of the District of Colum­
bia to the commissioners of the District of Columbia, and shall be exercised by
them in accordance with section 2 of the act of July 26, 1892 (Twenty-seventh
Statutes, page 268), and the powers and duties of the Board of Children’s Guard­
ians as prescribed by or pursuant to law shall thereafter be performed under
such regulations as may be made by said board and approved by the commis­
sioners.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

APPENDIX C.—LIST OF REFERENCES TO MATERIAL ON THE
PUBLIC AND PRIVATE CHILD-CARING WORK IN THE D IS­
TRICT.
GENERAL SOURCES.
National Conference of Charities and Correction: Proceedings.
Reports to the National Conference of Charities and Correction on the
Charities of the District of Columbia:
Spencer, Sara A. [representing the Associated Charities]: 1881, p. 55:
1882, pp. 164-169; 1884, pp. 24-27; 1885, pp. 39-42; 1887, pp. 3035; 1888, pp. 310-314- 1889, pp. 183-185.
Warner, Amos G. [U. S. Superintendent of Charities]: 1889, p. 36;
1892, pp. 254, 259, 271, 277, 286, 299, 304^305; 1893, pp. 307-309.
Macfarland, Henry B. F.: 1895, pp. 333-335; 1896, pp. 32-33; 1897,
pp. 386-388; 1898, pp. 39-43; 1900, pp. 303-304; 1901, pp. 48-49;
1902, pp. 37-40; 1905, pp. 41-42.
Lewis, H. W. [agent, Board of Children’s Guardians]: 1895, pp. 338340.
Tracey, John [Superintendent of Charities]: 1895, pp. 335-338
Wilson, George S.: 1910, pp. 568-570.
Papers and discussions:
Lewis, Herbert W. [agent, Board of Children’s Guardians]: Terms on
which children should be placed in families. 1894, pp. 140-146.
------ —: Report of the Committee on Child Saving: The rescue and
relief of children—outline of an ideal system. 1896, pp. 314-318.
Douglass, John W.: The Board of Children’s Guardians, District of
Columbia. 1901, pp. 239-244.
---------: Placing out by the Board of Children’s Guardians. 1904,
pp. 522-523.
Macfarland, Henry B. F. [president, Board of Commissioners, D. C.]:
Public subsidies to private charities. 1906, pp. 227-234.
Includes history of the development of public charities in the District of Columbia.

Wilson, George S.: Supervision of private charities—from the point of
view of an official board. 1911, pp. 35-41.
Children’s Bureau, U. S. Department of Labor: Mental Defectives in the
District of Columbia; a brief description of local conditions and the need for
custodial care and training. Publication No. 13. Washington, 1915.
Folks, Homer: The Care of Destitute, Neglected, and Delinquent Children.
The Macmillan Co., New York, 1902.
The system of public support in private institutions—District of Columbia, pp. 135-139.

Warner, Amos G.: American Charities; a study in philanthropy and econom ics.
Thomas Y. Crowell & Co., New York, 1894.
Public subsidies to private charities in the District of Columbia, pp. 334-337; 340-344; 349-355 ; 371 .
---------: “ Public subsidies to private charities.” Proceedings, International
Congress of Charities, Correction and Philanthropy, Chicago, June, 1893,
Section VI.— The Organization of Charities, pp. 120-132. The Johns Hop­
kins Press, Baltimore, 1894.
Bureau of the Census, U. S. Department of Commerce: Benevolent Institutions,
1904; same, 1910. Washington, 1905 and 1913.
Contain data regarding public and private child-caring institutions and agp-ncfes in the District of
Columbia.

Directory of Social Agencies of Washington, D. C. The Washington Council
of Social Agencies, Room 330, State Building, 1922.
ANNUAL REPORTS OF PUBLIC AGENCIES.
Board of Charities, District .Commissioners, and Superintendent of Charities.
Report on the condition of charitable institutions in the District of Co­
lumbia receiving aid from District revenues. Washington, 1886.
Report of the Commissioners of the District of Columbia respecting the
charitable and reformatory institutions in said District receiving aid
from District appropriations for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1887.
Washington, 1888.

157

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

158

C H IL D

DEPENDENCY

IN

TH E

D IS T R IC T

OE

C O L U M B IA .

Board of Charities, District Commissioners, and Superintendent of Charities—
Continued.
.
’ Reports of charitable and reformatory institutions of the District of Columbia
for the years 1888 and 1889. Washington, 1889, 1890.
Report of the Superintendent of Charities for the District of Columbia for
the year ending June 30, 1892. [Washington.]
Charities Superintendent: Reports on charitable and reformatory insti­
tutions of the District of Columbia, 1893-1900. [Include reports of the
several institutions receiving public subsidy.] Washington.
Estimates for the department of charities and corrections, with a prelimi­
nary report, 1900. [Washington, 1900.]
Board of Charities of the District of Columbia: Annual reports, 1901 to
date. [Contain the annual reports of the Board of Children’s Guardians
and of institutions receiving public subsidy.] Washington.
---------Also in Annual reports of the Commissioners of the District of Co­
lumbia, 1901 to date. Washington.
Board of Children’s Guardians: Annual reports, 1894 to date. Washington.
Institutions.
_
, . , TT
The annual reports of the Industrial Home School, the Industrial Home
School for Colored Children, the National Association for Relief of Desti­
tute Colored Women and Children, St. Ann’s Infant Asylum, and the
Washington Home for Foundlings, in the Annual Reports of the Super­
intendent of Charities and in the Annual Reports of the Board of Charities
of the District of Columbia.
Juvenile Court: Annual reports published as House of Representatives or Senate
documents. [First report made in 1907. Not all years available.]
CONGRESSIONAL INQUIRIES AND DISCUSSIONS OF BILLS.
Charitable institutions and agencies.
Joint Select Committee to Investigate the Charities and Reformatory Insti­
tutions in the District of Columbia: Part I—Hearings; statements;
reports from cities; suggestions for a board of charities. Part II—Re­
port. Part III—Historical sketches of the charities and reformatory in­
stitutions in the District of Columbia. Fifty-fifth Congress, first session,
S. Docs., vol. 8, Doc. 185. Washington, 1898.
Care of delinquent and dependent children in the District of Columbia;
letter from the Commissioners of the District of Columbia submitting a
plan for the future care of delinquent and dependent children in the Dis­
trict of Columbia, January 7,1904. Fifty-eighth Congress, second session :
S. Docs., vol. 3, Doc. 85; H. Docs., vol. 47, Doc. 355.
Public and private hospitals and charities in the District of Columbia;
report of Walter C. Clephane, chairman of the committee on charities
and corrections of the Washington Board of Trade, relative to conditions
of public and private hospitals and charities in the District of Columbia
and of appropriations necessary therefor. Sixty-second Congress, second
session, S. Docs., vol. 42, Doc. 614. Washington, 1912.
Care of dependent children.
Report from Committee on District of Columbia, favoring Senate bill 2426
[to amend act to create board of children’s guardians so as to commit to
board indigent feeble-minded children], April 10, 1896. Fifty-fourth
Congress, first session, S. Repts., vol. 3, Rept. 658. 2 pp.
Report from Committee on District of Columbia, under resolution directing
investigation of law relating to custody of minor children in the District,
January 13, 1896. Fifty-fourth Congress, first session, S. Repts., vol. 1,
Rept. 42. 21 pp.
Report from Committee on District of Columbia, favoring S. 5055 [for com­
pulsory support of children by parents in District], January 21, 1899.
Fifty-fifth Congress, third session, S. Repts., vol. 1, Rept. 1,506. 3 pp.
Report from Committee on District of Columbia, amending H. R. 7663
[to establish Board of -Charities for the District], February 22, 1900.
Fifty-sixth Congress, first session, H. Repts., vol. 2, Rept, 415 (5 pp.); 31
Stat. 664.
:
i
I
Report from Committee on District of Columbia, favoring S. 2029 [for
appointment of members of Board of Charities of the District and of the
Board of Children’s Guardians], January 14, 1908. Sixtieth Congress,
first session, S. Repts., vol. 1, Rept. 46.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

A P P E N D IX E S .

159

Care of dependent children—Continued.
Report from Committee on District of Columbia, amending S. 3890 [rel­
ative to abandonment of wife and minor children, to include suppoYt of
illegitimate children], February 4, 1910. Sixty-first Congress, second
session, S. Repts., vol. 1, Rept. 185.
Report from Committee on District of Columbia, favoring S. 3890 [amend­
ment to include support of illegitimate children]. Sixty-first Congress,
second session, H. Repts., vol. 3, Rept. 1374.
District of Columbia Commissioners: Report on H. R. 22922 [to provide
for a director of education for the District of Columbia and for a director
of charities, and for other purposes]. Sixty-first Congress, second session.
Washington, 1910.
House of Representatives debate on appropriation bill for the Board of
Children’s Guardians. Congressional Record, Sixty-seventh Congress,
fourth session, vol. 64, No. 28, January 8, 1923, pp. 1,450-1,463.
Investigation of the Board of Children’s Guardians; hearings before the joint
subcommittee of the Senate and House of Representatives Committee on
the District of Columbia, Sixty-Seventh Congress, Fourth Session, on the
Brookhart-Free bill (H. R. 13537), February 8, 1923. Washington, 1923.
Juvenile court.
f
Report from Committee on District of Columbia, amending S. 126 [for com­
pulsory support of children by parents in the District], February 9, 1900.
Fifty-sixth Congress, first session, S. Repts., vol. 2, Rept. 337. 3 pp.
Report from Committee on District of Columbia, recommending H. R.
13067 [to enlarge the powers of the courts in the District of Columbia in
cases involving delinquent children], January 12, 1901. Fifty-sixth Con­
gress, second session, H. Repts., vol. 1, Rept. 2281.
Report from Committee on District of Columbia, amending H. R. 13067
[to enlarge power of courts of the District in cases involving delinquent
children], February 8, 1901. Fifty-sixth Congress, second session, S.
Repts., vol. 3, Rept. 2193 (31 Stat. 1095).
Report from Committee on District of Columbia, amending S. 5443 [to
create juvenile court in the District], February 10, 1905. Fifty-eighth
Congress, third session, S. Repts., vol. 2, Rept. 3812.
Report from Committee on District of Columbia, favoring S. 51 [to create
juvenile court in the District], December 8, 1905. Fifty-ninth Congress,
first session, S. Repts., vol. 1, Rept. 18 (34 Stat. 1, 73).
Report from Committee on District of Columbia amending S. 51 [to create
juvenile court in the District], March 8, 1906. Fifth-ninth Congress,
first session, H. Repts., vol. 1, Rept. 2169 (34 Stat. 1, 73). 13 pp.
Supplement to annual. report of the Attorney General of the United States
for the year 1914, embodying the first report of committee appointed
by the Attorney General to study need for legislation affecting children
in the District of Columbia, March 3,1915 [including drafts of juvenilecourt laws]. Sixty-third Congress, third session, H. Docs., vol. 104, Doc.
1661. [Also published separately.]
Hearing before the Committee on District of Columbia (United States
Senate, Sixty-fourth Congress, first session) on H. R. 8348 [amending an
act relative to the juvenile court of the District of Columbia] and H. R.
9803, February 1, 1916.
Report from Committee on District of Columbia to accompany H. R. 8348,
February 4,1916. Sixty-fourth Congress, first session, H. Repts., vol. 1,
Rept. 120.
Report from Committee on District of Columbia to accompany H. R. 9803
[emancipating from certain disabilities children who have been convicted
of crime in the juvenile court]. Sixty-fourth Congress, first session,
H. Repts., vol. 1, Rept. 121.
Hearing before Committee on District of Columbia, House of Represen­
tatives, on H. R. 8348 [amending an act relative to the juvenile court in
the District of Columbia] and H. R. 9803 [providing for the removing
of disabilities resting upon children who have been convicted of crime in
the juvenile court], February 1, 1916.
Juvenile court in the District of Columbia; hearing before a subcommittee
of the Committee on the District of Columbia (United States Senate,
Sixty-fourth Congress, first session) on H. R. 8348 [an act to amend
an act entitled “An act to create a juvenile court in and for the District
of Columbia,” and for other purposes], May 11, 1916.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

160

C H IL D D E P E N D E N C Y IN

T H E D IS T R IC T O F C O L U M B IA .

Juvenile court—Continued.
Juvenile court in the District of Columbia; report to accompany H. R.
' 8348, August 21, 1916. Sixty-fourth Congress, first session, S. Repts.,
vol. 3, Rept. 815.
Report of Committee on District of Columbia on H. R. 7883 [examination of
persons brought before the juvenile court], April 11-November 23, 1921.
Sixty-seventh Congress, first session, H. Repts., vol. 2, Rept. 309.
Prevention of venereal diseases in the District of Columbia; hearings before
Committee on District of Columbia (House of Representatives, Sixtyseventh Congress, first session) on H. R. 4118, June 9, 1921.
Includes statem ents on m ental and physical examinations of children passing through the
juvenile court, pp. 22-39.

Provision for the feeble-minded.
Interior Department: Opinion of Attorney General [on relationship of
Secretary of the Interior to certain institutions in District as affected by
establishment of Board of Children’s Guardians]. Interior Department,
Report of Secretary, 1900, pp. 192-198.
School and Home for Feeble-Minded Persons; hearing before Committee, on
District of Columbia (House of Representatives, Sixty-fourth Congress,
first session) on H. R. 13666 [to establish a school and home for feeble­
minded persons in the District of Columbia, to be known as the Columbia
Training School, and providing for the legal commitment of feeble-minded
persons, and for other purposes], May 4, 1916.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis