The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
P roceedings o f the W h ite H ouse C onference on C hildren in a D em ocracy W ashington , D. C. January 1 8 -2 0 ,1 9 4 0 Including the General Report Adopted by the Conference m ■m UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Children’s Bureau Publication No. 266 3,u#.7 U sS c https://fraser.stlouisfed.org ■ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis J y liipii tos/ £ ^A https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis UNITED STATES DEPARTM ENT OF LABOR F rances Perkins, Secretary CHILDREN’ S BUREAU * K atharine F. L enroot, Chief PROCEEDINGS OF THE W H ITE HOUSE CONFERENCE ON CHILDREN IN A D EM OCRACY W a s h in g t o n , D . C. January 18-20,1940 Including the General Report Adopted by the Conference Bureau Publication No. 266 U N ITE D STATES G O VE R N M EN T P R IN T IN G OFFICE W ASHIN GTON s 1940 For sale by the Superintendent o f Documents, Washington, D . C. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Price 25 cents https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Contents Page Foreword, by Frances Perkins, Secretary of Labor---------------------------------- iv General Session—January 18 Opening statement by the chairman____________________________________ Plans for Conference procedure, by Katharine F. Lenroot________________ Presentation of the General Report for consideration by the Conference, by Homer Folks_____________________________________________________ Discussion by members o f the Planning and Report Committees__________ Elisabeth Christman_______________________________________________ Katharine Dummer Fisher____________________________________________ A. Graeme Mitchell, M. D_____________________________________________ W. R. Ogg____________________________________________________________ Floyd W. Reeves___________________________________________________ C.-E. A. Winslow_____________________________________________ 1 5 7 9 9 12 13 17 21 25 A fternoon Session—January 18 Group meetings______________________________________ 29 Morning Session— January 19 Opening statement by the chairman_____________ - _______________________ Remarks by Hon. Milburn L. Wilson, Under Secretary of Agriculture------Remarks by Josephine Roche, chairman, the Interdepartmental Committee To Coordinate Health and Welfare Activities___________________________ Discussion________________________________________________________________ 30 31 32 34 Afternoon Session—January 19 Discussion of and action on the General Report__________________________ 51 Session at the W hite H ouse—January 19 Opening remarks by the chairman of the Conference_____________________ The significance of the Conference to parents,by Mrs. H.W. Ahart________ The Conference report and program o f action, by Homer Folks____________ Address by the President of the United States__________________________ 62 63 65 69 T ranslating the Conference R eport I nto A ction—January 20 Opening remarks by the chairman of the Conference______________________ 78 Plans for Nation-wide consideration and action. Report of the Conference Committee on the Follow-Up Program, by Mrs. Saidie Orr Dunbar_____ 78 The responsibility of the individual and the community, by Mrs. Franklin D. Roosevelt-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------83 The responsibility of government, by Frank Bane___________________________ 84 Address by the Federal Security Administrator, Paul V. McNutt____________ 87 Discussion______________________________________________________________ 88 Organization and members of the Conference______________________________ 97 General Report adopted by the White House Conference on Children in a Democracy--------------- ------------------------------------------------- following page 126 he https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Foreword The proceedings o f the sessions of the White House Conference on Children in a Democracy held in Washington, January 18 to 20,1940, including the addresses and brief summaries o f the informal discus sions which constituted the chief part o f the program, together with the General Report adopted by the Conference on January 19, 1940, constitute a record whose significance has been greatly intensified by the testing to which all democratic institutions have been subjected in the months since the Conference was held. The work o f the Conference began early in 1939, and plans were given shape at an initial session held in the White House in April o f that year.1 On October 11,1939, a letter was received from the President which read, in part, as follow s: It was with great satisfaction that I learned o f the recommendation o f the Planning Committee o f the Conference, adopted on October 5, that the Conference be called into session from January 18 to 20,1940, and that the Report Committee have ready for submission at that time a report containing its major conclusions and suggestions for a follow-up program. I am in hearty accord with the statement o f the Planning Committee to the effect that events in Europe must not be allowed to divert the attention o f the American people from the task of strengthening our democracy from within, and that the needs of childhood re quire particular attention at the present time, w ill you, therefore, ask the Planning Committee to proceed with arrangements for a meeting o f the Confer ence on the dates specified? The Conference has been, indeed, a demonstration o f democracy at work, using government as the servant o f the people, facilitating the work o f citizens representing many different interests and points o f view, who have given their time in many days o f committee and con sultation work and have reached general agreement concerning the aims o f our democracy fo r its children and the dependence o f our civilization upon the bodily health, the mental vigor, and the integrity and moral fibre o f the younger generation. Since the Conference was held, a National Citizens Committee and a Federal Interagency Committee have been organized to give leader ship in the follow-up program, which will be the test o f the value o f the whole undertaking. Movements for the organization o f State follow-up activities are under way in many States. In declarations on child conservation and national defense adopted by the National Citizens Committee on June IT, 1940, the committee affirmed its con viction that the program adopted by the Conference will make for the national unity so sorely needed at this time and will strengthen the democratic institutions o f our country. F rances P e r k in s . 1 Conference on Children in a Democracy—Papers and Discussions at the Initial Session, April 26, 1939. Children’s Bureau, U. S. Department of Labor, Washington, 1939. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Contents Page Foreword, by Frances Perkins, Secretary of Labor______________________ jv General Session—January 18 Opening statement by the chairman____________________________________ Plans for Conference procedure, by Katherine F. Lenroot________________ Presentation of the General Report for consideration by the Conference, by Homer Folks_____________ Discussion by members o f the Planning and Report Committees_________ Elizabeth Christman-----------------------------------------------------------------------Katherine Dummer Fisher---------!___________________________________ A. Graeme Mitchell, M. D__________________________ _______________ W. R. Ogg-------------Floyd W. Reeves__________________________________________________ C.-E. A. Winslow__________________________________________________ Afternoon Session—January 18 Group meetings________________________________________________________ 1 5 7 9 9 12 13 17 21 25 29 Morning Session— January 19 Opening statement by the chairman________________________________ :___ Remarks by Hon. Milburn L. Wilson, Under Secretary of Agriculture_____ Remarks by Josephine Roche, chairman, the Interdepartmental Committee to Coordinate Health and Welfare Activities________________________ Discussion_____________________________________________________________ 3o 31 32 34 Afternoon Session—January 19 Discussion of and action on the General Report________________________ 51 Session at the W hite H ouse—January 19 Opening remarks by the chairman o f the Conference____________________ The significance o f the Conference to parents, by Mrs. H. W. Ahart______ The Conference report and program of action, by Homar Folks_________ Address by the President o f the United States________________ __________ 62 63 65 69 T ranslating the Conference R eport I nto A ction—January 20 Opening remarks by the chairman o f the Conference—!____________ Plans for Nation-wide consideration and action. Report o f the Conference Committee on the Follow-Up Program, by Mrs. Sadie Orr Dunbar_____ The responsibility of the individual and the community, by Mrs. Franklin D. Roosevelt_________________________________________________________ The responsibility of government, by Frank Bane_______________________ Address by the Federal Security Administrator, Paul V. McNutt_________ Discussion_________________________________ _____ j_______________________ Organization and members of the Conference____________________________ General Report adopted by the White House Conference on Children in a Democracy--------------------------------------------- -------------------- following page https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis in 78 78 33 84 87 38 97 126 e Foreword The proceedings o f the sessions of the White House Conference on Children in a Democracy held in Washington, January 18 to 20,1940, including the addresses and brief summaries o f the informal discus sions which constituted the chief part o f the program, together with the General Keport adopted by the Conference on January 19, 1940, constitute a record whose significance has been greatly intensified by the testing to which all democratic institutions have been subjected in the months since the Conference was held. The work of the Conference began early in 1939, and plans were given shape at an initial session held in the White House in April o f that year.1 . On October 11,1939, a letter was received from the President which read, in part, as follow s: It was with great satisfaction that I learned o f the recommendation of the Planning Committee of the Conference, adopted on October 5, that the Conference be called into session from January 18 to 20,1940, and that the Report Committee have ready for submission at that time a report containing its major conclusions and suggestions for a follow-up program. I am in hearty accord with the statement of the Planning Committee to the effect that events in Europe must not be allowed to divert the attention of the American people from the task of strengthening our democracy from within, and that the needs of childhood re quire particular attention at the present time. Will you, therefore, ask the Planning Committee to proceed with arrangements for a meeting o f the Confer ence on the dates specified? The Conference has been, indeed, a demonstration o f democracy at work, using government as the servant o f the people, facilitating the work o f citizens representing many different interests and points o f view, who have given their time in many days o f committee and con sultation work and have reached general agreement concerning the aims o f our democracy for its children and the dependence o f our civilization upon the bodily health, the mental vigor, and the integrity and moral fibre of the younger generation. Since the Conference was held, a National Citizens Committee and a Federal Interagency Committee have been organized to give leader ship in the follow-up program, which will be the test o f the value o f the whole undertaking. Movements for the organization o f State follow-up activities are under way in many States. In declarations on child conservation and national defense adopted by the National Citizens Committee on June IT, 1940, the committee affirmed its con viction that the program adopted by the Conference will make for the national unity so sorely needed at this time and will strengthen the democratic institutions o f our country. F rances P e r k in s . 1 Conference on Children in a Democracy— Papers and Discussions at the Initial Session, April 26, 1939. Children’s Bureau, U. S. Department of Labor, Washington, 1939. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Proceedings o f the W hite House Conference on Children in a Democracy J an u ary 18-2 0 ,1 9 4 0 1 General Session—-January 18 The session o f the Conference was called to order by the chairman o f the Conference, Frances Perkins, Secretary o f Labor. The Conference was opened with an invocation by Reverend Bryan J. McEntegart, director, Division o f Children, Catholic Charities o f the Archdiocese o f New York. Opening Statement by the Chairman I f is my pleasure as well as my privilege to welcome you here this morning in the name o f the Government o f the United States and to say that this, which is truly a citizens’ conference, is a part o f the “way o f government” in a great democracy like ours. The very make-up o f the conference—the participation o f the people rather than the laying out o f a plan by any government—is an illustration o f our way o f life in America, which becomes clear to us as we become more conscious o f what the processes o f democracy are and why it is we must all practice them. More and more it becomes obvious that not in any one group re sides wisdom as regards the problems o f the United States. Out o f many backgrounds and many specialized types o f knowledge comes the wisdom which can solve some o f our great problems, or at least lay the basis for their solution. One o f our problems in this, as well as in every other nation, is how to make it possible for the children, who are the future generation, to partake o f the best that the Nation is able to give while they are children—while they are in the forma tive stage, while their health is being built up. So this Conference does, I think, lay before you the fact that there have been brought 1 The preparation of the proceedings for publication and the summaries of the discus sion are the work of the assistant secretary of the Conference, Emma 0. Lundberg. 1 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 2 Proceedings of the White House Conference in people o f many backgrounds, people with many points o f view, and people with a great variety o f expert knowledge. This is a citizens’ group. The Government takes no part in it ex cept to be the agency, the medium through which people have come together, which issues the invitations, offers a place of meeting, and will keep the record for distribution so that all o f the people through out the United States who have specialized responsibility for children, and those others who have the general responsibility for the health and welfare and progress o f the children o f our Nation, may know what it was in 1940 that the people who concentrated most on this problem thought should be done and could reasonably be done within the decade. In welcoming you here to this 1940 Conference I feel that it is extremely wise for us to remind ourselves o f the values that have flowed out o f the recommendations o f the earlier conferences. This is the fourth White House Conference on child welfare. None o f us can say where the leaders o f this present Conference will be 10 years hence. Most o f us will not be in Washington, but I lay it upon you and upon this Conference to take on the responsibility o f seeing to it that the interest o f the people o f the United States is forwarded in progressive studies o f how to make the resources o f the country available to the children o f the country. I charge you not to let it drop but to see that it is continued so long as we remain a free and cooperating people. This is important, for as we look back to the first Conference we realize how the Conference in 1909 laid the basis for everything that is being done now. As yet, not all o f the recommendations o f that Conference have ever been put fully into operation. We are still working at the program laid out then. So, too, with the Conference o f 1919 and the Conference o f 1930. They made great and fundamental recommendations which we are still working at, and we ought to charge ourselves to realize that those recommendations have not been fully carried out and that it is our duty today, as we think o f these new problems laid out and the new recommendations made in this report, to recall that recom mendations o f other conferences must also be carried out. It has been natural that there should be, at each of these conferences, certain things which bear the special emphasis o f the day and o f the period. As we build from decade to decade we will in time come to a program for children which will satisfy the needs o f the com munity and afford a basis upon which public and private institutions, individuals, and families and groups can work for years to come. Many o f you have come here from a great distance, and most o f you who have come are here at your own expense. This is the kind o f citizens’ conference where each one pays his own way and every body comes for the purpose o f getting something and giving some https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, January 18-20,19JJ) 3 thing to the common thought, hoping to take away a program at which everyone can work. Interest in the White House Conference denotes not only that previous conferences have been a success, but that there is an intention and a purpose in American life today, no matter what the storms, no matter what the stresses, no matter what the economic and social problems of the world may be. It is our intent and purpose to keep our minds firmly fixed upon the welfare o f our children and to promote that welfare under all conditions, recognizing that they are the vitality, after all, o f this great experi ment which we are making upon this continent. When you were here in April, President Roosevelt said: Our work, of course, will not be finished at the end of this day—it will only have begun. During the greater part of the coming year the members o f this Conference, representing every State in the Union and many fields o f endeavor, will be at work. We shall be testing our institutions, and our own convictions and attitudes of mind as they affect our actions as parents and as citizens, in terms of their significance to the childhood o f our Nation. This challenge is just as pertinent now as it was at the time the Presi dent was thinking o f the work you were to do in the period between the day in April when you were here and the termination o f the work o f the Conference. During the next 2 years, or 5 years, or 10 years, wherever you are, you should be planning to carry out the purposes which will be expressed from time to time during this 3-day session. In the months that have elapsed since last April, when this Con ference first assembled, its members have faithfully discharged the responsibilities placed upon them at the initial session. W e have had, as you know, a Planning Committee o f some 70 members with the general duty of plotting the course and charting the subjects to be considered. Then there was a smaller committee on organiza tion, which served as an executive committee. Through the efforts o f a committee on finance, headed by Fred K. Hoehler, a grant o f $47,000 was obtained from the General Education Board, to be disbursed through the American Council on Education. The Children’s Bureau, whose Chief is executive secretary o f this Conference, has been responsible for the detailed work involved in the organization and conduct o f its work, and I suspect that many o f you think, as I do, that she has done a very good job in this organi zation, as well as in many other things for the last 25 years. In accordance with the decision o f the Planning Committee at the initial session, the Conference has devoted its attention, not to origi nal studies and investigations which could not have been made with the resources and within the time available but to assembling and collating available information about the conditions surrounding children in America at this time. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 4 Proceedings o f the White House Conference This material has been brought together, analyzed, and prepared for the Conference by the Report Committee under the chairmanship o f Homer Folks and a research staff headed by Philip Klein. It has been discussed and evaluated by a great variety o f consultant groups repre senting all the particular and special types o f experience in the Con ference. These groups have reviewed and in many cases have revised the preliminary drafts which were prepared for discussion at this ses sion o f the Conference, so that every group report which you w ill have before you today and tomorrow has been discussed in great detail by specialists in the subject as well as by those who represented a variety o f interests in the Conference. The fact that a single Report Committee, whose membership includes physicians, educators, social workers, representatives o f organized re ligion, and those representing the point o f view o f parents and citizens, has been responsible for the work in all fields in the Conference seems to me to be o f unusual significance. It has meant, o f course, a balanced approach in the interest o f the children and that approach has been maintained in every subject. No report is just the report o f specialists in that subject, but other types o f approach and understanding o f the child’s life have also been brought into play in critical comment and suggestion upon the reports which may have been worked out, in the first place, by specialists. A t the same time, the reports have had the benefit o f specialized consideration o f particular topics by experts. Some 160 members o f this Conference have participated as experts in the form ing o f these re ports. The Report Committee and the staff, moreover, have been aided by discussion at three regional conferences throughout the country and by written suggestions received from members o f the Conference and others. I feel that the procedure followed in developing the work o f the Conference, in general, has been consistent with its title—^‘Confer ence on Children in a Democracy.” Through preliminary drafts o f reports you have been kept informed o f the development o f the work in all stages. The committee and staff o f the Conference have responded loyally to the suggestion that because o f the danger that present world events might divert public attention and perhaps even resources from children’s needs it would be desirable to hold this session earlier than first planned. I know the days and weeks o f work for the staff members that this decision has necessi tated, but I do not believe the value o f the Conference reports has been diminished because o f the shorter time in which the work has been done. The first W hite House Conference was impressed by the importance o f buttressing families against poverty which, in many cases in those days, was completely disrupting the fam ily unit and separating parents https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children m a Democracy, Jarmory 18-&0,19Jfi 5 and children, brothers and sisters. Thirty years later this Conference again finds it necessary to give major attention to the economic founda tions o f family life, but with a basis o f far greater experience and an acceptance o f public responsibility far more thoroughgoing than was the case in 1909, when the first approach was made. This Conference also recognizes the threat to child welfare which is involved in the break-down o f orderly relations among nations and the lack o f balance among the various elements o f our own economic life. Nevertheless, the scope and the nature o f the reports presented for your consideration tell us that man does not live by bread alone; that to the individual it is the spirit of life in the soul rather than the material resources available to the body that has ultimate significance. We are the more deeply concerned about conditions which bring pain and sorrow within the four walls of home because we realize that whatever uncertainty, deprivation, and lack of adjustment may threaten our civilization, the simple normal processes of love, parent hood, friendship, worship, joy, and suffering persist and breathe into our lives something o f the substance o f eternity, which we can use to build on in the future. These are great reasons for making every sacrifice to maintain the institution o f the family in its successful care and nurture o f the children o f this country. Since this Conference first met, last April, it has lost through death some o f its most distinguished and beloved members. I want to men tion them to you today and ask you to remember them now and through out the days o f this Conference, not only for the work which they have done, but for the thought and vitality which they have contributed to the subjects we are discussing. We have lost Grace Abbott, C. C. Carstens, Robert Fechner, Robert Marshall, Dr. F. E. Trotter, Alvin Waggoner, Verna L. Nori, Herbert P. Orr. Remember them as we work these 3 days. Plans fo r Conference Procedure By K athabine F. L enkoot First o f all, on behalf o f the Conference staff, I want to thank many o f you who have participated in the preparatory work o f the Confer ence, in the assembling, reviewing, and consideration o f material, and in the suggestions that have come to the Report Committee and to the research staff. The staff could never have given to you for your con sideration the reports that are before you had it not been for the collab oration and the participation o f the widely distributed membership of the Conference. This is a large conference. Tomorrow we are to meet in general session all day for consideration o f and action upon the Conference https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 6 Proceedings of the White House Confererice Report. The group meetings also will have important material to discuss. It has seemed wise to submit to you for your consideration and action something in the nature o f rules for the Conference. The Committee on Organization met this morning, considered and revised a draft, and submits for your consideration the following statement: 1. Group meetings: Each group will consider a topical report, giving special attention to the recommendations therein. Suggested modifications o f the topical report or recommendations, or addi tional material, will be referred to the Report Committee for its consideration, along with suggestions from other groups. The Con ference as a whole will not take action upon the topical reports. They will be utilized by the Report Committee in the preparation o f its final report. Each group will also consider material in the General Report which is related to the topical report under discussion. Suggestions by the group for modifications will be referred to the Report Committee, which will be in session Thursday evening. 2. General sessions for consideration o f the General Conference Report: To facilitate discussion, each member desiring to take part is asked to submit his name and address to the chairman and to indicate the portion o f the report which he wishes to discuss. Each discussant will be limited to 5 minutes unless the Conference grants additional time. Suggestions by Conference members o f additional material for the report should be submitted in writing to the executive secretary o f the Conference not later than 6 p. m., Thursday, January 18. The Report Committee will consider such suggestions and report its recommendations to the Conference before the close o f the afternoon session, Friday, January 19. After a period o f general discussion on the report as a whole, the Conference will consider and vote upon each general division o f the report. After such action on each part o f the report, a motion to adopt the report as a whole, subject to such editorial changes as the Report Committee may deem necessary, will be in order. 3. Authorization to the Report Committee to complete and publish a final report: Prior to adjournment o f the Conference a motion will be in order to authorize the Report Committee to prepare and publish in behalf o f the Conference a final report o f the Report Committee, which will take into account the material considered and suggestions made in the group meetings, with such modifications and additions as the Report Committee may deem desirable, and will include the recommendations in the General Report adopted by the Conference. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, January 18-80,191ft 7 4. Translating the Conference Report into action: The report sub mitted by the chairman o f the Conference Committee on the FollowUp Program will be discussed under the 5-minute rule in general session on Saturday, January 20, and will be acted upon by the Conference. The rules o f the Conference were adopted as read. A motion was adopted authorizing the Report Committee to act as a Resolutions Committee for the Conference. Presentation o f the General Report fo r Consideration by the Conference By H omer F olks, Chairman, R eport Committee The actual task assigned to me might be termed, in language used more frequently some time ago than now, a work o f supererogation. It is to present to you the report submitted by the Report Committee. But you have already been introduced to that report, and I trust by this time you are quite thoroughly acquainted with it; so I do not hand it to you in the sense that it is in any degree a stranger to you. You are familiar, I presume and I hope, with its details and with its spirit, and the first comment I would make, and for which in behalf o f my colleagues on the Report Committee I would ask favorable consideration, is that it is limited to 50 pages. It would have been much easier to write a report of 500 pages. It would have taken much less time, and we present that as an initial factor that might well receive your favorable thought. Since you have had opportunity to examine it and familiarize vourselves with its text and point o f view and its definite sugges tions, perhaps I can use the time assigned to me more advantageously in giving you some idea o f how this report came to be what it is— o f what is back of the opinions here expressed. The chairman has indicated the nature of this Conference. It was enabled to provide itself, after the meeting o f last April, with a staff headed by Philip Klein o f the School of Social Work in New York. I speak with great enthusiasm and the highest regard and approbation o f Mr. Klein’s work and that o f his assistants. There were also associated in each of our various general lines of thought a group o f consultants. They were people who were supposed to know a lot about these various subjects and who had the reputation o f being wise men, able to reach mature views and policies in these various fields. With the aid o f the staff and in the light of material submitted to them by the members in most cases, they arrived at suggestions to the Report Committee o f text and o f recommendations. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 8 Proceedings of the White House Conference The Report Committee has been a very industrious committee. It has not felt that its task was an easy one. It has held many 2-day sessions here in Washington and one lasting 3 days. The committee has taken its job o f joint responsibility for this report seriously and thoughtfully. From these groups o f consultants and from the staff members, there came to us a series of tentative reports, topical reports, which in their later stages have come to you. I should like to convey to you, if I could, something o f the kind o f work that was done on those reports by the Report Committee and that led to the text which has come to you. While the consultants in each group were people who were as qualified, we believe, as any group in the country to say what needed to be said in that particular field, they had to submit that material at the Report Committee meetings and defend it before a group who were not, exCept for one or two in each case, experts in that field. The Report Committee consists o f physicians, laymen, lawyers, businessmen, administrators, and all kinds of people, each o f whom is qualified by some particular activity or in some particular phase o f an activity. Therefore they were in a sense a group of highly intelligent and able guinea pigs on whom the experts tried out their more or less ideal proposals to see how far they would go. The manner in which those reports were received and dealt with is really important when you come to consider this problem. Perhaps the experts who submitted the material might well have thought that since they knew all about the subjects and most of us knew little about them, it would be more or less a matter o f routine approval o f the material coming from the consultants, with possibly slight modifications; but that does not describe what took place. The Report Committee was a tough-minded group. They were set in their ways. They knew what they thought and they had to be “shown” at every stage o f progress in dealing with each o f these reports. That was what kept us here for those 2-day and 3-day meetings. The Report Committee did a magnificent job o f creative thinking as a group on each o f these pieces o f subject matter, and what you see here does not represent the original opinions of any members o f that group nor the average o f the opinions with which they set out. The report includes the opinions at which they arrived by thinking with open minds as hard and as frankly and as seriously as they could on subject matter o f common interest. You have discovered that the report covers a great deal o f ground; that it deals with subject matter which varies greatly in its inherent nature and possibly in its importance. I can only say in justification that that is the way life comes. I f life were more rational, if it https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, January 18-&0,1940 9 divided itself naturally into compartments which were separable and could be labeled, it would have been easy. But life and the conditions affecting children and child life are a compound o f important and less important, o f generalized matter, and o f detailed subject matter that can be stated concretely. We had to face early the question o f whether we would limit ourselves to things which were ready to be done now, whether we would be influenced by the present state o f the Treasury o f the United States and the several States and the local governments and individual contrib utors, by the political programs o f existing parties or agencies; or whether we would look upon ourselves as putting together something, not for the distant future primarily, but which we deemed to be pos sible o f realization within the coming decade. We have tried to aim between discarding everything except that which might be set on foot this year, and, on the other hand, depicting an ideal condition wnich could not possibly be realized until the more or less distant future. Ten years, at least, is the period within which we think all these things might reasonably well be fully recog nized and established as public policies and be well under way. Discussion by Members o f the Planning and Report Committees E lisabeth Chbistman , E xecutive Secretary, National Women's Trade Union League This Conference on Children in a Democracy once more gives tan gible appreciation o f our national responsibility for child welfare. It emphasizes, too, the significance o f real child welfare in a really democratic America. W e know, o f course, that the health and well-being of children are interwoven with the economic security and well-being o f the family. The welfare o f the family—its ability to survive—is built upon the wage-earning capacity of its wage earners. When you realize that wage-earning and farm families constitute nearly 63 percent o f all our families in America it will not be difficult for you to understand the deep interest which I, as a representative o f organized labor and o f women workers everywhere, have in this Conference. Much has been done to raise wage levels by the trade unions them selves and by legislation sponsored by them and supported not only by organized labor but by the public generally. Raising wage levels in order to increase family income remains the most important single consideration in furthering the national well-being o f children. The income figures which are so well assembled throughout the various reports which the Conference is considering dramatize in a https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 10 Proceedings of the White House Conference striking manner the discrepancy between income received and what is necessary for a minimum standard o f living. It is startling to realize that in 1935-36 half o f America’s 29 million families had annual incomes o f less than $1,200 and that more than a million families received less than $250 a year. These amounts include relief payments o f all kinds. More than a quarter o f all the Nation’s families received yearly incomes under $750. Staggering as these income figures are, it is even more staggering to note the extent to which relief payments make up the total family income. The material given in the reports showing our total national income over the last few years makes some striking observations on the pro portion of that income which comes from relief payments and how that proportion o f our national income has increased. Such a large proportion o f our low-income families are almost wholly dependent upon relief for their livelihood and for all their services that the providing of any kind o f wage becomes a most imperative problem; but to the extent that we can raise wage levels in families above this relief group, to that extent can we hope to pull up our whole economy to a level which permits the children to have a “break.” Concen tration on providing needed services for this group is our responsi bility, certainly, but concentration on providing work and adequate wages for that work is o f even greater importance. What can families in these low-income groups offer their children? And what hope can we have for the children who come out of these homes into adult life and into the labor market with poor physiques, unable to resist the ordinary stresses and strains of physical existence, and with a completely shattered morale? Can we wonder that there are so many misfits in industry when we realize how many o f our children come from these low-income families and try to be wage earners ? My work is with wage earners, particularly with industrial women wage earners, and I am constantly reminded o f an experience I had last year in Huntsville, Ala., where I had an opportunity to observe some o f the hardships o f the textile workers in the mill village. The degree o f poverty and the lack of the simplest kind of health and education facilities which resulted from low wage scales have re mained with me ever since my visit there. I think o f the hundreds o f other Huntsvilles throughout our Nation where children growing up in this decade have so little chance to survive and make a living. Child labor, o f course, is a recognized blot on any civilized country. We have made rapid and great strides in the last few years toward reducing child labor, but industry still employs far more children than we like to contemplate. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, January 18-&0,19Ifi 11 One-third o f the unemployed workers in the country today are young people between the ages o f 15 and 24. Unemployment o f youth in this group is higher than that in any other group of our unem ployed population. A number o f recent pronouncements o f national organizations and o f some o f our Federal agencies concerned with youth have given evidence o f a keen recognition o f the seriousness o f this problem. We need greater attention to the facilities for providing vocational education for our young people. Study o f the content o f present school programs shows them to be quite inadequate in fitting our youth for jobs. In addition, the facilities of public employment services should be concentrated on this mammoth prob lem o f locating employment for our youth and o f suggesting ways to fit them for this employment. The continuing load o f unemployed workers in this age group, between 15 and 24, is, I repeat, one o f the great factors making for insecurity now and in the future. There must be a will to solve it. T o bring up the level o f child care in localities like Huntsville, not only by extending general service programs where needed, but also by bringing up the general wage level in the industry and giving support to measures to stabilize wages and employment, must be one o f the most important concerns of the months ahead i f we are to save our children and make it worth their while to want to live in a democracy. For the democratic way o f life means not only indi vidual freedom o f speech and thought but also economic and indus trial freedom to enjoy these less tangible conditions. There is much of startling significance in these reports, and I cannot emphasize too strongly the fact that they should be “must” reading on this winter’s book list o f everyone interested in our pro gram. I commend especially for thoughtful rereading the booklet entitled, “ Better Care for Mother and Child.” 1 Read those figures before you adopt the committee recommendations and maybe you will shout that their recommendations do not go far enough. You will most certainly be stirred to do your part in the follow-up program, which to my mind is all-important i f the Conference report is to have practical value. The resources of my organization, insofar as it is possible to use them to stimulate interest and support for the program which this Conference is sponsoring, will be utilized to the fullest extent. Noth ing is of greater moment to the working man or woman in America than the safeguarding o f the health, security, and education o f the children o f today who are the wage earners o f tomorrow. Give the child a “break” and we will have the man well on his w ay! 1 Children’s Bureau, U. S. Department of Labor. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Washington [1939L 12 Proceedings o f the White House Conference K atherine D ummer F isher # Th0 things in this report to which I should like to call your atten tion are the underlying fundamentals which are implied rather than explicit. W hy do we call this a Conference on Children in a Democracy? ¡Why, having done so, do we not say in this report what we mean by democracy? We have said it. Not by definition, not by historical description, not by quotation from the classic phrases o f our fore fathers. W e plan to testify to the faith, not with our lips, but in our lives. These recommendations which we bring before you must be inter preted as more than a list o f material things and beneficial services which a State should see are supplied to its children, that they may in turn be o f value to the State. These recommendations are to pro vide the means and the opportunity for the full development which a free, self-governing people believe to be the right o f each o f them. Such things cannot be provided without a price. That price might be paid by the giving up o f liberty. It can be paid also by the effort required on the part o f citizens fo r thoughtful participation in the process o f government. It is not always easy for us to cooperate, but we have that capacity and we do it when an object is sufficiently desired and can be procured by joint effort. You must read in your report more than requests for running water and playground instructors, fo r vitamins, vaccination, and vo cational advice. W e are asking more than adequate housing, schooling that prepares for citizenship, and religious instruction. These we would like to see accepted as factors in the American standard o f living. They alone are not enough to make the American way o f life. W e want for our children the high adventure o f pushing out the boundaries o f brotherhood. So we ask you to see that these various specific proposals reflect our democratic faith in the value o f every individual, his right to the opportunity o f development, his ability to work with his fellows, and his willingness to pay the price o f liberty by assuming responsibility. This faith we must transmit to our children in the only way that can give it validity. We must live it ourselves. It has often been said that morals are caught, not taught; and this happens in families. That is why we want to consider the family, not only as an agency through which the necessities and services may be provided, but as the most potent force in fostering the growth o f the young human animal into a personality. This growth occurs in families who are in want through forces beyond their control, in families o f the struggling o f the comfortable, and o f the small minority handicapped by surfeit. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, January 18-J20,19Jfi 13 As our children find understanding, tolerance, respect for themselves and their fellows, as they see us prize liberty beyond luxury, as they see us willing to work with others for the public good, we may hope that they will grow to express in their own lives the ideals o f brotherhood. Many things change, the more important things endure. I f we, the members o f this Conference, can live our own faith in democracy in such ways as by our efforts to bring to pass those things we here pro pose, then we may hope that our children will prize this way o f life and will, in turn, hand down to the following generation the priceless heritage o f being children in a democracy. A. Graeme Mitchell, M. D., Professor of Pediatrics University o f Cincinnati College o f Medicine D irector of The Children's Hospital Research Foundation The spirit in which this medical report evolved was the spirit o f the Conference itself. A ll o f us desire that all the children o f this de mocracy shall have available potentialities for health as well as provision for good care during illness. The carefully selected consultants and experts who gave their advice and criticism were well aware that health is a composite of many factors. The most important o f these is the child himself or, in the case o f illness, the patient. Everyone and everything else is secondary, and the human and material components which go to make up health are part o f a complete plan. Thus the doctor, the nurse, the hospital, the health administrator, the public-health official, and allied personnel must work together, and furthermore, public-health measures, the hospital, the clinic, and many private and public health organizations are part o f this plan. Health and illness are problems too complex to be solved by any one o f these human elements or organizations. That is to say, there must, for example, be good water and m illr supply and there must be good hospitals. Without them the doctor alone, the nurse alone, the public-health official alone cannot properly and completely serve the child. That is why this Conference seems to me to be so significant; it is a council o f all groups interested in children and not a gathering o f autonomous units. It is equally obvious that proper physical and mental health can not be expected unless there are good housing, proper clothing, satis factory food, happy family life, facilities for recreation and education, to mention only a few o f the necessities which this Conference will discuss in relation to the total needs o f the child. For many years, and perhaps with heightened speed during the past decade, knowledge o f the health needs o f children has been 262205°— 40----- 2 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 14 Proceedings of the White House Conference acquired. This knowledge has come about by the contributions o f medical science, which has been concerned, especially recently, with conditions affecting growth and development o f infants and children, with the factors which cause disease and injury in the newborn period, with nutrition in its broader aspects and the requirements for dietary essentials such as minerals and vitamins, with the effect o f the endocrine glands on physical and mental growth, with the problems connected with adolescence, and the like. Progress has also been made in protection against certain dis eases, and especially in the treatment and cure o f other diseases, by antiserum and the use o f certain chemical substances. As the report will show, the health o f children has been given increased attention and support on the part o f the community, both by private health organizations and by government, and the public itself has been stimulated to an interest in health and action to secure it. In medical schools and universities attention has been focused on teaching physicians and other professional workers the various as pects o f the prevention o f disease and the means of carrying out the measures which present knowledge warrants. Postgraduate educa tion in such matters has been supported by the funds o f State and Federal Governments, and local, State, and National medical so cieties, as well as universities, have conducted postgraduate courses with telling effect. It is obvious that many professional groups and organizations have continued research, but they have also become increasingly involved in the spread o f knowledge and in its appli cation. Since this is a report on medical care, I may be pardoned for calling attention to the fine contribution made by the medical profession to this progress through its individual members and its recognized organizations. Some facts which demonstrate progress and the attempt to meet existing problems have been mentioned. No complacency, and cer tainly no boastfulness, can accompany these remarks, for there is much to be done. There is great need for continued research, for education, for better care in pregnancy, for continued care through out childhood, for increased emphasis on community responsibility— in short, for expansion o f all health and medical services. It is a commentary on our democracy that we possess a large body o f knowl edge which is not reaching in application to all its citizens. Certain deficiencies in this respect which cannot be ignored are matters o f common observation as well as o f statistics, and the facts show that there is an obvious inequality in distribution o f medical care in economic groups and in communities. Certain urban com munities do better than others, and there is a great discrepancy between the facilities existing in urban and in rural communities. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, January 18-&0,191ft 15 Even in those cities in which medical care has received more than average attention there has been greater emphasis on the care of illness than on the prevention o f disease and on the measures which will maintain health. May I cite a few of many facts ? Each year nearly a quarter of a million mothers are not attended by a physician at childbirth; nearly a quarter of a million newborn babies do-not have the benefit of medical care in the first few days of life, and often no skilled nursing care; of all children under 15 years of age having illness which disables them for 7 or more days, 28 percent have neither a physician in attend ance nor hospital ca re; approximately 90,000 children die annually from whoop ing cough, measles, diphtheria, scarlet fever, pneumonia, influenza, diarrheal diseases, rheumatic heart disease, tuberculosis, or accidents, and many o f these conditions are theoretically or actually preventable; several million school children have defective vision, more than a million and a half have impaired hearing, and at least two-thirds of all school children have dental caries. These are, as I have stated, only constituents of a more complete list o f prob lems which you will find mentioned in the report, but they are sufficient to outline some of the needs which our democracy should attempt to meet for its children. What is not being done can readily be translated into positive statements o f what should be done. Again time permits a statement of only some o f the requirements: Provision for premarital and preconceptional instruction and care of the mother, as well as care throughout pregnancy by qualified physicians and nurses in the home, prenatal clinic, or hospital; care at delivery by qualified physicians and nurses ; care when necessary in an approved hospital which is adequately staffed; postpartum care in home, hospital, or clinic, including supervision of nutrition of the mother and medical and nursing care of the infant; facilities for expert diagnosis and consultation when necessary; supervision of the physi cal and mental health of the child until at least adolescence or early adult life has been reached; adequate care in the home or hospital during illness. Obvious accessories to and details o f such a program are contained in the report. Here again facts must be faced. Our democracy is such that some families are able through their own resources to furnish good housing, clothing, food, recreation, education, and medical care to their chil dren. Other families must face from time to time unpredictable emergencies that put on them an extra load which is beyond their ability to carry and which causes health as well as other essen tials of family life to suffer. Then there is the group who are unable through their own resources to provide even the minimum needs. We must, perhaps, redefine what is meant by the term “ medically needy.” It is known, for example, that o f the more than 2 million births which take place in the United States yearly, a million occur in families on relief or with an income o f less than $1,000 a year; that approximately 900,000 births occur in families on relief or with an income o f less than $800 a year; that, for example, in large https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 16 Proceedings of the White Rouse Conference cities 37 percent of children in families with incomes o f less than $1,000 had neither a physician’s care nor hospital care during disabling illnesses, whereas only 20 percent in families with incomes o f $3,000 or more had no such care; that hospital facilities are not obtainable in many rural communities even for those people who are able to pay for them, and that in such communities there is a lack or inadequacy o f health programs and o f professional personnel. A ll these inadequacies and many others constitute failure to protect the children o f this democracy. A ll these inequalities are the concern o f all o f us— o f the local community, the State, and the Nation. It is certain that more thought must be given, more activity ex pended, more facilities and personnel supplied before we can hope to cope with these obvious problems. Certainly we would like to see every family financially and intellectually able to furnish individual care to its children, but even for those who are able there must be brought to bear the influence and service o f many organizations, and o f local, State, and Federal governments, in mass prevention and in establishment o f hygienic measures which the individual demands o f his community. Certainly, too, there is no one who does not wish all children to have access to health and to care during illness. I am far less competent than most o f you to analyze the measures suggested by your committee to meet these problems; it is not my function just now and they are set forth for you in the more detailed report. There you will find the specific recommendations concerning the means whereby we can continue our progress and expedite it, whereby we can and should continue research and education, whereby we can secure the application o f knowledge and o f preventive pro cedures to all children. Specific recommendations emphasize impor tant phases such as mental health and nutrition. It is recognized that existing facilities, both private and public, including the practice and the practitioners o f medicine, should be utilized before new facilities are provided, but these new facilities must be provided by the expansion o f existing facilities and by the institution o f new ones. A ll this should be done with care and by cooperation. Some com munities, for example, may need new hospitals and health centers as well as other facilities, but the hospital will do little good unless it can be supported and unless it can be staffed with qualified personnel. Perhaps it may be transportation facilities which certain communities need rather than new hospitals. There must be expansion o f full-time local health organizations on a city, county, and district basis; there must be coordination o f health and medical services for which health, welfare, education, social serv ices, or other public or private agencies are responsible. Preventive https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, Jaruaary 18-viO, 19J^0 17 and curative medical care must be made available and accessible to all members o f the family if children are to be properly cared for. Voluntary hospital insurance may be encouraged for certain groups, and other plans for budgeting for illness must be developed. To all families below the economic level at which it is possible to budget for the cost o f illness and the cost o f health, aid must be given or the. children o f our democracy will suffer. Since I have been asked to give this report and since I have done so, although inadequately, perhaps I may be allowed, as I close, the privilege o f interpretation. I feel sure after my analysis o f the re port that there is no one in this Conference or elsewhere who will fail to recognize the inadequacies o f our present state o f medical care. There may, o f course, be some understandable difference o f opinion concerning the extent o f the needs and their type, and there may be some discussion o f methods of approach. Again speaking as an individual and as an interpreter, I may say that I believe that the recommendations o f this report are consistent with the democracy in which we live and with our existing system. I am sure that we all recognize that we should attempt to secure good health and satisfactory medical care as an important part, al though only a part, o f the complete plan to live up to the principles o f our democracy. Our duty to the children o f a democracy requires that they possess abounding and optimum health. W. R. Ogg, D irector of Research American Farm Bureau Federation In these troublous times it is o f special significance that this White House Conference is to consider the welfare o f children in a democracy. Today the boastful exponents o f the totalitarian state are chal lenging the ability o f a democracy to provide effectively for the national welfare. I believe that the American people, living in the greatest democracy o f our times, are ready to accept that challenge and to demonstrate that democracy can and does work—that we can and will, through democratic processes, meet adequately the needs o f all our people. I f democracy is to endure, we must learn how to make it work to meet human needs adequately. W e cannot attain this goal by living on the borrowed glories o f the past nor by mere wishful thinking or academic planning. Fundamental to its realization is a fearless self appraisal to determine wherein we have failed and why—to face frankly and realistically the great problems o f unemployment, public relief, the unbalance in our national economy, the inequalities o f op portunities in a land o f unparalleled resources, the powerful specialinterest groups often sparring for special advantages, the limitations https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 18 Proceedings of the White House Conference o f partisan politics, the tendency o f citizens to allow their prejudices to obscure their responsibilities and opportunities to help solve the great social and economic problems that vitally affect the welfare o f children. W e rightfully glory in our democratic heritage and the magnificent achievements which our vast resources have made possible in so short a time, but can we truthfully say that democracy has worked as effectively as we are entitled to believe it should— When 16 million families, 74 percent o f all nonfarm families in the United States, did not have sufficient income even in the so-called prosperous year 1929 to provide an adequate diet at moderate cost for their children? When more than 9 ^ million families at the bottom of the income scale, compris ing 32 percent of all families, received no more total income than 150,000 families at the top of the scale, comprising but one-half o f 1 percent of all families? When nearly a quarter million mothers and babies have no medical care at childbirth and the first few days o f life? When competent authorities estimate that at least one-half o f maternal deaths and at least one-third of infant deaths are preventable, yet mothers and infants are allowed to die for lack o f proper medical care? When 28 percent o f all children under 15 years o f age who had disabling illnesses for more than 7 days had neither medical nor hospital care? When in 1930 more than 800,000 children between 7 and 13 years, most o f them in the poorest rural areas, did not attend school? When one-third of all unemployed workers are young people 15 to 24 years o f age, who are denied the opportunity of a job and the opportunity for further education ? In the main, the greatest inequalities exist in the rural areas. This is due to the enormous concentration o f population and taxable wealth in urban areas and the abnormally low rural income. In the field o f education, for example, farm families have 31 per cent o f the Nation’s children, yet receive less than 10 percent o f the national income with which to support and educate these children. The President’s Advisory Committee on Education found that in general the least satisfactory schools are found in rural areas; that under present conditions there is no prospect that the rural areas will be able to lessen this gap through their own resources; that low school expenditures in rural areas have unfortunate results for the children and that the education which can be provided at present in many localities is below the minimum necessary to preserve democratic institutions. These inferior facilities are not due to unwillingness or lack o f effort to support education; on the contrary, the committee found that the rural areas on the whole are making a much greater effort in supporting their inferior facilities than the urban areas, which with far less sacrifice enjoy greater facilities. Similarly, hospitals and health and medical facilities are con centrated largely in urban areas. Two-thirds o f our counties, mainly https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, January 18-®0, 191fi 19 rural, do not have even the minimum o f a modern health service; 1,300 counties are without hospitals; the cost o f medical and hospital care all too often exceeds farmers’ ability to pay, with the result that many farm families go without adequate medical care and consult a physician only in acute emergencies, while young, promising doc tors are reluctant to settle in rural areas, not only because o f in sufficient income but also because o f the dearth o f modem diagnostic and hospital facilities with which to practice scientific medicine. In the field o f housing it is estimated that at least 3 million farm homes do not meet even the minimum standards of health and com fort. A recent (unpublished) study by the Bureau of Home Eco nomics showed that 85 percent o f farm homes have no bathrooms; 83 percent, no water piped into the house; 93 percent, no indoor toilets; and more than 15 percent, no toilet facilities whatever. About 70 percent are inadequately screened, and 27 percent have no screens at all. More than 82 percent need repainting, and 40 percent have no paint whatever. W hy? Not because farmers do not want better housing, but because o f their inability to provide it with existing low incomes. These conditions are the inevitable result of human impoverish ment growing out o f the economic inequality o f agriculture during most o f the past 20 years. Despite the progress made in recent years toward a fair balance in our economic structure, farmers are still exchanging their products for industrial goods at a 21-percent pen alty. This unbalance, which curtails the purchasing power of the 52 million people living in rural areas, is a major reason why there are still millions o f unemployed men and billions o f unemployed dollars. About 40 percent o f all rural youth ultimately go to the cities to earn their livelihood. The cost to farm people of rearing, educating, and training these youth during the 10-year period ended in 1930 is estimated at about 14 billion dollars. The fundamental philosophy upon which our democracy is based is equal opportunity for all. Inequalities and unmet needs, whether in country or in city, must be removed, not only for the sake o f democracy itself but for the sake of the children. It is not enough merely to provide for the material needs of our children. We have left God out o f our schools, our family life, our business and professional world, and our every-day living. Society and our children are suffering the penalty o f decaying morals, in creasing crime, growing cynicism, and unconcern for the welfare o f others. Our children need a vital, sustaining religious faith—faith in God, faith in one’s fellow man, faith in democratic processes, faith in the ultimate triumph of right. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 20 Proceedings o f the White House Conference These are some o f the realities confronting us despite the progress we have made. Significantly, this White House Conference report is not content to describe conditions and cite statistics, but, mindful o f the welfare o f 36 million children, it rightfully concentrates major attention upon constructive programs o f action to improve the welfare o f children. We refuse the philosophy o f despair that says we cannot solve these problems. We refuse to be content to look on these human needs and then pass by on the other side o f the road. There can be no compro mise with human suffering and destitution, especially when our chil dren are concerned. W e are dealing not with abstract facts and statistics but with human destitution and misery, with stunted and diseased bodies, with hunger and ignorance, exploitation and human greed, with the blighted opportunities and blasted hopes o f millions o f children who seek to find their places in life and make their contri bution to human advancement. This report recognizes that the fundamental solution is restoration o f the income o f the masses o f people so they can meet these needs adequately. Meanwhile millions of families must be cared for and bet ter opportunities provided for millions o f children. To meet these immediate needs, the report proposes some specific recommendations which our chairman has already presented to you : Improved public relief and public works, improved housing, better schools, churches, libraries, recreational centers and other community institutions, im proved and expanded hospital, health, and medical care and facilities, and so forth, must be made available to all the people, both rural and urban, in all sections o f the country. Such a program costs money. In many cases the areas where the greatest need exists have the least financial resources to meet these needs. Therefore it is imperative, especially in the fields o f educa tion and health, to equalize these burdens through a system o f Federal grants to the States in order to assure equality o f opportunity and to meet the vital needs o f our children. Meanwhile the future welfare of our children demands that increas ing attention be given to the solution o f our basic economic problems which create and maintain these inequalities and distressing conditions. American agriculture recognizes that these problems cannot be solved by agriculture, or by industry, or by labor alone, but only through the mutual understanding and cooperation o f all groups. W e agree with the splendid statement in this report : The basic economic problem of our children is the economic problem of the Nation, to find a sound balance o f wages, prices, and financing that will provide a growing purchasing power to industrial workers and farmers and profitable investment of capital. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, Jarmory 18-&0,19Jfi 21 American agriculture seeks no position o f special advantage, but we do seek the removal o f the economic barriers which deny equality o f opportunity to our children. American agriculture stands ready to join hands with industry and labor and with government to restore a fair balance between farm prices and industrial prices and wages so as to insure the maximum interchange o f goods and services, and to produce an abundance o f goods and services at fair prices and fair wages so as to raise the national income to the maximum level for all the people and thereby make it possible to provide essential services for all our children. When the welfare o f our children is at stake, let us think less about our differences and more about our common needs and mutual re sponsibilities. The time has come for national unity for the welfare o f our children rather than selfish group advantage. W e talk about conservation» o f soil, water, forests, and so on, but what about the conservation of the greatest o f all our resources—our children? Certainly they are worth as much to taxpayers and to our Government as battleships and airplane bombers. Certainly they are worth the expenditure o f tax revenues to improve and expand educa tional facilities, medical and health facilities, and other vital childwelfare services. Surely they are worth the mobilization o f our vast resources in intelligent planning through democratic processes in order that poverty, human selfishness, and neglect may not crush out their opportunities and blight their future. They are even worth the sacrifice a little tradition, and a little personal liberty, i f necessary, to assure more security, freedom, and protection for all. To bring the matter a little closer to each citizen, let us ask ourselves if these 36 million children o f ours are not worth a little more sacri fice and effort on the part o f every citizen to see that their vital needs are met, to do his part in translating into human law, into human relationships, and into human institutions, both public and private, the divine law, “ Thou shalt love thy neighbor”— and may I add, “ thy neighbor’s children”—“ as thyself.” F loyd W. R eeves, Ph. D., LL. D., D irector American Youth Commission I shall confine my remarks today to a selected few o f the recommen dations in certain sections of the report, those dealing with educa tional services in the community, protection against child labor, and youth and their needs. The section on educational services in the community includes a dis cussion o f the three m ajor institutions responsible fo r carrying on community educational programs: the school, the library, and the recreational center. It is well that these three agencies should be https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 22 Proceedings, of the White House Conference dealt with in a single section o f the report because no hard and fast lines separate their functions. The establishment and maintenance o f a fair educational opportu nity for every child is set forth in the report both as a responsibility o f democracy and as an unattained goal to be striven for in this Na tion. Few, i f any, will disagree with this aim or with the statement that democracy has a responsibility for its achievement. I shall, therefore, limit my comments to the means that may be used to achieve this desirable end. In many parts o f the United States it will be impossible to reach any o f the desirable goals set forth for the schools unless action is taken to compensate for the present inequalities among States and within States in financial ability to support education. The President’s Advisory Committee on Education pointed out that there are eight States—principally in the northeast and the far west— which, by the use o f average effort as measured by a model taxing system, could spend more than $75 per child per year for schools. For the most part these States actually do spend that much or more. On the other hand, the committee showed that another nine States— principally in the southeast—by the same measure o f effort could not spend as much as $25 per child. Every one o f these States is at present spending more for schools than the measure o f average effort, yet in six o f them the actual expenditure is under $25 per child—less than one-third o f the amount which the eight most fortunate States could spend with average effort, and less than one-half o f the national average expenditure. The advisory committee also reminded us that in 1930 the farm population o f the Nation was responsible for the care and education o f 31 percent o f the Nation’s children but received only 9 percent o f the national income. This very great disparity is accentuated by regional differences. In 1930 the farm population o f the Southeastern States had about 4 14 million children aged 5 to 17, but it received only 2 percent o f the national income. The nonfarm population o f the Northeastern States had 8y2 million children and 42 percent o f the national income. In other words, this group had 21 times the amount o f income out o f which to support and educate only twice as many children as had the farm people o f the southeast. I f the first three o f the recommendations relating to the schools were carried out it would be possible to reach all the other goals. But unless these three recommendations are put into effect it will be quite impossible in many parts o f the United States to achieve some, or even any, o f the report’s other recommendations relative to the schools https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, Jarmary 18-&0,1 9 $ 23 The three recommendations which seem to me most essential read as follow s: 1. Units of local school attendance and administration should be enlarged wherever necessary in order to broaden the base o f financial support and to make possible a modern well-equipped school for every child at a reasonable per capita cost. 2. Substantial financial assistance should be granted by every State to its local school systems for the purpose of equalizing tax burdens and reducing educational inequalities. 3. An extended program of Federal financial assistance to the States should be adopted in order to reduce inequalities in educational opportunity among States. These recommendations are in full accord with those o f the Ameri can Youth Commission in its statement adopted October 9, 1939, and recently published in its pamphlet, A Program o f Action for Ameri can Youth. They are also in full accord with the recommendations o f the President’s Advisory Committee on Education in its report o f February 1938. With regard to the section on leisure-time activities I especially commend the proposal that the development o f recreation should be recognized as a public responsibility on a par with the responsibilities for education and for health. This undertaking should be shared by local communities, the States, and the Federal Government. Immedi ate steps should be taken by each community to appraise local recrea tional facilities and to plan systematically to remove inadequacies. I also agree that special attention should be given to children in rural areas, children in congested city neighborhoods, children in lowincome families, the children o f Negroes and other minority groups, children with mental, emotional, or physical handicaps, and children who have just left school. Let me point out that these are precisely the same groups which need special attention in education. I endorse unreservedly the proposal that a national commission be created to study leisure-time needs and recreational resources. Turning now to the section on libraries, I would emphasize especially the recommendation that Federal aid to the States is as necessary for libraries as for schools, and for the same reasons. Federal grants for education should be available for school libraries, and, at least at the beginning, special Federal grants should go to the States for the exten sion o f rural library services for both children and adults. Both these recommendations are in accord with the report o f the President’s Advisory Committee on Education. Among the recommendations under the heading o f child labor I would stress the following: “ Financial aid from public sources should be given whenever necessary to young persons to enable them to con tinue their education even beyond the compulsory-attendance age if they wish to do so and can benefit thereby.” https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 24 Proceedings of the White House Conference I agree with the recommendation that schooling should be both compulsory for and available to every child up to the age o f 16. This is a corollary o f the recommendation in the section on youth and their needs, which reads as follow s: Federal, State, and local governments should provide work projects for youth over 16 not in school, who cannot obtain employment. Such work should be useful, entailing possibly the production of some o f the goods and services needed by young people themselves and other unemployed persons. * * * There should be further experimentation in part-time work and part-time schooling. Both these recommendations coincide with statements recently adopted by the American Youth Commission. In my opinion they constitute matters o f immediate urgency among the excellent lists of recommendations which the proposed report o f this Conference contains. It seems to me to be a matter o f major importance that compulsory education should not be extended beyond the sixteenth year. I f young people desire to continue school beyond that age and cannot do so without financial assistance, such assistance should be afforded to them. But if they do not desire to continue full-time education and cannot find employment in private enterprise they should be provided with jobs under public auspices. They should have the opportunity for part-time education whether they have jobs in public or in private enterprise. I know o f places in the United States where, at the present time, very close cooperation exists between most o f the agencies working in the fields relating to the welfare o f children. But I also know o f many communities and States where close cooperation does not exist. I hope that the work o f this Conference and the publication o f its report will bring about closer cooperation among all the agencies dealing with children. As I look ahead and try to visualize what might be the outcomes o f this great Conference, it seems to me that if it has no other direct result than that o f making those working in any one o f the areas of social service acquainted with the needs and the work o f those working in other areas, it will have accomplished something that is very much worth while. O.-E. A. W inslow, Ph. D., P rofessor of Publio H ealth, School o f Medicine, Tale University D r. Mitchell has reviewed the health program as presented in the report so admirably that I need not take time to repeat what he has said in regard to the advances made and the new problems that present themselves at the end o f this decade. As Dr. Mitchell has said, it has become increasingly clear that the preventive and diagnostic services o f the conventional public-health https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, January 18-&0,19Ifi 25 program must, i f they are to be effective, be supported by a parallel program o f medical care for those who need such care and cannot now obtain it. The National Health Survey has made this need abun dantly clear. As one goes down the economic scale, sickness increases and medical care declines. Even in our cities more than a quarter o f the children suffering from disease so serious as to disable them for a week or more receive neither medical nor hospital care o f any kind. Each year nearly a quarter of a million mothers must go without the attend ance o f a physician in the crisis of childbirth. I f the American child is to have that right to life, not to speak o f liberty and the pursuit o f happiness, which was visualized by our fore fathers, it is essential, as our report points out, that for the large section o f the population now without the benefits o f modern medical science there should be made available “ adequately supervised medical care through a program or programs financed by general tax funds, by insurance contributions from beneficiaries and government, or by such combination o f methods as may be best suited to local conditions.” This is the sort o f broad program that was suggested at the National Health Conference in 1938, and essentially the program which is embodied in the national health bill introduced in 1939 by Senator Wagner. You will hear that this bill is going to put a straight jacket upon the medical profession and rob it o f liberty o f action and force the American people into some particular form o f bureaucratic medi cine. That is, o f course, completely untrue, as everyone must know who has read the act through once. A ll the act does is to stimulate experimentation which is to be initiated by the various States along lines that seem suitable to local conditions. Any adequate program, however, must involve some plans of voluntary insurance for those o f the middle economic group, some plan o f compulsory insurance for those on a lower economic level, and a program o f tax-supported care, not only for the indigent but for many other persons in rural areas. This is the major public-health challenge of the moment, as I see it, but there are many other things which are vitally important and which open up new vistas in this campaign o f public health. We have done much, I think, in the 30 years since the Conferences were initiated. We have done much, as a people, in substituting preventive medicine for the purely alleviative medicine of an earlier day. I am wondering, however, if preventive medicine is enough. Even this term has a negative aspect; perhaps something which might be called “constructive medicine” may be the watchword o f the future. The total death rate has dropped from 18 per 1,000 population in 1900 to 12 and it may be possible to get it to 8, but it is not possible to go much below that figure. Does that mean public health must go https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 26 Proceedings o f the W hite House Conference out o f business? Rather, it opens up a new vision, not merely o f keeping down the mortality statistics, but of vigor and efficiency and joy o f living. This vision opens up such new problems as nutrition and housing and recreation. Those are going to be as important to the health officer in the future as diphtheria antitoxin and septic tanks have been in the past. I think one o f the most important recommendations o f the report is that a national nutrition committee be appointed by the President of the United States to study this problem. Then there is the problem of housing. Some people think of hous ing as i f it were merely dwellings. It is important to have individual dwellings where children can have light and sun and air, but that is a very small part o f the housing problem o f today. A housing project, in the modern sense, is a group of buildings built as a neighborhood which is designed to contribute not only to the physical health but to the mental and social health o f the group concerned. Now, this is peculiarly interesting from the standpoint o f those whose special work is with families, for so many o f our modem activities tend to ward the development o f recreation and social centers outside the home. The housing project sets the recreation of the family in the home itself, and, therefore, I think we can fairly say that a major need at the present moment is the continuation and extension o f the United States housing program—a program which, as you know, is facing a crisis in the present Congress. The bill for continuing the housing program failed o f passage at the last session and is coming up at the present session. It will be a very severe set-back to the entire movement i f Congress fails to pass the bill this year, for the continuance of this program is an essential need o f children in a democracy. Democratic children cannot be developed in the slums. These are controversial matters, as has been pointed out. W e can not have health, we cannot have houses for the children, unless we are prepared to pay for them. Our conception o f neutrality in the United States at the present moment involves keen sympathy and admiration for those who, many o f us believe, are fighting the battle o f civiliza tion, but an equally firm determination not to let their fight cost us anything at all. We show somewhat the same kind of neutrality in the warfare against disease and poverty. There are plenty o f people who think the children and mothers o f the Nation should be preserved but not if by any chance it is going to cost anything. A t the meeting last night someone raised the question whether we could do these things without the reconstruction o f our present eco nomic existence. Well, England has done them. Sweden has done them. Denmark has done them. Holland has done them. I do not https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, January 18-&0, W ifi 27 know about all the other fields, but in health and housing all we are asking is that we should make the start they made 25 years ago and follow the English record until the problem has been solved. I f they can do it we should be able to do it. Some people think the word “economy” means keeping money in the pocket. I f you will look up the derivation you will find that “ economy” means the wise management o f the household. W e have another word for keeping money in the pocket. It is “ parsimony.” Economy means wise and judicious management for the general future good of the individual and o f the Nation. From that standpoint it is good economy to do the things that have been suggested in this report and it will be very bad economy if we continue to save dollars in this country at the cost of the bodies and the minds and the souls o f American children. T h e C hairm an . It is very heartening to us to know that in this Conference there is a woman who carries the same sort o f responsibility in her country, which is our neighbor across the northern border. It gives me great pleasure to welcome Miss Charlotte Whitton, the execu tive director o f the Canadian Welfare Council, a friend and associate in all matters which have to do with child welfare. She has often consulted with our Children’s Bureau, has worked with us on the League of Nations, on child welfare and nutrition, and all that sort o f thing, and I know you will be glad to find her a member o f your group today. I am happy to introduce Miss Whitton and ask her to speak. Miss W hitton . Madam Secretary, members and guests o f the Con ference, we do indeed consider it a high privilege to have the honor o f participating in this Conference through a representative o f the Canadian Social Welfare Council, because our welfare has drawn very largely for its nurturing from the United Kingdom and the United States. It is clear that for the courageous leadership o f the United States we, in Canada, owe you a debt so great you need never suggest its repayment. We are indeed bound, in our two lands, to the theme of your Con ference, recognizing as it does that the successful operation of the mechanism o f democratic government requires a citizen body that is strong, intelligent, secure, and happy, and that for the annoying internal aggression o f poverty, suffering, disease, and insecurity there must be effort to the same degree that there is against external aggres sion. In that common cause against these gnawing internal forces which threaten democracy there can be no question o f our unity o f interest. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 28 Proceedings o f the W hite House Conference I f, Madam Secretary, we in Canada appear to be concentrating upon the protection o f our democratic institutions in resisting other forms o f aggression, we will look to your leadership to keep afloat the flag o f protection for the children in a democracy; and we shall attempt, perhaps, to repay you with a little service in protecting democracy for the children. We thank you and we wish your Con ference, your children, and your democracy Godspeed and well-being, now and always. The C h airm an . I am delighted at the number o f people who are here today as guests as well as those who are members o f the Con ference. I see, sitting in thè front row, a lady who comes from a foreign country and who happens to be traveling in America at this time. She has done such distinguished service for the public good in her country that I know she will forgive me if I call on her to say a word to us. She is Fru Betzy Kjelsberg, who has been the chief inspector o f factories in Norway and who in recent years has devoted practically all her time to the improvement o f conditions o f women and children in Norway. Madam K jelsberg. Madam Chairman, members of the Confer ence, I am so happy that I postponed my journey and was able to accept the invitation to come here today. I have learned much, and I will go home to Norway and tell my people what you are doing over here and what you are trying to do. O f course, we have heard what has been accomplished in this wonderful country. Norway is a little country with only 3 million people. W e have been working for years trying to get as good social laws as possible for our country, and I am glad to tell you that we no longer have any child labor in Norway. I also want to tell you that night work is forbidden for young persons under 18 years, that we try to get rid o f as much night work as possible, both for men and for women, and that we try to have night work only in plants where the work must be kept going on. Neither men nor women are allowed to work in bakeries in Norway during the night. I am glad to say that it was the doctors in Norway who helped us to get the law that forbids night work in bakeries. I am so thankful that I have the opportunity to be here, and I do hope that the Scandinavian countries, Finland, Sweden, Norway, and Denmark, may be allowed to continue their work for better health and for happy family life. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Afternoon Session— January 18 Group Meetings The afternoon o f January 18 was devoted to group meetings for the discussion o f topical statements. Members o f the Conference divided into 11 groups for discussion o f the preliminary statements on the following subjects: 1. The Family as the Threshold of Democracy. James S. Plant, M. D., Sc. D., chairman. 2. Economic Resources of Families and Communities. Edwin E. Witte, Ph. D., chairman. 3. Housing the Family. Frank G. Boudreau, M. D., chairman. 4. Economic Aid to Families. William Hodson, chairman. 5. Social Services for Children. Rev. Bryan J. McEntegart, LL. D., chairman. 6. Children in Minority Groups. Charles S. Johnson, Litt. D., chairman. 7. Religion and Children in a Democracy. Rabbi Edward L. Israel, LL. D., chairman. 8. Health and Medical Care for Children. Henry F. Helmholz, M. D., chairman. 9. Education Through the School. William G. Carr, Ph. D., chairman. 10. Leisure-Time Services for Children. Grace L. Coyle, Ph. D., chairman. 11. Child Labor and Youth Employment Courtenay Dinwiddie, chairman. Reports o f suggestions by the groups for modifications o f the Gen eral Report were presented by the chairmen of the groups to the Report Committee in session the evening o f January 18 and taken into consideration by the committee in drafting modifications o f the General Report for presentation to the Conference on January 19. 262205°— 40---- 3 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 29 Morning Session—Jan u ary 19 Chairman, Frances Perkins Opening Statement by the Chairman The work of the groups discussing the topical reports went on all yesterday afternoon. Most o f you know, as members o f one or more o f those groups, the degree o f discussion that took place and the degree o f difference o f opinion that developed in the discussion. The material from those groups, together with the material which has been submitted by individual members o f the Conference and by other interested persons, was handed to the Eeport Committee, which was in session throughout the evening and far into the night. Thus the amount o f work and consideration given to the work o f the report which will be discussed this morning is very encouraging. Nothing was discussed lightly. Everything was discussed with great seriousness and intentness of purpose, ih order to get out the best report o f which we are capable in this year 1940. The preliminary report was distributed to all o f you several days ago, and you were asked to read especially the section in which your field o f interest or your field o f experience was particularly vivid so that you might be able to participate in this discussion and in the consideration o f this report upon the basis o f your own experience. I think we should remind ourselves again that this is a body o f citizens thinking o f laying a pattern and a plan for the better care and development o f our children for the next 10 years. This day is to be devoted to the general discussion o f the report, section by section. It is hoped that during the day we can adopt finally whatever parts o f this report seem to the Conference to be valid and important. This will be a free discussion. It is a wellorganized meeting, but there is nothing cut and dried about it. There is no reason why the report should be adopted as written i f the majority o f the persons in the Conference do not so desire it. I want to make that perfectly clear to you. After a period o f general discussion o f the report as a whole the Conference will consider and vote upon each section o f the report. After such action on each portion o f the report, a motion to adopt the report as a whole, subject to the various changes necessary, will be in order. Before proceeding to the general discussion this morning, in order to bring to your minds some o f the points o f view which have been 30 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, January 18-&0,19Jfi 31 prevailing in the preparatory work, I want to call upon two o f the vice chairmen o f the Conference to review for us what seem to them to be the points o f greatest significance and the general objectives which seem to them to be the most important. Remarks by Hon. M ilburn L. W ilson Under Secretary of Agriculture During these days when national unity is essential it is unusually timely that people from all walks o f American life should gather here to undertake one o f our periodic appraisals o f the situation of our children. Leaders o f past generations realized how important such appraisals are in improving the conditions in which democratic representative government can flourish. I f such appraisals were im portant in earlier times, when democracy was moving forward unchal lenged the world over, they are doubly important today. When democracy is being challenged there is no more important subject that America can concentrate on than this one o f evaluating the opportunities open to our children. In the America o f today there are two patterns o f life. One is the urban; the other, the rural. They are not separate and distinct from each other, yet their basic characteristics differ in many respects. Recognition o f these different patterns will not keep us from centering our thoughts upon all our children. But it will enable us the easier to keep in mind the central importance o f the countryside as the reservoir o f our population. Our rural areas provide not only food and fiber for the Nation but also more than their pro portionate share o f our children. The urban birth rate is lower than the rural; 10 adults in the large cities have only 7 children on the average while 10 adults in our farm regions are raising 14 children. For both urban and rural cultures this is o f central importance. In this situation rural poverty takes on added significance. For a good many years now the existence o f widespread poverty in the cities has been pretty well known; not so, however, the existence of widespread poverty in the country. One o f the things the country has come to know about during the past decade is this matter o f rural poverty. Along with the attractive side o f life in our farming regions we have the seamy side. It has cost us a good deal to become aware of rural poverty. Only through agricultural depression, floods, droughts, dust storms, and the onward march of technology in agriculture has it been brought forcibly to our attention. But if it has gained a place in the Nation’s consciousness, perhaps the price has not been too high. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 32 Proceedings o f the W hite House Conference Through the work o f the Department o f Agriculture, particularly that of the Farm Security Administration, our research program, and our extension activities, we are learning a good deal about how widespread and how acute rural poverty really is. We are not only uncovering the facts o f rural poverty but within the limits o f law and o f their financial resources Government agencies are shaping their various programs to do everything possible to remedy these conditions. It can be truthfully said that today the children in our rural areas are receiving more attention from Government than ever before. W e are recognizing that agriculture is something more than the raising and disposing o f crops and livestock. It is a way o f life, possessing values unique in themselves and vital to the welfare o f the Nation as a whole. Any increased recognition, therefore, that rural children are receiving today should be regarded as only a beginning. Much more must be done, both by Government and by other agencies, before the matter will be receiving attention commensurate with its importance. In view o f the high rural birth rate the existence o f rural poverty as a factor in determining the future course o f our population and hence o f our Nation should be kept constantly before us. As a representative o f the rural pattern of life and speaking for the Department o f Agriculture, I want to say that we appreciate deeply the opportunity to join with people from the cities and from other Government agencies in undertaking this evaluation o f our chil dren’s situation. The convening o f this Conference under the leader ship o f the President o f the United States is an event o f Nation-wide importance. On behalf of agriculture, I extend to you all a hearty greeting and express the confidence that the results o f your efforts will be regarded in years to come as o f historic importance. Remarks by Josephine R oche Chairman, The Interdepartmental Committee to Coordinate Health and W elfare Activities In the General Report before us for discussion two sentences seem tp me to sum up the objectives which we are discussing and which we intend to realize. A t the first meeting of the Conference on April 26, 1939, President Roosevelt said: “Democracy must inculcate in its children capaci ties for living and assure opportunities for the fulfillment o f those capacities.” Near the end o f the report we find: “ Secure family life is the foundation o f individual happiness and social well-being.” https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, January 18-820,191fi 33 Between these two sentences are pages closely packed with evidence well known to us and very effectively repeated in this report, o f the conditions o f life, the insecurities, the denials, and the destruction o f human values which continue to be the lot o f countless American families today. The report brings this before us in no uncertain terms. It brings us to the brink and it forces us again to face the wide and deep chasm which stretches between the realities o f today and what America’s democracy at its birth pledged to all its people—equal opportunity to all and special privilege to none. I think it is very fitting and very fortunate that the conditions which persist today, conditions which this report outlines and con ditions which stubbornly go on threateningly in violation o f democ racy’s commitment, are being presented to us in terms o f their effect upon childhood and youth; for whatever society as a whole experi ences, whatever it is denied or whatever it gains, always is tellingly registered upon us in terms o f its results for children and young boys and girls. And today, if these objectives that we are discussing are to be realized, every citizen must be stirred to action and kept in action. It has been pointed out frequently in the discussions that many o f the objectives that we have in mind can be realized through individual effort, through community effort, through cooperation between indi viduals and communities, through wider information and education. But I think all o f us realize that the conditions outlined in this report—these conditions which continue to violate democracy’s com mitments—are basically Nation-wide economic inequalities, deeprooted and serious. They can be overcome and eliminated only as an aroused and determined citizenry prevails upon its government, Federal, State, and local, to take courageous and constructive leadership, to accept its obligation for carrying out the responsibilities of government through conservation o f our resources. I see no conflict in these two points o f view, because democracy’s government is only the people themselves speaking and acting through their self-chosen form o f organization. And I think that only as we keep this in mind can we proceed effectively toward the goals that we have outlined. Con tinuing progress is the birthright of all our citizens today and the birthright o f our children who will be the citizens o f tomorrow. And only as we keep this very definite responsibility clearly in mind and uppermost in our hearts, can we make sure and swift advance on any o f these many fronts of child welfare which we are discussing and acting upon during this Conference. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 34 Proceedings o f the White House Conference D iscussion1 In outlining the procedure for discussion o f the General Report by Conference members, the chairman suggested that there should be brief discussion o f the report as a whole, its general plan and direction and its general conclusions, before beginning discussion o f the detailed sections. Suggestions were made by several members relating to points which should be emphasized especially and to rewording or expan sion o f ideas in the General Report. The suggestion was made by Sanford Bates that the report as presented tended to “make things out worse than they are” and that “in our defense o f a democratic system we should not publish and approve statistics which give people across the sea the oppor tunity to say that democracy is a failure. * * * In this report we should have statistics which will enable us to maintain our con viction that democracy is working and that democracy not only is succeeding materially but is helping to bring a wider culture to our young people today.” A t the request o f the chairman, Mr. Folks commented upon the types o f suggestions which came from the group discussions o f the preceding afternoon and upon the general nature o f the changes and decisions by the Report Committee as incorporated in the Gen eral Report now presented to the Conference for discussion. He said that the most prevalent type o f suggestion from the groups con sisted o f changes in wording without change o f substance, or slight rearrangement o f the material, and that it was assumed that the Conference would entrust the Report Committee with a certain de gree o f editorial freedom in completing the revision o f the report, without submitting to the Conference questions which do not involve any change in substance. Nothing came from any section, Mr. Folks said, which called for a recommendation or a statement that was contrary to any recommendation or statement contained in the pre liminary draft o f the report which was sent out to members in ad vance o f this meeting, but there were many modifications and proposed additions. Mr. Folks stated that the Report Committee devoted much time to consideration o f comments by different groups that their respective subjects had not received adequate space in proportion to other subjects. The remedy usually suggested was to incorporate more material from the topical reports into the General Report. This o f fered real difficulties because the topical reports are to be used only 1 Dr. Henry F. Helmholz, a vice chairman of the Conference, presided. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, January 18-£0,191fi 35 after further detailed study by the Report Committee. Considera tion was given to the practicability o f putting into the General Report the material which the various sections wished to have included, without throwing the whole report out o f harmony with other sec tions. The Report Committee, in the main, acceded to a considerable degree to requests for insertion o f additional material. In accordance with the procedure which had been agreed upon for discussion, consideration by the Conference o f each section of the report began with a brief summary by the executive secretary o f the changes made by the Report Committee the preceding eve ning, as a result of the recommendations of the groups which dis cussed the topical statements during the preceding afternoon. This was followed by presentation o f the range o f subject matter o f the section under discussion. After general discussion, the Conference took formal action on the changes proposed in each section. The first topic, The Child in the Family, was divided into four sections: The Family as the Threshold of Democracy, Families and Their Incomes, Families in Need o f Assistance, and Families and Their Dwellings. This topic was presented by Harry L. Lurie, executive director, Council o f Jewish Federations and Welfare Funds. H arry L. L urie. Ladies and gentlemen, I want first to pay trib ute to the general excellence o f the Conference report and to the supplementary topical statements. These documents are notable for their clarity o f expression and for their moderation. The section on family life and the child is especially pertinent. The problems that are cited are obvious but they are fundamental. And we know that fundamental questions are always the most controversial and the most difficult to define. What are the important findings o f this section? They are, briefly, that a large proportion o f Americanvchildren live under conditions o f poverty and inadequate standards o f living; that we have made considerable progress in relieving these condi tions, but it is not enough. Extension o f Federal support for State and local programs o f assistance is imperative. The general relief measures o f States and localities need Federal support. Socialinsurance programs need to be completed. Work-relief programs for the unemployed extend only to a fraction o f the able-bodied jobless. They must be enlarged. To protect the incomes o f large sections o f our working population we need more adequate and comprehensive minimum-wage standards and legislation to safeguard labor organizations. Beyond that, there is the general need for organizing our economic processes so that our country, rich in re https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 36 Proceedings o f the W hite House Conference sources, can make decent standards o f living available to all o f its population. A large-scale low-cost housing program is advocated. As you see, there is nothing novel nor radical about these pro posals. In each instance they are merely the next steps to be under taken in the present program o f services along lines that the majority o f Americans have fully endorsed. As the report recognizes, the main question that confronts us is whether we can extend the fundamental principles o f democracy to achieve more satisfactory lives for our children. What ways are open to us? What is the outlook for the attainment by public opinion o f “greater economic understanding and social insight,” as the report suggests? What is this lag in public understanding that obstructs fulfillment o f the program ? W e can state the basic question in terms o f concrete political issues. That is, in terms o f tax problems, fiscal resources available for Government purposes, and the controversial matter o f balancing the budget. Extension o f social-welfare programs in which we all believe raises all these questions. No one is openly opposed to achieving social welfare, but agreement on these basic economic ques tions has not been secured. W e cannot blink the fact that they remain unsettled political questions. I f those who believe in the reduction o f Government expenditures and welfare measures and who favor so-called business policies are sincere,, the justification for their program lies in their belief, fal lacious as it may be, that by means o f conservative economic policies the welfare o f our population in the long run can be more effectively secured. Assuming that this view is correct, may we not reasonably ask why it is necessary to achieve social-welfare aims by indirection? Why not proceed directly to solve our problems o f poverty by extending those measures that have demonstrated their utility? It has been proved that public-welfare measures can provide economic assistance, jobs for the unemployed, social security in a more or less satisfactory manner. Whatever limitations there are exist not in thei measures themselves but in their inadequacies, their lack o f coverage, their low standards. The only valid criticism is that they shift our eco nomic problems into a different sector. That is to say, we exchange our poverty problems for fiscal and tax problems. But why not? I should like to advance thel thesis that we defer experimenting with economic processes until after we have provided for the security o f our population. I believe that we shall find that some o f the problems that now seem so difficult have solved themselves in the process. We shall have stimulated purchasing power and produc https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Dem ocracy, January 18- 20, 191f i 37 tion to meet the needs o f the population. W e shall have at least found workable expedients to relieve human ills. This is our theoretical justification for endorsing and defending tiie very moderate proposals advanced by this report. Let me also point out that we have gone a considerable way in this direction through the enactment and development o f our publicwelfare services. W e have followed the mandates o f the majority and we have had the acquiescence, if not the good will, o f other groups. There has been some redistribution o f national income through taxation. In large measure we have paid for our social welfare by borrowing and by increasing Government debt. The pecuniary in terest o f investors who prefer low-interest-bearing Government se curities to alternative risks for capital and savings in private invest ments has led them into the financing o f public welfare. They could not make any better investment in democracy. W hy not continue to act vigorously along the same lines ? The end result may be that we shall be facing some difficult ques tions o f Government finance, but at least we shall in the process have preserved the well-being o f our children. W e can then face with greater freedom the questions o f adjusting our American system o f agricultural and industrial protection so that it functions within a Nation primarily concerned with the social welfare o f all elements o f the population. The cure for poverty is the provision o f income through work, in surance, or relief, and not the fanciful illusions o f tax reducers, relief manipulators, or addicts o f less government in business. Let me repeat again that there is sufficient time to experiment with new economic formulas after we have provided social security. There is one specific recommendation in the report that we might examine carefully in this discussion, since it can serve as an excellent index to the underlying theories and temper o f the report in general. A large-scale low-cost housing project is suggested. This is a reason able proposal not only for the improvement o f living standards, but, indirectly, for its effect on general economic factors. Large-scale home building for the lowest-income groups would provide an opportunity for Government cooperation, private capital, and private initiative. It is o f interest to note that this suggestion does not propose to eliminate private initiative in home construction. The political questions posed by this and other sections of the report are involved with an important time element. W e see totalitarian states and dictatorships establishing ruthless programs because men have lost faith in the democratic process. There are always at hand unprincipled groups or individuals ready to exploit the moral weak https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 38 Proceedings o f the White House Conference nesses of a population that has lost faith in its basic institutions. We in this democracy abhor the destruction of human values under these reactionary systems. In its modest way the Conference report has an alternative to sug gest—moderate, simple proposals well within the limits of our economic resources and our political processes. It offers conclusions that are inescapable in any honest survey o f the needs o f children in our democracy. Among the points brought out by the discussion from the floor were the desirability o f giving further emphasis to the family as the central point in the preparation o f children for responsible citizenship in a democracy and the importance o f strengthening the family. It was suggested that something should be included in the report in regard to parent education. Dr. Richard A. Bolt suggested that something should be said about the effects o f alcohol on the family from an economic, social, religious, and moral standpoint. The chairman requested Dr. Bolt to prepare a short statement on this subject for presentation later in the day. There was discussion of the practicability o f trying to define, in terms o f the psychology o f family training, what can be brought into the lives o f children through the way in which the family is conducted. It was suggested that emphasis should be given to the quality of lead ership which parents should exercise in promoting the security and the physical and mental health of their children but that discussion of theoretical adjustments relating to family life and particular philoso phies o f experimentation may lead into a field that is not desirable. It was pointed out that “ the values inherent in the family are the same values that we are really seeking in a democracy” and that “ if we are going to give material security, it is just as essential to teach children habits o f industry and thrift as to give them food and shelter.” The motion for adoption by the Conference o f the section on The Family as the Threshold o f Democracy was put to a vote and carried. The subject of Families and Their Incomes was introduced by Isador Lubin, Commissioner, Bureau of Labor Statistics, United States Department of Labor. I sador L tjbin. After looking over your committee’s report one must come to the conclusion that the drafters gave attention to every possible factor which has a bearing upon the income of the American family. I think they have done a remarkable job in depicting what the standard o f living in the American family is and in emphasizing the extent to https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Dem ocracy , January 18- 20, 191f i 39 which our families do not have sufficient income to meet certain basic requirements o f a healthy, developing, decent, constructive life. I should like to discuss the section o f the report which deals with employment and unemployment. I do this deliberately because I feel that a conference o f this sort should go on record in more detailed fashion than this report apparently does relative to the problem of employment and its relationship to income. In other words, as I read the unemployment section I get the impression that the job ahead of us is simple, that all that is needed is public works, a works program, and that then everything will be taken care of. Now, no one will deny that for the immediate future, at least, the volume o f unemployment will be large. But, after all, let us bear in mind that unemployment in the United States has always been large— never, o f course, o f the magnitude o f the past 5 or 6 or 7 years. Never theless, it has always been great. And unemployment has always been a very important factor in making it impossible for our workers’ families to secure the income that they ought to have. Industry in America has never operated regularly in the sense that year after year it has maintained given levels o f unemployment. W e have always had marked fluctuations from year to year and cyclically. As industry is operated in this country and as it is operated through out the western world, it has never given regular employment to its workers in the sense that from month to month they were regularly on the pay roll. Our system o f private enterprise and the competitive system have led to hundreds o f thousands o f bankruptcies in our industrial order. These have caused unemployment. In any growing society, particularly a society that has been grow ing as fast as ours in the scientific field, technology has played a tremendously important part and probably will continue to do so. This also brings unemployment. I think one thing that this report says—that there has been a gratify ing improvement in business employment—is something that we may all be delighted with. And I think that the problem we have to face is how far industry will absorb those people who will be available for work during the next few years. And please note that I did not say “ unemployed” ; I said “those who will be available for work.” I think we ought to make a very definite distinction between those who are unemployed and those who are available for work. The man who works in a cotton mill that is shut down for inventory, or that is shut down for repairs, or that is shut down because o f a seasonal lack o f orders is not available for work in the sense that if somebody came along and offered him a job he would take it. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 40 Proceedings, o f the W hite House Conference He is waiting for and expects the mill in which he has been working to reopen. In fact, if he took a new job when the mill shuts down seasonally he would not be available when the mill had orders and could offer employment to its workers. That is one o f the prices we pay for a system o f free enterprise such as ours. Furthermore, one o f the things that we should mention in this report is the place that unemployment insurance can be made to play in providing for the people who, although unemployed, are not available for jobs. I think also that something might well be said about either extending the period o f unemployment compensation or increasing the benefits. Those who have studied the problem tell me this can be done without increasing the premium rates or the tax rates for unemployment insurance. Again, bear in mind that day after day something in excess o f a half-million people in this country are not available for work, al though employed, because o f illness. * I think they should be taken into consideration in trying to find means for increasing the income o f the American wage earner’s family. I think it is fair to say that once we have reached the stage where 500,001 new people are employed each year the number of unemployed will decrease faster than employment rises. Let me give you a concrete illustration. There are hundreds o f thousands of families in this country in which two or three persons are today unemployed and willing to take jobs. But if the father could get a job at a fairly good rate o f wages those persons would automatically disappear from the ranks o f the unemployed in the sense that the youngsters would go back to school. The reason is obvious. The father could afford to keep them in school, or the mother would cease seeking employment because o f the fact that there were other sources o f income for the family. Industry must absorb 500,000 new persons each year i f the number o f unemployed is not to rise, that number being the approximate net addition to the working population resulting from youngsters becoming o f working age. Beyond that point, with a rapidly increas ing employment roll, I think it is fair to assume that the rate of decline in employment would be faster than the rate o f increase in employment. Again, there are many people in this country who are unemployed but not available for work because o f the fact that we have failed in our job o f training our people in a way which would make it possible for them to take the types o f jobs that become available. That becomes very important in a few industries in the United States, in which because o f prevailing circumstances it is difficult to https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Dem ocracy, January 18-&0, 19Jfi 41 obtain properly trained people. Certain types o f skill are not ex istent in sufficient volume to meet the needs o f our industries. Industry has failed in its job because it did not want to undertake the cost of training people for future needs. The Government has failed in the job, and the school systems have failed in the job in the sense that they have not assumed that responsibility. There are various reasons for the failure to assume that responsibility. But I do not wish to go into them at the present moment. Frankly, I think that the attention of the American public should be called to the fact that public works in itself will not solve the problem o f unemployment, but that public works plus A , plus B, plus C, plus D, must all be used i f we are to create a situation in this country in which we will at least have the minimum amount o f unemployment consistent with the way industry operates under our system o f free enterprise. I think the report should specifically tie up the various factors which should be emphasized in attacking the problem—public works, changes in the unemployment-insurance system, the extension of old-age annuities, thereby making it possible for people to retire from industry at an earlier age, and child-labor legislation—this being a child-labor conference. The Federal Government, so far as inter state industries are concerned, has limited the age o f employment to 16; but there are still many States which permit the employment o f children of much younger ages. The whole problem o f vacations with pay has a way of tiding over seasonal unemployment and is very much worth while considering. W e have only made a beginning on it in this country. A t Geneva the problem has been discussed very fully at the International Labor Organization. There is no reason why the practice of giving people vacations with pay at periods when industry cannot give them full employment should not be emphasized. I think the whole question o f technology and its effects should also be mentioned in discussing the income o f the American family. Some plants in this country have developed a system o f dismissal wages. When a new machine is put in they try to time the instal lation o f the machine so that nobody will lose his job. In some in stances where people may lose their jobs a very large dismissal wage, sufficient to tide them over a period o f time, has been put into effect. But those instances are rare. There is no reason why that burden should not be borne in part by the employer because o f the lower cost o f production by the machine, in part by the stockholders, and even in part, I think, by the consumers. Another thing that I think might be worth while mentioning in the report is the part that industry itself can play in eliminating https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 42 Proceedings o f the W M te House Conference so-called seasonal changes in employment. I suppose one would be looked upon as terribly orthodox and behind the times in raising once again the question that we discussed in 1926, 1927, and 1928: What can we do within a given year to regularize the employment o f the workers within the individual plant? We seem to have for gotten the minor segments of the picture because o f the fact that the larger problem has been confronting us. Finally, I should like to say one thing—and I am quite sure my colleague on the T. N. E. C., Mr. Leon Henderson, will agree with m e: So far as the economic system is concerned “there is still a lot o f life in the old gal.” I should not like to see this Conference give the impression to outsiders that we are in a situation in which the policy o f despair predominates. There is a very big job still to be done in the United States, even i f we are to get the output o f industry up to the point where the per capita output is equal to what it was in the last decade. We ended the year 1938 with 9^> billion dollars less housing in existence in this country than 10 years ago. Deterioration, fire, and other elements have been playing their part. There is a terribly big job to do in the housing field. Our railroad system is still to be adjusted to modern, high-speed transportation. There are still hundreds o f thousands, if not mil lions, o f farmers who are quite a distance away from fairly good roads. There are dozens o f fields that are still untouched in this country, not in terms o f new industries but in modernizing our standards o f living and our methods o f doing things. I feel very definitely that although there may be a fairly large problem o f unemployment which must be met and provided for and anticipated by the Government, the problem itself is not one that is not solvable. The job is here to be done. The question is how we can provide the stimuli for getting the job done o f seeing that so many o f our people will not remain unemployed. Among the points brought out in the discussion were the follow ing: <{W e must expect private enterprise to fluctuate because it is based on selfish interests and the profit to be derived. I f we cannot look for stability and dependability o f employment as it is developed in our public enterprises, where can we look for the steadying factor in employment?” It was stated that this point would be reconsidered by the Report Committee. “ W e should recognize that no matter what happens we are still going to have the problem o f many unemployed young people, and https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Dem ocracy, January 18-&0, 191ft 43 we are not going to absorb them in private industry no matter how good business becomes. A t the present time there are many natural resources which can be developed without competition with private industry; there are many services which are not being given and which can be developed by governmental agencies.” Dr. Edwin E. Witte, chairman, Department o f Economics, Uni versity o f Wisconsin, commented on the section relating to. families and their incomes. E dwin E. W itte. A s chairman o f the Conference group dealing with economic resources of families and communities I want to call attention to this section o f the report. There are two committees that ¡are very closely related, the group dealing with economic resources o f families and communities and the one dealing with eco nomic aid to families. A great many o f the suggestions that have been made are dealt with in the report on economic aid and very appropriately belong there. A great many more are discussed in the topical report on economic resources. I question whether we can give adequate treatment to the big problem o f unemployment. Any method by which we might be able to cope with that problem would take the entire 50 pages, which Chairman Folks has suggested as about the limit o f what the General Report should be. Consequently, in the 2 or 3 pages which are at our disposal for this portion o f the report, very little more can be done than to state the problem. The group that met yesterday afternoon had the same feeling which was expressed here today by nearly all the speakers, if not all o f them; first, the feeling that Dr. Lubin so well expressed, that we in this democracy, at the zero hour o f democracy in the world, do not need to feel very apologetic, even at this time, when our record o f the past 10 years is one o f great trouble. I think the great majority o f us in this audience will agree that the United States has done as well as or better than any o f the totalitarian countries. The other feeling of our group was that only the Government’s part was mentioned in the report. There was no mention whatsoever o f private employment and the responsibility o f private industry. Yet in the economic system under which we live the great majority o f the people obviously must find their employment in private industry. Consequently, we sent a suggestion to the committee, and we think the committee has incorporated a statement to the effect that this problem is one which must be tackled by the Government and by industry, that everything cannot be done through a works program. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 44 Proceedings o f the W hite House Conference In stressing public works, as the original report did, we had in mind that there is probably great danger that we may lose the works program, that we do need to emphasize that there are millions o f Americans who will have no work in the years to come unless it is provided through a works program. And, at the same time, we felt that it is very necessary to empha size the responsibility o f business and the fact that the Gov ernment alone cannot solve this problem o f unemployment without the cooperation o f business, and that we must have in mind these measures for improving conditions in private employment and in making it possible for private employment to function as we all want it to function. Accordingly, Madam Chairman, I make the motion on behalf of our group that this part o f the report be adopted, with such changes as the Report Committee may deem necessary, to make mention of other methods besides public works through which government may help in this great problem o f unemployment, and to stress further, if the committee deems it necessary, the responsibility o f industry and measures for helping industry to assume that responsibility. The section on Families and Their Incomes was adopted by the Conference. Conditions resulting from absence o f Federal grants-in-aid for direct relief, the inadequacy o f the home-relief program in many places throughout the country, and the difficulties which result from curtailment o f the W . P. A. program were stressed in the discussion on Families in Need o f Assistance. The discussion included com ments in regard to the need for maintaining the Federal works pro gram, administration o f “ categorical” assistance, and related prob lems, and the problem o f increase and extension o f benefits under unemployment compensation. The following extended comments were made : Msgr. J ohn O ’G rady, secretary, National Conference o f Catholic Charities. The danger that we face at the present time is that of losing our works program or having it greatly reduced. I think that is one o f the most immediate and concrete issues with which we are faced; that is, there is a danger that this works program may be reduced out o f all proportion to the need therefor. This is a realistic problem for social workers, if they are really interested, as is claimed in these reports, in providing a continuing works program on a Federal basis. I am in disagreement with regard to the recommendation on grants-in-aid for relief. This is not an issue at the present time. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, January 18-&0,191$ H 45 The issue is whether we are going to have a works program on a Federal basis or whether we are going to turn the whole thing back to the States. That is the practical issue before the people. I f we are interested in a constructive American program, the thing for us to do is to work on the practical issues that are before us. I think the practical issues are, first, to hold our works program and develop it this winter. W e need to bring all o f the forces to bear upon the Congress that we can in order to retain the works program and to keep it up to the standards that should be maintained in order that we may be able to provide employment. The works pro gram has not been everything that it should be, but we can make it do the things that it should do. W e will never do that by holding out the cheaper methods, by lending comfort to those who are really opposed to a works program. Therefore, I disagree. And, if I am just a minority of one, I want to cast my vote against this recommendation that we should have grantsin-aid for Federal relief. We would better make this grants-in-aid system work in the categories before we begin to extend it to the whole field. I am not so sure about the desirability of going into any more grants-in-aid. W e may find some other way out o f it through an extended works program. I am not so sure, when I see what has been happening in hundreds o f counties in the past 2 years, that the grants-in-aid system is anything else at the present time than a cheaper method o f taking care of our people. I think the second practical problem with which we are faced is the improvement o f the standards and the extension o f aid under the category forms of aid, under aid to dependent children, and under old-age assistance. These are unsolved problems. We need a sliding scale in grants-in-aid. W illiam H odson, commissioner of public welfare of the City of New York. May I move the adoption of this section of the report on behalf o f the committee ? And may I say just a word with respect to the deliberations o f the committee ? May I make as clear as it is possible for me to do, without res ervation and without equivocation o f any kind, that the section» which discussed this report, all its members and its chairman, believe fully and completely in the W . P. A. program, and that nothing in this recommendation by word or deed or implication was intended to limit or to restrict or to change in the slightest measure, except hopefully upward and with more appropriations, the W . P. A. pro gram in the United States o f America. I f I have not made that clear I have completely failed my group. They are insisting that the present W. P. A. program be continued. • 262205°— 40- https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 4 46 Proceedings o f the W hite House Conference They are not suggesting any changes, in terms of allocation or other wise to the States, with respect to the W . P. A. program, and they hopefully look forward to the time when the W. P. A. program may be expanded to include all o f the employables who are now on relief. And, Madam Chairman, as evidence of the intention of the group to leave no possible doubt on this question, you will observe that the section as read provides, first o f all, for a statement with respect to the W. P. A. and then concludes with the recommendation that sup plementary thereto and in addition thereto there should be grantsin-aid for direct relief. Now, may I come more directly to the practical question which has been stated by Dr. O’Grady. Is it practical to say that because you believe the Federal Govern ment should adopt an additional responsibility you are thereby arguing that it should give up a responsibility which it has already accepted and assumed in a very substantial measure? Let us bear in mind what the situation in this country is where there are not grants-in-aid for direct relief. Do I have to call your attention to certain States and to certain cities? I will not mention them here, but I suppose the members o f this group are perfectly aware o f the inadequacy o f the home-relief program in the United States. And I think the members o f this group are aware o f the fact that in many places throughout the country where there have been grants-in-aid for the categorical programs the same inadequacies do not exist. May I call attention to the fact that, as I understand it, the present appropriation for the W . P. A. means a cut o f at least one-third in the present allocation o f funds to the States throughout the country ? While we are talking about practical considerations let us face that fact and let us face those consequences, which are that when there is a cut in the W. P. A. program and when Congress has reduced its appropriations and effected an economy program, who takes the backwash? The States and the localities. Do they get reimburse ment? No. Would Congress be equally prepared to reduce the W. P. A. appro priations if at the same time it had to assume responsibility for those persons who are dropped from the W. P. A. and who are picked up by the local relief authorities and become a charge upon the States and the localities ? I think I express the opinion of the group over which I presided when I say to you that in their belief there is no justification whatso ever for saying that the Federal Government will participate with the States and localities on old-age pensions, on blind relief, and so forth ; that it will assume responsibility for W. P. A .; but that when it comes to direct relief there is some strange, sinister bar. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, January 18—20,19Ifi 47 I do not speak for the social workers here today, but I am proud to be one o f their members. I think the social workers of this country are professionally concerned about the needs of the unemployed and o f the destitute. I believe the social workers o f this country are heart and soul behind the W . P. A. program. They do not want us to take any action which will in any wise reduce or harmfully affect the exist ing program o f W . P. A. They would like to see that program continued. Now, may I say that it becomes an exceedingly difficult thing for the States and the localities to object to relief expenditures when they have those tremendous unknown factors! in the picture w'hich is W . P. A., with no possibility that the Federal Government will share in the results o f the economy program ? How can the localities object to larger relief expenditures when thousands and hundreds o f thousands are dropped by reason of Congressional action to the effect that anyone on W . P. A. for 18 months can no longer be carried on that program? I f we here in this Conference are going to adopt principles o f action which look toward a stabilized program with some measure o f planning, with an opportunity for all levels o f government to plan their programs in advance and to budget their expenditures in advance, I think it is fair to say that the unknown and uncertain factors in the picture must be eliminated as rapidly as possible; and one way to do that is to agree that a program should be adopted which includes an over-all participation by the Federal Government in all forms o f public assistance. As to the point raised by Dr. O’Grady with respect to the question of reimbursement to the localities based upon the needs o f the States rather than upon some formula which treats all States equally, I want to say that I should like to have an opportunity to discuss that phase of the report further with the Report Committee along the lines suggested by Dr. O ’Grady. The motion for adoption o f the section on Families in Need o f Assistance was put to a vote and carried. It was reported that problems relating to migrants and transients were touched upon by several discussion groups. A statement was presented to the Report Committee by Dr. Ellen C. Potter, pro posing that the report be strengthened with reference to this subject and making a specific recommendation. The Report Committee, after carefully considering all phases of the problem and the sug gestions that had been received, decided to develop a separate section dealing with the problems o f migrant families and their children. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 48 Proceedings o f the W hite Rouse Conference. The committee came to this conclusion because it recognized that the problems o f migrant families cut across all subjects dealt with in the report, and it therefore asked authority o f the Conference to insert a section on Children in Migrant Families and to incorporate in it a definite recommendation that appropriate agencies o f the Federal Government undertake to study the problem further and to develop and carry out plans for meeting it. The section on Families and Their Dwellings was adopted without detailed discussion. The chairman stated that for purposes o f discussion Keligion in the Lives o f Children, Schools, Leisure-Time Services, and Libraries were included in one general division. Discussion was introduced by Helen Hall, director, Henry Street Settlement. H e l e n H a l l . I should like to start by pointing out what I should particularly commend in the educational section o f the report. 1. Units of local school attendance and administration should be enlarged wherever necessary in order to broaden the base o f financial support and to make possible a modern well-equipped school for every child at a reasonable per capita cost. 2. Substantial financial assistance should be granted by every State to its local school systems for the purpose of equalizing tax burdens and reducing educational inequalities. 3. An extended program o f Federal financial assistance to the States should be adopted in order to reduce inequalities in educational opportunity among States. This seems enormously significant to all o f us. It makes me think o f a visit that I made accidentally to a little place not far from Washington a few years ago, where there was a good deal of excite ment because the school for the first time in 2 years had opened and was going to be kept open for 3 months. Previously it had never been open for more than 3 weeks. I think that each child there was obviously in need o f some kind o f physical care. The teacher was very much excited because of the fact that she had the children for so long a time. Some o f the children had walked 3 miles over the mountains in order to get there. I wrote to Miss Lenroot and asked her if she would look into the situation. Miss Lenroot wrote to the State Board o f Education and the board answered that the situation existed because that section o f the country was too poor to afford better schooling. So it drove home to me the significance o f those first three sections o f the report. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Dem ocracy, January 18-&0, 191f i 49 Leisure time—or free time or voluntary time—is enormously sig nificant in the education and development o f the child* Our thought is that the development o f constructive use o f leisure time should be recognized as a public responsibility. W e feel that is a step forward. Steps should be taken in a community by public and pri vate agencies to provide local recreational facilities and services and to plan systematically to meet the present inadequacy. After all, although there is not enough planning for education and health, there is infinitely less community planning for the leisure time o f our children. I think that it is o f great importance to have this Conference go on record as stating that such planning is significant and necessary. In the religious section I should like to see more stress laid on example as well as on precept. It seems to me the young people o f today are translating “ I am not my brother’s keeper” into their social concepts. I know when anyone mentions what the churches are doing it is with the greatest satisfaction that I am able to point to men like Bishop McConnell and Rabbi Wise and other leaders in the formation o f social action, who typify the ventures that the churches have before them. It seems to me that libraries should be emphasized, because with the radio coming into the home reading will be a lost art in 20 years unless books are brought to the rural sections. It was reported that the group which dealt with Religion in the Lives o f Children urged the Report Committee to consider putting into the General Report the recommendations o f the topical report as revised by the group, and the Report Committee recommended that this should be done. The chairman o f the Conference com mented upon the fact that “this is the first time in the conferences on children in the United States, beginning in 1909, that the Con ference has considered religion as a part o f children’s lives” and that “ whatever may have been implied in the purposes and motives o f individuals and o f groups and associations in their willingness to serve the interests o f children has never been expressed as part o f a religious conception.” Rabbi Edward L. Israel, of the Har Sinai Congregation, Balti more, Md., chairman o f the discussion group on Religion and Chil dren in a Democracy, moved the adoption o f this section as submitted by the Report Committee. Rabbi E dward L. I srael. I hesitate to make any comments on the report because in one o f the most debatable sections o f the report yesterday everything was all right until one of us decided to make a comment, and then that which we thought was perfectly https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 50 Proceedings o f the W hite House Conference clear from a reading o f the report became decidedly obscure. That is the way theologians work, it seems. Therefore, I hesitate to in ject dense and dark clouds into this discussion by any comment. However, I will say this, that I think this is rather historical, inasmuch as it is the first time that religion has been faced as a factor, in the same detail, o f the cultural equipment o f man in a democracy. Nevertheless, there were many things on which we had to make certain compromises. Therefore, we did not commit ourselves to theological expressions, which would have opened up the subjects to discussion, and we did not go as far as we should like to have gone along certain lines because, in the first place, we realized that we judged the situation from a rather highly specialized point of view. First o f all, i f we have given any impression that religion exists in the minds o f any o f us for the sake o f democracy, let that be obliterated. I think the topical portion o f the report brings out clearly that religion is an attitude o f man, regardless o f the type o f government under which he lives. Nevertheless, it is our contention that religion has always dealt primarily with the problem o f how the individual can express him self as an individual and that the fundamental problem in democracy today is how, with the necessity of the development of governmental functions, we can have those functions o f a cooperative society expressed, at the same time preserving the individual values. ^ Therefore, today, religion becomes uniquely a force in the preserva tion o f democracy. That was our contention, Madam Chairman, and that was the spirit o f the report. And in this spirit I move its adoption. Points brought out in the discussion included the desirability o f mentioning specifically the responsibility o f the home, as well as the church and other social organizations, for the religious growth o f older children and youth; and the desirability o f including in the topical report some material which could not be dealt with ade quately in the General Report. The section o f the report on Religion in the Lives o f Children was adopted by the Conference. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Afternoon Session— January 19 Discussion o f and A ction on the General R e p o rt1 Æÿ The first section taken up for consideration was Educational Serv ices. The executive secretary outlined the action taken by the Report Committee on the recommendations submitted by the discussion group on this subject, which pertained especially to the advisability o f transposing from the topical report into the General Report certain statements which were phrased differently in the two reports. Dr. William G. Carr made the following statement: “ The recom mendations refer to the larger unity o f educational administration, to State aid for lessening differences in educational opportunity within States, and to Federal funds to lessen unavoidable differences in educa tional opportunities among States. Given those three recommenda tions, it is probable that the other recommendations can be put into effect at an accelerated pace. Lacking those three recommendations, we must expect a considerable amount o f retardation in putting into effect the other recommendations.” Suggestions were made that the report should include recommenda tions for “ provision of adequate instruction in safety education for every child” and “ some reference to specialized vocational training in preparental education” and that there should be a definite recom mendation concerning the treatment o f defective eyesight, a factor affecting scholarship. The comment was made “ that the health program in most o f our schools has been the least effective of any o f the health programs put on in the community,” and that “we still have large numbers o f chil dren with defective vision, defective hearing, and at the present moment children in the lower strata of nutrition, about which nothing has been done.” It was suggested that there should be a specific statement regarding the responsibility of the school to see that im provement in this situation is effected, either by the school authorities themselves or by their making possible through the school resources the clinical and nutritional health services that should be available. The statement was made by Alice V. Keliher, chairman of the Commission on Human Relations o f the Progressive Education Asso ciation, that “ we have a tendency to consolidate schools all over the 1 Dr. Henry F. Helmholz, a vice chairman of the Conference, presided. 51 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 52 Proceedings o f the W hite House Conference country. Consolidation is neither good nor bad. Consolidation may be good for the children, the parents, and the community. It is bad where it removes children from their communities and makes it im possible for the kind of community education that has been described to go on.” It was urged that “the proposed program should not be accepted without differentiating between attendance units, tax units, and the administrative unit.” The statement was made that “ many teachers in the country have great difficulty making effective contacts with homes, knowing the parents, taking care o f health. Children eat cold, soggy lunches, and they go to school 15 miles by unsafe busses.” The suggestion was made that the larger units should be recommended where larger units are indicated, but that this must not be done indiscriminately. The Conference voted to adopt the section o f the report on Schools. It was reported that no changes were suggested with reference to the section on Libraries, except for one statement which needed clari fication. Ralph Munn, director of the Carnegie Library o f Pittsburgh, speaking for libraries, suggested that the recommendation regarding provision for special collections and personnel to serve children should not be limited to “ libraries in larger cities” ; even the very smallest o f libraries should have special collections and personnel for children. He suggested also the desirability o f adding a recommendation that provision should be made for research in library service to youth, to serve as a basis for determining policies and programs. The question was raised as to the reason for leaving out museums— “ they play a large part in the cultural life o f the Nation, and certainly the modern museum that takes its branches into the poorest districts does a grand job in education.” This question was left for consider ation by the Report Committee. The Conference voted to accept the section on Libraries. Presentation of the changes recommended by the Report Commit tee in the preliminary draft o f the report on Child Labor and Youth Employment was followed by a statement by Anne S. Davis, assistant chief o f the Division o f Women’s and Children’s Employment o f the Illinois State Department o f Labor. A nne S. D avis. I just want to emphasize, very briefly, the sig nificance o f the report on child labor and youth needs. Twenty years ago, when the second White House Conference was held, the recommendations relating to child labor presented for adop tion were essentially the same as the recommendations that are being https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Dem ocracy, January 18- 80, 19JJ) 53 presented here today. They provided for a 16-year age m in im u m for children entering full-time employment. As this report points out, only 12 States today have a 16-year age minimum for full-time employment. Gains have been made during the past 20 years in reducing child labor in this country, especially in the mills and factories and the mines, due in part to legislative enactment, both State and Federal, to widespread unemployment, to the improved school programs in many parts o f the country, and to technological changes in industry. But after we have made a recital o f these gains and the way in which child labor has been reduced, we are confronted with the fact that child labor still exists and that there is still a child-labor problem. There are many people in this country who believe that child labor is no longer a problem and many have the erroneous idea that the Fair Labor Standards Act o f 1938 has eliminated child labor. Yet it has been estimated that it has affected only 20 percent o f the children under 16 who were employed when the act became effective, and it applies, as you know, only to those industries which ship goods across State lines. However, it does give the Children’s Bureau power to raise the minimum age to 18 for industries which are considered hazardous. It is estimated that there are between 500,000 and 1,000,000 children who are still employed in this country. The exact figures cannot be given until the next census is completed, but thousands are employed in commercialized agriculture unregulated by State laws. Thousands more are employed in street trades, and there are only 20 States that have laws regulating the employment o f children in street trades and in the sale and distribution o f newspapers. Then there are many thousands in occupations that are intrastate in character. They are likely to be employed in offices, stores, garages, filling stations, and all the service industries, and these occupations may be just as detrimental to their health, to their physical development, and to their education as work in factories. Great inequalities still exist in the various States in the protection offered these children as to standards o f minimum age for entering employment, as to hours o f work, as to night work, and as to prohibi tion o f work in hazardous occupations. There are still at least 10 States in 1940 that permit children, no matter how young, to work in nonmanufacturing occupations, though some o f these States do set a minimum o f 14 for full-time employment. There are 25 States that permit young persons between 16 and 18 years o f age, regardless of their immaturity, to enter hazardous occupa tions. Yet statistics have shown that the accident rate for this age group is very high. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 54 Proceedings o f the W hite House Conference The children under 16 who are now employed in intrastate industries need protection just as much as children who are engaged in industries which ship goods across State lines. In a democracy all children should be given equal opportunity and protection. Initial responsi bility for legal regulation lies in the States but Federal action is a requisite in order to provide minimum standards below which no State may fall. The minimum standards proposed are not radical. They have been generally accepted as minimum in protective legislation for a number o f years. Their adoption would mean that if the children are kept in school until the age o f 16, the jobs now occupied by these children may go to the youth over that age who are not in school and who are not at work. The great problem today is to find a way o f putting to work the nearly 4 million youth under 25 years o f age who are now unemployed and who constitute one-third o f the total number o f unemployed in this country. The youth are getting into idle habits. Their ambi tions are being destroyed because they see no opportunity ahead. Their situation is so acute at this time that major attention should be given to national planning and Federal financing to provide work opportunities for the millions o f youth now unemployed. The Chairman stated that in view o f the close relationship o f pro tection against child labor and “ youth and their needs” the two sections would be considered together. Joseph Cadden, executive secretary, American Youth Congress, made a statement in regard to the programs o f the C. C. C. and the N. Y. A. J oseph C adden. Although at the present time it is possible that 300.000 young people could be enrolled in the C. C. C., the funds which have been appropriated by Congress are not sufficient to allow such a large enrollment; there has been a suggestion by the President that the enrollment be further cut during the next fiscal year. I should also like to point out that although we say that only one-fourth o f the young persons out o f school and out o f work are being aided by these constructive efforts, actually the figure is about one-tenth and not one-fourth. In addition, I think it would be important to mention here that 300.000 are being given aid by the W. P. A. O f course, this probably will not be true during the next fiscal year if the cut in the budget which has been proposed by the President goes through, because the young people on W. P. A. will be among the first to be cut off. I think that we must specifically say that, recognizing the value of the N. Y. A. and the inadequacy o f its current budget with which it reaches only 1 out o f 10 unemployed and out-of-school young people, https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Ohildren in a Dem ocracy, January 18- 20, 191^0 55 Congress should at least double the appropriation for the next fiscal year. The N. Y. A. is for young people from relief families. A very small percentage o f nonrelief young people are being helped by the N. Y. A., and it has now become very difficult for the millions, literally millions, o f young people who are not from relief families to find anywhere to fit into the Federal program o f youth aid. It seems that it is time for someone to take leadership in the fields o f social service, health, education, recreation, in fields where there will be thou sands o f opportunities for young people if they are given the training when the Federal Government is able to expand its services as is recommended in other sections o f this report. Mrs. Dorothy J. Bellanca, vice-president o f the Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America, called attention to the omission in the report o f mention o f the part that organized labor has played in help ing to eliminate child labor. She said: “ This is not a legislative body; this is not a body that can really enforce. It is a body that is recom mending, perhaps for the next 10 years, and if we cannot go far enough to recommend the complete elimination o f child labor during school periods, I think we have failed in our efforts. I appeal to this Conference to adopt this recommendation eliminating child labor during school periods.” In answer to a question as to the desirability o f setting a minimum age o f 16 “ for all employment during school hours or at any time in manufacturing or mining occupations” but permitting the minimum age o f 14 for limited periods after school hours and during vacations, Mrs. Bellanca replied: “ I am opposed to any exception for the child under 16 to work even after school, taking into consideration that we have half a million children under the age o f 16 who leave school and seek employment and also taking into consideration that we have 4 million youth unemployed who are seeking jobs and cannot get them.” It was moved and seconded to eliminate all exceptions and make a flat minimum age o f 16 years for all employment inside or outside school hours. This motion was voted down. It was suggested that there should be legislation which would make it compulsory for children under 18 years o f age either to be in school or at work or in some kind o f directed project. Discussion brought out the fact that the Report Committee felt that it was not wise to extend the period o f compulsory school attendance to 18, particularly ® vi^w o f the fact that a ^.ater recommendation on youth employment calls for the provision o f public work opportunities for all youth not in school who cannot obtain employment. Some members o f the com mittee thought that there were many children who would not benefit https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 56 Proceedings o f the W hite House Conference by any school programs available to them or that could be made avail able to them within the reasonably near future and that the existing programs o f education were not adapted to their needs and they would be better off at work. It was their hope that the public would accept responsibility for seeing that work was available to all these young people. It was pointed out that it was perhaps unrealistic to think that work could be made available to every young person who would not have voluntarily remained in school, but in reply it was reiterated that it would not be wise to require all between 16 and 18 to attend the ordinary schools. In view o f all the problems and difficulties, it was decided that the best that the Report Committee could do was to recommend to the Conference that there should be expression o f the obligation o f the community to provide schooling, but that the phrase relating to compulsory attendance should be omitted. After some discussion it was suggested that in the recommendation that Federal, State, and local governments should provide work proj ects for youth over 16, not in school, who cannot obtain employment, a recommendation should be included that the N. Y . A. and the C. C. C. be continued and extended. A n amendment to the recommendations was proposed, declaring in favor o f the immediate passage o f the proposed child-labor amendment to the Constitution. It was reported that the topical statement on Child Labor and Youth Employment includes the following: “Rati fication o f the proposed child-labor amendment by the eight States whose action is still required to make it a part o f the Constitution should be completed in order to provide protection for children em ployed in intrastate industries as well as those in interstate industries now covered by the Fair Labor Standards Act.” A motion to include in the General Report a recommendation favoring the immediate com pletion o f the ratification o f the child-labor amendment was put to a vote after some further discussion. The Conference voted in favor o f the motion. Emphasis was given to the importance of a tie-up between the public machinery of the employment service and the schools in the broad area o f guidance and placement, so that cooperative arrangements rather than competitive efforts might be encouraged in this field. It was voted to accept the sections on Child Labor and Youth Employment. In behalf o f the Report Committee, Grace L. Coyle, director o f the group-work course, School o f Applied Social Sciences, Western Re serve University, said that the Report Committee incorporated into https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis , , On Children in a Democracy January 18- 8,0 19Jfi 57 the General Report a statement suggested by the discussion group which gave a more adequate interpretation o f the development o f the use o f free time. The committee felt that the emphasis on play and recreation alone did not adequately represent the possibilities o f learn ing which come, not only through what is recognized by the child as play and recreation, but also through a great deal o f informal educa tion that goes on voluntarily in leisure-tune groups. The committee agreed also that the report needed additional emphasis in regard to the relation between public and private agencies, with special recog nition o f the place o f the private agency in this field. It was also de cided that consideration be given to the dominant place o f the new forms o f entertainment industry, particularly the radio and the movies and their effect upon children; those interested in children should have more part in the development o f programs which are influential in the development o f child life. Adoption o f this section was voted. Horton Casparis, M. D., professor o f pediatrics, School o f Medicine, Vanderbilt University, opened the discussion on Health and Medical Care for Children. H orton C asparis. There is one thing that I should like to empha size in this health section that I do not believe comes out quite so well as it should, and that is the fact that there have been tremendous ad vances in the promotion and restoration o f the health o f children. I do think it should be emphasized that much has been accomplished. Now, that does not mean that we do not have to go further, a great deal further. I happen to come from the starving South, and we did not know we were starving until someone called our attention to it. That simply means that people have to be taught to realize what con dition they are in. In my work with individual children in the groups with which we are concerned, I find that the problem is not merely a matter o f having better wages, more income, fo r these people. It is largely a matter also o f teaching them the components o f good health, o f welfare, and o f religion. As I say, we did not know we were starving until somebody told us. A lot o f the people that we deal with do not know, actually, what good health is until they are taught the components o f good health and are shown by demonstration that things can be better than they ever thought. Until they realize what good health is they are not going to have an appreciation o f better health, and i f they do not appreciate it I do not believe we can force it on them. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 58 Proceedings of the White House Conference W e can do a lot o f spraying from above and get them to absorb some health out o f this sprayed atmosphere; but on the other hand it seems to me that health and appreciation o f it have to be grafted into people through education, and that the most effective method o f education in the promotion o f health and in the restoration o f health is demonstration. That seems to be the way they learn to appreciate and learn to tell others about what good health is. I might say that there is one place where there is no unemployment and that is in the medical and nursing profession, among people well qualified to carry on this work. There is a marked scarcity o f well-qualified people, capable o f demonstrating modern methods o f promoting health and restoring health. The health o f people is not going to be any better than they want it to be. They are going to want it only through being shown the value o f it. The health care that people get is not going to be any better than the quality o f the personnel that gives it. That brings me to two points o f emphasis in the health section—which, by the way, I think has been done extraordinarily well and thoughtfully—and one o f them is that we need more knowledge. A s I said a while ago, we need to do research, not only to accumulate basic knowledge but also to find the methods o f using and disseminat ing this knowledge. And we need more qualified personnel to act upon this knowledge and spread it among the people. One o f our greatest defects in health care today is not lack o f knowl edge but lack o f use o f available knowledge, and that has to come through trained personnel if we expect to get anywhere. Now there is another point that I wish to emphasize. I think health is more or less a voluntary matter. It has to be wanted in connection with assistance through other measures. I do not deny that assistance is needed, but it has to be on a voluntary basis ; the health o f people cannot be any better than they want it to be, and they cannot get any more out o f life than they put into life. In the broad sense we are all children in a democracy, and adults have to see that, because the chil dren are going to get their ideas from the people who teach them, whether it is in the home or by the medical groups involved. The discussion included the follow ing points: Instead o f giving an estimate o f the number o f preventable maternal deaths, it would be better to say that “ a considerable portion o f these maternal deaths are preventable.” It would be desirable to place emphasis upon growth and development, so that the concept o f health w ill be more dynamic. It might be opportune to include in the report some reference to in struction in parenthood, not only for women but also for men. It https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis , On Children in a Democracy January 18-&0,191ft 59 was said that “ the report recognizes that there are certain deficiencies and wants them remedied as they can be remedied, and that means that we have to help as individuals and in our existing groups, as well as help by government.” The section on Health and Medical Care for Children was adopted by the Conference. It was reported that very few changes had been suggested in the draft o f the section on Social Services for Children. Material on set tlement laws and on proper care o f migrants cut across all categories o f help, and the Report Committee, therefore, decided to set up a sep arate section o f the report to show how the migrant problem cuts across all other sections, instead o f treating it under social services only. It was pointed out that it was necessary to condense the treatment o f social services into very small space and that, therefore, the question o f juvenile courts and delinquent children had to be dealt with in one paragraph. It was pointed out that the last White House Conference issued a volume on the delinquent child which is still germane and valuable and that a great many o f its recommendations have not yet been carried out. It was suggested that additional material from the topical statement on the subject o f the juvenile court and the treatment o f delinquency should be taken over into the General Report and that more detail should be given in the General Report regarding social services in connection with court action. The Conference adopted the report on Social Services fo r Children. Changes which had been made in the section on Children in Minority Groups in the preliminary draft o f the General Report were discussed. The discussion brought out the importance o f measures taken by the school and the community to give recognition to the valuable con tributions to American life made by the various nationality groups. It was said that “ the problem o f the second-generation child is partly due to the fact that he is often made to feel ashamed o f his parents and o f his cultural or racial group.” Emphasis was placed upon the desirability o f positive statements regarding treatment o f racial minorities. This section o f the report was adopted. No changes were suggested by the Report Committee in the section on Public Financing and Administration. It was stated that this sec https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 60 Proceedings of the White House Conference tion had been discussed with people in public administration. part o f the report was adopted by the Conference. This Richard A . Bolt, M. D., director, Cleveland Child Health Associa tion, made a motion with regard to inclusion in the report o f a state ment on the effects o f alcohol: “ Alcohol, taken in its various forms, is recognized as a potential as well as actual danger to the integrity o f the home, in its social, economic, and moral aspects, as well as to health. Its social uses by adolescents is likely to fix habits which disrupt fam ily life.” The motion was seconded by James Hoge Ricks, judge o f the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court, Richmond, Va., who made a statement including the follow ing: “ In the work in the juvenile and domestic-relations court, I find the use o f intoxicants seriously affects the life o f the child in many o f its phases. This is one o f the most serious problems o f fam ily life. The excessive use o f intoxicants by parents causes dire poverty in the home, physical neglect o f the children, and emotional and nervous disorders in them. It is not solely economic. The drinking man may work regularly at good wages but drink heavily over the week-end. * * * I think we should empha size the obligation o f the State to give our children a continuous pro gram o f education as to the harmful effects o f alcohol, and that the church should include such instruction periodically in its Sundayschool program.” The observation was made that we should “talk in terms o f temper ance and restraint and excessive use o f these things.” It was suggested that “ parent education w ill take up this matter without loading the general program o f this Conference with the minutiae o f detailed programs.” Other comments were as follow s: “ People who are inter ested in parent education are giving thoughtful attention to this pro gram ; it w ill appear in the parent-education programs that w ill grow out o f this Conference all over the country.” “ I understand fully the idea o f temperance in life, but alcohol and temperance do not go to gether.” “ Many accidents that occur on our public highways are due to this one feature. * * * This Conference should go on record as recognizing that alcohol is a danger in the fam ily, and if certain asso ciations are laying stress upon the importance o f this element in their programs this should be mentioned in the report o f the Conference.” It was moved that the subject be referred to the Report Committee fo r consideration. This motion was carried. The section o f the report on Call to Action was adopted by the Conference. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, January 18-80,191J) 61 The motion was made and seconded that the Conference adopt the report, as amended, as a whole, subject to editorial changes by the Re port Committee, and that the report be published as the General Report o f the W hite House Conference on Children in a Democracy. Sanford Bates, executive director, Boys’ Clubs o f America, Inc., returned to the subject which he had introduced earlier in the session, and made the follow ing m otion: “ It is the sense o f the meeting that the report be amended by the insertion at appropriate places o f state ments which will record the progress and the eminence o f the Am eri can, culturally, socially, educationally, and materially, in order that critics o f our system may have correct information, in order that our own people, and particularly our children, may not lose confidence in American democracy as a way o f life, and in order that we may be encouraged and reassured thereby to press on to greater and higher accomplishments.” A fter considerable discussion, emphasizing par ticularly the desirability o f having the report show progress that has been made in the United States, it was pointed out that insofar as this involves comparison with other countries there is very little informa tion available fo r exact measurement. The proposed amendment was rejected. The question o f adopting the Conference report as a whole was put to a vote. The report as a whole was adopted. 262205°— 40- -5 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Session at the White House—Jan uary 19 Opening Remarks by the Chairman o f the Conference Those o f you who have been meeting in this Conference for the last 2 days know how important have been the deliberations, the recom mendations, and the discussions which we have had together, and I think that I am right when I say to you and to the President that this Conference has been an example o f democracy in action. Embraced within this Conference are people o f all shades o f opinion and from all kinds o f background. There are people who come from every walk and every experience which American life offers to its citizens. So I think we are unusually proud o f the quality and char acter o f the deliberations and the discussions which we have had in these last 2 days, for we have been concentrating our experience and our knowledge upon the problems o f the child in American life. I sub mit that out o f the exercise o f the old democratic process o f debate, o f dispute, o f question, and o f attack, i f necessary, we have had a coming together o f minds, a sense o f the meeting o f minds, if you w ill, which is the essence o f Ajnerican democracy. In a country as large as this, we cannot hope to have the simple, elemental practice o f the town meeting, but we have had, I think, within this representative assembly, something that approaches the town meeting in its experience and in its expression o f its knowledge. This, I think, Mr. President, is a very significant and a very important contribution to the ways o f life in America in this year 1940, for i f we cannot find a way to meet each other’s minds and to meet each other’s objections we have lost the essence o f democracy. But in this Con ference I think we have found a way by which honest people, people o f good w ill, really can have a meeting o f the minds. W e have broken up into specialized groups for discussion o f special aspects o f the problems o f the child in American life in this year 1940, and we have recalled that this is not the first W hite House Conference on children—this is the fourth W hite House Conference on children. W e have reiterated and reaffirmed our faith in the recommendations o f the first and the second and the third W hite House Conference on the life o f children in America, and we have realized that insofar as we perform our duties and perform our functions with regard to children in America we are, perhaps, laying the basis o f a democratic society. 62 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, January 18-&0,194-0 63 This Conference tonight is a conference o f unusual importance and significance in American life. I want to remind you, Mr. President, that it is a conference in which we have recommended not only a few patterns and programs which might be useful if enacted into law and made the basis o f State or Federal action. It is important because it has recommended, also, a pattern o f life and a pattern o f procedure and development which can be lived by the people o f America, the parents, the teachers, the ministers, the recreation directors, the people o f the United States. And this is a citizens’ conference, Mr. President. This is a con ference in which the people o f the United States have, themselves, participated. That is why this deliberation is important and that is why it is really a picture and an aspect o f democracy in action—the people o f the United States meeting together, not in this case through elected representatives but through a group o f selected representatives, selected because o f their knowledge and experience in particular fields, not trying to impose a pattern but trying to recommend a pattern which w ill really draw to itself the allegiance o f the people o f the United States because it is practical, because it is simple, and because it does really represent the moral purpose o f all the people o f the United States.. The Significance o f the Conference to Parents Mrs. H. W. Ahabt President, Associated Women o f the American Farm Bureau Federation T o us the most significant fact is that we have a government and an administration interested in children and their welfare, and this gov ernment is striving to eliminate some o f the inequalities o f opportunity that now exist. W e have a government that is most anxious to solve the social and economic problems that affect the welfare o f children and youth in all its aspects, to give guidance and assistance required to assure security, protection, and opportunity. W e are again reminded o f the fam iliar fact that city populations do not reproduce themselves and must depend on rural areas to meet their deficits. Authentic reports show—and we have heard this many times in the Conference—that the farmers o f the Nation are supporting nearly one-third o f the Nation’s children on less than one-tenth o f the Nation’s income. Anyone can see what that means to the children in farm families. So why should not this Conference be most significant to rural par ents and urban people ? It is significant to parents in that it is thinking o f the health o f our children and attempting to inaugurate a plan to https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 64 Proceedings of the White House Conference make America a healthy place for our children and our children’s children. W e are impressed with the fact that the Conference is con sidering the housing needs o f children and is attempting to help the Government in its promotion o f better places to live. W e are con sidering the nutritional needs o f the children and are trying to help the Government make food available to every child. A very significant factor is that the Conference is attempting to think in terms o f the parents themselves and to help them secure the infor mation which is most needed in order to have healthier and happier children in America. This Conference, as Madam Secretary just said, is truly a picture o f democracy in action. W e believe that the fam ily is the threshold o f democracy, and we further believe there can never be satisfactory substitutes for the integrity o f fam ily life and its dedication to the task o f properly preparing children for the venture in citizenship. In our deliberations we are stressing spiritual values and the im portant part religion has played in the development o f the ideas o f man and o f the development o f our national life. W orking together as we are in this Conference, we adults are exem plifying and putting into practice the recommendations we are em phasizing for child guidance and development; that is, learning that there is a common bond between the interests o f the individual and the interests o f the group, learning to respect the rights o f others and to develop tolerance for their differences in traits and points o f view, learning to adjust ourselves to the needs o f others without the sacrifice o f principles. The greatest potential danger to our American democracy lies in the attitude o f our youth to the solution o f pressing economic problems. Ten years o f widespread unemployment and the feeling o f insecurity that permeates various groups have caused certain dangerous tendencies to manifest themselves in both the lower and upper age brackets. Age grows preoccupied with unworkable plans for pensions, and youth turns to ill-conceived plans fo r the complete reorganization o f society. These conditions are o f the utmost concern not only to parents but to their children. How many millions are roaming the country, homeless, workless, and with no constructive goal ahead o f them ? An increasingly large proportion o f children are on relief. Youth fears the future and under conditions o f fear becomes fertile soil for the planting o f seeds o f discontent. Youth is a period o f life when one expects to gain an economic foot hold in the world. Children in a democracy are entitled to all the emoluments that provide the necessities o f life and opportunities for constructive service to self and the State. It is the duty o f govern ment to take whatever steps are necessary to provide these emoluments. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, January 18-&0,1 9 0 65 I subscribe wholeheartedly to the work o f the National Youth Adm in istration and the Civilian Conservation Corps and to their magnificent accomplishments in saving American youth from the black-out o f eco nomic crises. Democracy’s greatest responsibility is to the children o f our land. The Conference Report and Program o f A ction H omes: F olks, Chairman of the Report Committee The membership o f the Conference has accepted the report and approved the recommendations submitted by the Report Committee. W e may now profitably take not a bird’s-eye view but an airplane view o f three areas in which we have been working in the fields: I. Children in the American democracy in the 1980’s. II. Our present conclusions and recommendations. III. Getting something done about them. We have by no means extracted the full meaning o f the events o f the past decade in relation to children. The depression is, o f course, the outstanding feature o f that decade. W e should not underestimate its terrific blow to the child life o f America. Neither should we under estimate the fact that the depression was met, stood up to, and dealt with, by the people o f this country. Democracy proved itself flexible, resourceful, and concerned about its children. It had to take, and did take, many new untried steps for the relief o f the families o f the unemployed, including several million children. Among these steps, it is interesting to note, is the full recognition in the amendments to the Social Security A ct in 1939 o f one o f the chief conclusions o f the first W hite House Conference, in 1909; namely, that children should not be removed from their families for poverty alone. That unchallenged statement has steadily moved into the area o f accomplishment during the decade. It received an enormous im petus when the original Social Security A ct established Federal aid to dependent children; the amendment o f 1939 extended this principle to well nigh its logical conclusion. The hope o f 1909 is a fact in 1939. Several important things happened during the thirties which indi cate that the steps taken to conserve the welfare o f children and their parents were not without surprisingly encouraging results. For in stance, the death rate among babies under 1 year o f age continued to fall through the thirties. In 1929 it was 68 per 1,000 live births; in 1938 it was 51, a decrease o f 25 percent. That is striking. It would not have been surprising if it had gone up. But there are even more strik ing facts. Since the time o f my earliest public-health experience I had been told that the maternal death rate in the United States was high, that it remained high, and that seemingly no one could do any https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis A 66 Proceedings of the White House Conference tHing about it. But look now at the depression decade. In 1929 the maternal death rate was 70 per 10,000 live births. In 1938 it was 44. It has decreased each year, and in 1938 was 37 percent less than 10 years before. Again, look at tuberculosis. In 1929 the number o f deaths from tuberculosis in the United States (estimating conservatively 2 States whose figures were not then complete) was 93,000. It declined each year, and in 1938 was 64,000, a reduction o f 29,000 or 31 percent, in the number o f human lives lost from this cause in 1938. Most o f these per sons were in the middle years o f life when fam ily responsibilities were at their peak. This was certainly a great contribution to the increased stability o f fam ily life and child care. Thus even the 1930’s yield cheerful indications for the 1940’s. W e start upon the new decade hopefully. W e have acquired experi ence* and momentum. W e have learned to be flexible. W e have learned that we must study changing general conditions and be ready to adapt ourselves and our activities thereto. In 1940 we begin with new knowledge on how families may be protected still further in the performance o f their vital functions for children. Especially is this true in avoiding the break-down o f the fam ily by avoidable illness or premature death o f the father or mother. There is every reason for confidence that the notable improve ments o f the past decade in the reduction o f maternal m ortality and tuberculosis may continue with accelerated momentum. New scientific knowledge and administrative experience open up other new and promising opportunities fo r comparable gains. The Nation-wide Federal-State-local well-organized campaign for the con trol o f syphilis should certainly reduce in the near future the number o f disabilities and deaths o f fathers and mothers, for which any monetary grants can afford only the slightest amelioration o f the harm done. Pneumonia, until now a catastrophe to be faced with resigna tion, is now definitely subject to direct and hopeful attack along simi lar cooperative lines, and thereby many thousands o f families that otherwise would lose father or mother w ill be kept intact. Other striking opportunities open before us in almost a bewildering variety, though in varying degrees o f development. Protection o f the health o f their parents certainly must be our first line o f defense fo r the children o f America. In general, we may say that we already have the essentials for pre* ventive and ameliorative services— a legal framework, a favorable pub lic attitude, and adequate scientific knowledge. W hat we need is to study the present coverage o f preventive and ameliorative services and to measure long-standing lacks and gaps in particular areas or in par ticular functions. The questions o f administrative practicability and https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, January 18-&0,1940 67 o f financial support move up into the first order o f importance. Gen erally speaking, to secure full benefits fo r all children (and we dare not accept a lesser aim) we must move toward larger geographic units. The further increase o f technical knowledge makes the smallest units increasingly impracticable. W e must have larger units, but not too large, not at least until we have tried out the units next larger than we now have. W e are clearly entering upon a hopeful effort to solve the problem o f complete coverage by a system o f financial aid and through some degree o f leadership, by the larger units, for the smaller ones, but not for the smallest. This means State aid, fiscal and tech nical, for the next smaller units. It means Federal aid, fiscal pri m arily, but also technical, fo r the States, and through them fo r the localities. In entering upon this era o f increased State aid, we should bear in mind our reasons fo r so doing, the advantages and also the limitations o f this plan. So long as we leave the operating responsi bility to the States we must be careful not to impair that responsibility. It may well be that a decade from now the next W hite House Confer ence on children may find one o f its first duties to be that o f studying and evaluating the plan o f Federal aid and State aid in the light o f its actual effects upon the vitality and effectiveness o f the different areas o f government. W e need not try now to forecast its conclusions in 1950. The “ follow -up” for the 1940 Conference w ill be the subject o f tomor row morning’s session. The 98 recommendations o f the Report Com mittee have been accepted. The text o f the report gives the why and wherefore for them. One thing may be said o f them all—they w ill not be self-starting. W e are committed by the logic o f events, by our own self-respect, by the special knowledge and interest we have developed, to making some plans and taking some steps to initiate a follow -up program. What, then, in broad outlines are the things which we are to follow up? The Report Committee put together these recommendations as its best judgment o f what is actually needed; they were set down, one by one, on their merits. The order in which they are to be followed up must take into account at least two things—their inherent importance and the present degree o f probability o f their realization. It would seem in order, then, to reexamine each o f these recom mendations and to ask by what steps its accomplishment may be approached; who in terms o f authorities, agencies, or individuals, must act in each case; and who can get him or them to act. The W hite House Conference is not a permanent nor even a con tinuing body. Presumably it should not be. It may be best that once a decade it should start afresh. It should ask, “ Are we getting what we thought we would get when we set out on our various courses?” https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 68 Proceedings of the White House Conference There is unquestionably some degree o f inherent tendency in all governmental bodies toward becoming bureaucratic and self-satisfied; and there is, as I see it, an equal tendency in voluntary agencies. The active program at the moment obscures the view o f the long-range objective, and the location and nature o f that objective may be for gotten. Therefore, in essence, the follow -up program presumably must consist primarily in getting those permanent or quasi-permanent bodies, public and private, which have interests or responsibilities relating to children to measure their present programs and activities against the things which this Conference finds to be desirable. I f they concur as to the soundness o f our findings, we may hope that, with such aid and support as we may enlist for them, they w ill m odify their program so as to coincide more fully with the conclusions o f this Conference. The recommendations o f this Conference vary widely in kind. They range, fo r instance, from changes in the attitude o f the entire people toward such questions as fam ily life as a preparation for democracy, on the one hand, to detailed amendments o f the Social Security A ct on the other. They include several prepared studies, one under Federal auspices, two under national voluntary agencies. They include a readjustment o f the programs o f a wide variety o f voluntary agencies, Nation-wide, State, and local, particularly with reference to taking a constructive interest in governmental policies and activities. They include action by Congress, both on lines o f Federal operation and on lines o f cooperation with States. They include legislative and administrative action in each o f the 48 States. They include modifi cation and development o f the activities o f all local governmental agencies in the wide fields o f education, health, welfare, and recreation. To give an initial impulse toward such extended objectives it is obvious that a general educational campaign must be carried on in respect to the studies, conclusions, and recommendations o f this Con ference. It should assist in creating a background-of interest and acceptance on the part o f the people, out o f which soil modifications o f the attitude o f individuals, action by voluntary agencies, and legis lation and administration o f governmental authorities might naturally spring. Not only must the soil be prepared by such a broad, inclusive in formation service, but the seed must be sown—seed o f many varieties— and each type must be sown in the manner, under the circumstances, and in such locations as w ill give promise o f normal growth and fruitful harvest. In other words, our task is to foster a definite interest on the part o f voluntary agencies and public authorities concerned with any phase o f the total field— education, health, welfare, recreation, and https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, January 18-&0,191^0 69 the like—in reviewing their present activities in the light o f the present activities o f all agencies and authorities and o f the total picture as outlined in our report. Since the end o f knowledge is action, it must be our hope that in the light o f such comparison they w ill proceed to the enactment o f such legislative changes and the realization o f such administrative changes as may be required in their respective areas to bring about a harmonious, comprehensive program fo r the children o f America, based on State and local action, stimulated and supplemented by Federal action, supplemented and strengthened by voluntary agencies to such extent as may be necessary to achieve the general objective. The answer to the question as to who must be followed up must be “ everybody” : the general public, the general informational and edu cational services, the officers and directors o f voluntary agencies, the President and the Congress, the 48 Governors, the 48 legislatures, and the army o f local executive and legislative bodies. There is one other group which must be follow ed up, perhaps the most important and possibly the most difficult—ourselves. W e see the W hite House Conference objectives now, we feel their importance at the moment; but they are no longer novel to us. Under the pressure o f our other continuing interests are we not likely to lose sight o f the logical im plication o f what we have done here? W e must organize procedures by which we may follow up even ourselves, lest we forget. Address by the President o f the United States I come here tonight with a very heavy heart because shortly ago I received word o f the passing o f a very old friend o f mine, a very great American, Senator Borah. I had known him for a great many years and I had realized, although perhaps on this or that or the other political problem we may have differed from time to time, yet his purpose and my purpose and the ultimate objective o f, I think, every body in this room interested in the future o f America, were iden tical—and the Nation has lost one o f its great leaders in his passing. I am glad to come here in the thought that Senator Borah o f Idaho would want us to go on with the work o f building a better citizenship in the days to come in the United States. You know, I go back, not as far as he did, but I go back a great many years. I go back to my days in college when I worked fo r an organization called “ The Social Service Committee.” A fter that my wife came into the picture and, when we were engaged, I discovered that she was teaching classes o f children on the East Side in New York. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 70 Proceedings of the White House Conference And then, very soon after I was admitted to the bar, I got to know another very great American, an old friend o f yours and mine, Homer Folks. Probably Homer does not remember it himself, but in New York in those days we were just beginning to take up the problem o f providing milk for babies, for mothers, in all parts o f that big city. And I, wanting to do something in addition to trying to learn a little law, went in with an organization which has long since ceased to exist because it was absorbed by greater organizations, the New York M ilk Committee, and I worked for 2 or 3 years in trying to help in placing milk stations for babies on the East Side and West Side and up in the Bronx in New Y ork City. Homer Folks was one o f the principal moving agencies in setting that up, and it is rather an interesting thing that the woman who was most directly responsible for helping to provide milk for dependent poor children in the great city o f New York was Mrs. Borden Harriman. I sent Mrs. Harriman as United States Minister to Norway 2 years ago. Last A pril when this Conference first met in this room I asked you to consider two things: first, how a democracy can best serve its chil dren ; and, the corollary, how children can best be helped to grow into the kind o f citizens who w ill know how to preserve and perfect our democracy. Since that time—since last A pril—a succession o f world events has shown us that our democracy must be strengthened at every point o f strain or weakness. A ll Americans want this country to be a place where children can live in safety and grow in understanding o f the part that they are going to play in the future o f our American Nation. And on that question people have come to me and they have said, “W hat about defense?” “W ell,” I have said, “ internal defense and external defense are one and the same thing. You cannot have one unless you can have both.” Adequate national defense, in the broadest sense on the one side, calls for adequate munitions and implements o f war and, at the same time, it calls for educated, healthy, and happy citizens. And neither requisite, taken alone, taken all by itself without the other, will defend the national security. And so today, in January 1940, it is my pleasure to receive from you the General Conference Report with its program o f action. You have adopted this report after days o f careful deliberation, preceded by nearly a year o f study and discussion. And, by way o f illustration, I am having a problem with the Con gress o f the United States as to whether the problems o f the United States are going to be decided after a couple o f days o f careful de liberation in each House or whether I am going to get a couple o f https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, January 18-&0,1 9 $ 71 m illion dollars for undertaking studies that would correspond to this year o f study, this year o f discussion, that you good people have been putting into the problem o f children in a democracy. And I think I am going to win out. When I started to jo t down some notes about what I was going to say tonight— and so far I have been speaking, as you have observed, practically extemporaneously—I said to myself, “ This is going to be the most dreadful speech I have ever delivered,” because when I come to write down notes and dictate a speech, I say to myself, “W hat is it in this particular subject that I am going to talk about that hits me between the eyes?” And, on this particular subject o f children in a democracy, the thing that hit me between the eyes was what I got about a week ago— a list, a tabulation, a catalog o f what you have been studying. And so I felt that the Nation as a whole ought to realize that the subject o f children covers several pages o f a catalog. There are so many interests involved, so many problems involved. Almost every body who is hearing me tonight, I suppose, in every State o f the Union, thinks o f children in terms o f two or three o f these subjects on the average, two or three subjects in which he or she has special experience or special interest, such as the education o f children or the recreation o f children or the health o f children. Or he or she may have some great enthusiasm fo r one particular kind o f child-welfare service. For instance, I m yself am tremendously interested in crippled children. But this Conference report rightly calls on us to think o f children as a whole, as each child is related, not to one life, not only to his own life but to the lives o f his brothers and sisters, the life o f his fam ily, and then, inevitably, to the life o f his community, the life o f his county, the life o f his State, and the life o f his Nation. And that is why if people in this country are going to think o f this problem as it really is, they have got to listen to a catalog for the next 10 minutes. I can illustrate best the extent to which the interests o f children are interwoven with the interests o f families and communities by giving you these main topics o f the Conference. I do not think there is any one o f these topics o f which we can say, “W ell, that is awfully nice, but what relation has it to the problem o f my child?” W ell, o f course it has; every subject here has. And the first part o f the Conference report reminds us sharply that by every step we take to protect the families o f America, we are pro tecting the children also. Put that in another w ay: It means that what Federal Government and State government, county government, town government, village government, everything else, what they are doing to coordinate the economy and the social problems o f their own https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 72 Proceedings of the White House Conference communities in relation to the whole population necessarily has an effect on every child in that community. Here we find in this report recommendations in general which constitute an argument for but tressing and strengthening, in the first instance, the institution o f the fam ily, the fam ily as it relates again to a whole, and o f other things— health, training, and opportunities o f children in what we are pleased to call a democracy—and, thank God, it still is. This part o f the discussion includes families and their incomes, families in need o f assistance, families and their dwellings, and the fam ily as a threshold to the future democracy o f this country. And then, follow ing that group o f topics, the report discusses a lot o f other things that either enter or ought to enter into the life o f every American child in every part o f the country, schools, religion, leisure-time activities—mind you, these are all separate topics that we are trying to coordinate into one national picture—libraries, pro tection against child labor, youth and the needs o f youth, the con serving o f child health, the social services fo r children, children in m inority groups, and, something that a lot o f people forget, as I have good reason to know as the Chief Executive, the subject o f public financing and administration. But what I am specially pleased about is th is: that this Conference, made up o f men and women that belong to every political party in every part o f the country, has found that we have definitely improved our social institutions and our public services during-these past 10 years. I think they have been the most interesting 10 years since—what? W ell, at least since the Civil W ar and maybe since the Bevolution. And we are all glad we have had a part in them because I believe that though we have had lots o f trouble, lots o f difficulties, these past 10 years have been 10 useful years and, on the whole, 10 years o f definite progress in a democracy. The Conference concludes, and rightly, that to have made progress in a period o f hardship and strain proves that America has both strength and courage. But, again, I agree with the Conference that we still have got a long way to go. T oo many children—and you can find them in every State in the Union—are living under conditions that must be corrected i f our democracy is to develop to its highest capacity. The Conference tells me that more than half o f the children o f America are living in families that do not have enough money to provide fu lly adequate shelter, adequate food, adequate clothing, adequate medical care, and adequate educational opportunities. I have been called to task, as you all know, because I have reiterated, reiterated many times, something about one-third o f America—the ill-clothed, ill-housed, ill-fed—criticized on the ground that I was https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, January 18-%0,19IJ) 73 saying something derogatory. I have been telling the truth, and you good people have sustained me by that statement that more than half the children o f America are living in families that do not have enough money to provide fully adequate shelter, food, clothing, medical care, and educational opportunity. W hy should not we admit it? B y admitting it we are saying we are going to improve things. Yes, and you are rightly concerned that provision be made fo r those who are unemployed, whether fo r economic or for personal reasons. T o keep families from starving while the fathers walk the streets in vain in search for jobs w ill not give children the best start in life. Social insurance to provide against total loss o f income and appro priate work projects adjusted to fluctuations in private employment and both urban and rural needs, constitute the first lines o f defense against fam ily disaster. And I am glad o f what has been said tonight about urban problems. I think my very good old friend, the Mayor o f New York, would not mind my telling a story o f what happened up at Hyde Park last autumn. He was up there lunching with us. W e had a big lunch, 18 or 20 people, and we were talking about the problem o f distribution o f population in the United States. W ell, that is an old thing that I have been “ hobbying” about for a great many years, 20 or 30 years. And I talked about the problem o f overcrowding the cities. I talked about whether it was a good thing, with a big question mark, about cities getting too big, the bigger cities getting still bigger, and whether we could not work on some plan for a greater decentralization o f the population, the building up o f the smaller communities. And then, as a sort o f jest, I said, “ You know, Fiorello, I am going to say some thing awful that you won’t agree with. I think your problem in New York City, with 7 m illion men, women, and children in it, is a bad one. I think that the problem o f civilized life in a community o f that size is almost too big a problem, and I think that New York would be better off if it had 6 m illion people instead o f 7.” And the Mayor o f New York looked at me, and he said, “Mr. Presi dent, I cannot agree.” He said, “ Mr. President, you are wrong.” He said, “ New Y ork would be better off if it had 5 m illion people in it instead o f 7.” And, by way o f follow ing up the same subject—this is just purely from memory—we were talking o f conditions before the W orld W ar, somewhere around 1913 or 1914 when I was over here in the Navy Department—I read an extraordinarily interesting pamphlet which carried out the thought that you have heard tonight about rural populations. It was by a great French doctor who had made all kinds o f examinations o f records, vital statistics in half a dozen o f https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 74 Proceedings of the White House Conference the great cities o f Europe, and he had come to the conclusion, and had attempted to prove it by fam ily statistics, that any fam ily that had been city-bred for three or four generations died out and that the only families in cities that survived were the families that had an influx o f country blood every generation or two. Now, I do not know whether our modern medical friends w ill support that, but at least it is something well worth our thinking about in terms o f the America o f the future. You tell me, in effect, in this report what I have been talking about fo r many years, that we have been moving forward toward the objec tive o f raising the incomes and the living conditions o f the poorest portion o f our population, that we have made some dent on the prob lem and that, most decidedly, we cannot stop and rest on our rather meager laurels. Y es; I agree with you that public assistance o f many kinds is necessary. But I suggest to you that the Federal Treasury has a bottom to it, and that mere grants-in-aid constitute no permanent solution o f the problem o f our health, our education, or our children, but that we should address ourselves to two definite policies: First, to increase the average o f incomes in the poorer communities and in the poorer groups, in the poorer areas o f the Nation, and, secondly, that we should address ourselves to an insistence that in every com munity, in every State, and the D istrict o f Columbia, they should pay taxes in accordance with ability to pay. The Conference report—going on with this catalog—and it is very educational to read a catalog—has called attention also to the need for continuing and expanding public and private housing p r o g r a m s if the families in the lowest income groups are to live in dwellings suitable fo r the raising o f children. Last A pril, to take another item, I referred to our concern fo r the children o f the m igratory families who have no settled place o f abode. I spoke casually to the press today about a study I am making. Up in the State o f Washington we are spending a great many millions to harness the Columbia River, to put a great dam up there which w ill pump the water up onto a huge area o f land capable o f providing a living fo r 500,000 people—irrigated land, today a desert, which can be made a garden with the process o f modern science. W ho ought to go there? Are we going to treat that, 2 years from now, just as we treat the average irrigation project? W ill it be a contract with the Government to pay out the loan over a period o f years on the b a s is first come, first served? I have read a book; it is called Grapes o f Wrath, and there are 500,000 Americans that live in the covers o f that book. I would like to see the Columbia Basin devoted to the care o f 500,000 people repre sented in Grapes o f Wrath. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis * On Children in a Democracy, Jarmary 18-20, 1940 75 M igratory families, the situation o f their children, children who have no homes, families who can put down no roots, cannot live in a community—that calls for special consideration. But I am being practical. I am trying to find a place for them to go. This means, in its simplest terms, a program for the permanent resettlement o f at least 1 m illion people in the Columbia Basin and a lot o f other places. And remember that the money spent on it after careful plan ning is going to be returned to the United States Government many times over in a relatively short time. T o go on, your report has devoted many pages to fam ily economics. I know very little about that—my w ife does. W e all recognize that the spirit within the home is the most important influence in the growth o f the child. In fam ily life the child should first learn confi dence in his own powers, respect fo r the feelings and the rights o f others, the feeling o f security and mutual good w ill and faith in God. Here he should find a common bond between the interests o f the indi vidual and the interests o f the group. Mothers and fathers, by the kind o f life they build within the four walls o f the home, are largely responsible fo r the future social and public life o f the country. And, just as we cannot take care o f the child apart from the fam ily, so his welfare is bound up with a lot o f other institutions that influence his development—the school, the church, the agencies that offer useful and happy activities and interests for leisure time. The work o f all these institutions needs to be harmonized so as to give our children rounded growth with the least possible conflict and loss o f effort. And the money and hard work that go into these public and private enterprises are, again, repaid many times. And I think that religion, religion especially, helps children to appreciate life in its wholeness, to develop a deep sense o f the sacred ness o f the human personality. In view o f the estimate that perhaps one-half o f the children o f America are having no regular religious instruction, it seems to me important to consider how provision can best be made fo r some kind o f religious training. W e can do it because in this way we are capable o f keeping in mind both the wisdom o f maintaining the separation o f church and state and, at the same time, giving weight to the great importance o f religion in personal and social living. And I share with you the belief that fair opportunity fo r schooling ought to be available to every child in this country. I agree with you that no American child, merely because he happens to be born where property values are low and local taxes do not, even though they should, support the schools, should be placed at a disadvantage in his preparation for citizenship. Certainly our future is endangered when nearly a million children o f elementary-school age are not in school: when thousands o f school https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 76 Proceedings of the White House Conference districts and even some entire States do not pay for good schools. This situation has been reported by many agencies, private and public, and, the way I have got it down here in my manuscript, “needs to be more widely understood.” That does not mean anything. What I really wanted to say is this: I would like to put on the front page o f every newspaper in the United States a list o f the most backward school districts, the most backward school States in the United States. That is rough treatment, but if every person in the United States could know where the conditions are worst in education and health those areas would get the sympathy, the understanding, and the help for im proving those worst o f conditions. And again, I have to sug gest that the permanent answer is not mere hand-outs from the Fed eral Treasury but that the problem has to be solved by improving the economics in these poorer sections and an insistence, hand in hand with it, that there be adequate taxation in accordance with ability to pay. W e must plan also, on a larger scale, to give American children a chance for healthful play and worthwhile use o f leisure. I agree with you that a democratic government has a vital interest in those matters. And I am glad that you have suggested a national com mission, under private auspices, to study leisure-time needs and recrea tional resources. More than in any previous decade we know how to safeguard the health o f parents and children. Because o f the advance o f medical knowledge and the growth o f public-health work, we have it in our power to conquer diseases that we could not conquer 10 years ago, and the ability to promote general good health. New opportunities to us mean new duties. It was one thing to let people sicken and die when we were helpless to protect them. And it is quite another thing to leave a large portion o f our population without care at all. It is my definite hope— and I believe that hope can be fulfilled—that within the next 10 years every part o f the country—just to use an example—every part o f the United States w ill have complete and adequate service for all women during mater nity and for all newborn infants. That we can do. So, too, good nutrition is the basis o f child health. And I am equally in sympathy with your suggestion that I appoint a National Nutrition Committee to review our present knowledge and to coordinate our efforts, looking toward the development o f nutrition policies based on the newest and best methods—and we are making new discoveries every day. You, all the members o f the Conference, have charted a course, a course for 10 years to come. Nevertheless, the steps that we take now, in this year o f 1940, are going to determine how far we can go tomorrow, and in what direction. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis # On Children in a Democracy, January 18-&0, 19J/-0 77 I believe with you that i f anywhere in the country any child lacks opportunity for home life, fo r health protection, for education, for moral or spiritual development, the strength o f the Nation and its ability to cherish and advance the principles o f democracy are thereby weakened. I ask all our fellow citizens who are within the sound o f my voice to consider themselves identified with the work o f this Conference. I ask you all to study and discuss with friends and neighbors the pro gram that it has outlined, to study how its objectives can be realized. May the security and the happiness o f every boy and girl in our land be our concern, our personal concern, from now on. You, the members o f this Conference, this Conference on Children in a Democracy, you are leaders o f a new American army o f peace. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Translating the Conference Report Into Action— Jan u ary 20 Opening Remarks by the Chairman o f the Conference F or 2 days we have been listening to and taking action on the report o f the Conference which has made recommendations o f opinion and recommendations for action. In his address last night the President o f the United States asked all o f us to consider how the objectives o f the Conference could be realized. Only as they mean to the children o f our Nation a better chance for the security o f home and health and educational oppor tunity do they have real significance. It is how to put them into action and how to prepare a method o f putting them into action that we are to consider this morning as a primary responsibility o f the last session o f the Conference. Our theme at this closing session then is the findings and recommendations adopted yesterday and presented to the President and their transla tion into a pattern o f action by which we are all prepared to stand. In order that the Conference might have before it suggestions for a program o f action, a committee on follow -up was appointed by the Planning Committee. The report o f this committee outlining plans for Nation-wide consideration and action w ill be presented by its chairman. Plans fo r Nation-W ide Consideration and Action. R e port o f the Conference Comm ittee on the Follow-Up P rog ra m 1 Mrs. Saidie Orb D unbab President, General Federation o f Women’s Clubs It was the task o f the Conference Committee on the Follow -U p Program to consider how the goals toward which we have set our faces in this Conference may be reached. The challenge given to us at the first session o f the Conference in A pril 1939 by the President o f the United States, the chairman o f the Conference, and the chair1Members of Committee on the Follow-Up Program: Mrs. Saidie Orr Dunbar, chairman; Elisabeth Christman, Martha M. Eliot, M. D„ Henry F. Helmholz, M. D., Homer Folks. Rev. Bryan J. McEntegart, Mrs. J. K. Pettengill, Floyd W. Reeves, Josephine Roche. 78 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, Jammry 18-®0, 191$ 79 man o f the Report Committee, was tw ofold. It included, first, review and restatement o f the primary objectives o f a democratic society fo r its children, and the extent to which they are being realized or can be realized in the United States; and second, the call to consider how our children may be prepared to take their places as citizens in our democracy, to understand its aspirations and contribute to its fuller development. This Conference, though called by the President o f the United States, is an enterprise carried on by citizens from many walks o f life, the m ajority not connected with government. Through committees and a research staff, with the aid o f groups o f consultants in which more than 150 persons have participated, material and recommenda tions on 11 m ajor topics have been brought together. As a second step, these have been combined into a General Report, which was adopted January 19 after 2 days o f deliberation and presented to the President the same evening in a session held at The W hite House. The report covers the follow ing subjects: The Fam ily as the Threshold o f Democracy; Families and Their Incomes; Families and Their D w ellings; Families in Need o f Assistance; Social Services fo r Chil dren; Children in M inority Groups; Religion in the Lives o f Chil dren ; Conserving the Health o f Children; Educational Services in the Community; Leisure-Time Services; and Protection Against Child Labor. The last section o f the report is a “ Call to Action” : to do now those things that can be done now, and to plan now those that must be left fo r the morrow. The Conference believes that in a world showing many signs o f break-down the American people can present a picture o f a Nation directing its thought and actions toward building fo r the future. Thus we can strengthen our democracy. In responding to this call we are encouraged by the definite and tangible results o f the three previous conferences on children held under W hite House auspices. The Conference o f 1909 gave great impetus to the mothers’ pension movement and the movement fo r the establishment o f the United States Children’s Bureau. The Confer ence o f 1919 adopted child-welfare standards and stimulated efforts fo r health protection, child-labor regulation, and protection o f chil dren suffering from individual or social handicaps such as the physi cally handicapped, the dependent, and the delinquent. The 1930 Conference adopted the Children’s Charter, constituting a declaration o f the rights o f American children, and laid the foundations for developments in many fields. The gains made as the result o f these Conferences did not just hap pen. W ords mean nothing in an undertaking o f this kind unless they lead to action. Fortunately America is rich in possibilities fo r carry https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis $0 Proceedings o f the W hite Bouse Conference ing the message o f this 1940 Conference to every com er o f the United States. There are agencies in the Nation and in the States and local communities devoted to advancing the health, education, and welfare o f children and strengthening fam ily resources fo r the care o f children. Membership in the Conference is not confined to a single group but represents a cross section o f American life. Members o f labor or ganizations, farm organizations, churches, schools, leisure-time agencies, and health and social-welfare organizations—all have partici pated in its work. Many agencies o f the Federal Government are represented in the Conference membership and on Conference com mittees. To name only a few, they include the Children’s Bureau, the Office o f Education, the Public Health Service, the Social Security Board, various Bureaus o f the Department o f Agriculture, Federal housing agencies, the National Youth Administration, the W ork P roj ects Administration. In addition to governmental resources, Federal, State, and local, many privately supported organizations are conduct ing or are keenly interested in child-welfare work. Some 150 national organizations interested in children have direct access to the work o f the Conference through membership o f persons active in these agencies. To put the recommendations o f the Conference into effect is not a matter o f creating new agencies. Existing organizations need a con tinuing source o f information and help in directing their efforts into the most fruitful channels and more fully coordinating their activi ties. There is need also to bring the work o f the Conference to the attention o f individuals all over this country, so that the goals for childhood which the Conference has set forth may be realized. It is clear that Nation-wide planning is only the beginning o f a program for making this Conference mean something to individual children. It must reach individual children in communities and States, in Maine or Mississippi, New York, Michigan, or Florida. It must mean something to Johnny, whose father is dead; to Mary, who shares in the work o f the fam ily as they follow the crops, never staying long enough in any one place for Mary to become really settled in school; to undernourished Stephen or crippled Susie or George, whose mother is at her wit’s end to know why he is forever coming to the attention o f the police and the juvenile court. The general aims o f the Conference are equally valid in all parts o f the country and fo r all children; the community efforts that must be made to achieve the objectives w ill be many and varied. In the last analysis whom must we reach in this follow -up program? It is the citizen, voter, taxpayer. He is the one, the only one, who can turn recommendations into realities. It may be at a school-board meeting to choose a school superintendent or teacher who w ill carry https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis m X On Children in a Democracy, January 18-&0,19lfi 81 out the educational policies recommended; it may be as a member o f the parent-teacher association whose support or whose pressure may determine whether a school district is large enough to do the job and whether the school budget shall provide kindergarten and recreation along with the three “ R ’s.” The citizen or voter confronted with a bond issue for a county hospital or a community health service may determine whether the child or the expectant mother is to receive medical care. A s citizens join together in common effort to urge pro vision fo r libraries where there are none, to support public housing programs where public opinion is indifferent, to create good w ill for sound labor relations and labor policies, the aims o f this Conference will be carried forward. No standardized follow -up program w ill do. One State may need to focus its effort on im proving its program o f aid to dependent chil dren ; another, on strengthening its child-labor law s; another, on rais ing the standards o f its maternal and child-health w ork; another, on im proving its rural schools. In all States there is need for improve ment in all these activities, but the steps that should be taken first are not the same in every State or even in every community within a State. The Conference Committee on the Follow -U p Program has been exploring the ways in which the Conference could be most effective in planning how to meet these widely varying needs through utilizing all the resources o f private initiative and government that can be mustered. It makes the follow ing recommendations: 1. That follow-up work be started at once. 2. That responsibility for national leadership in the follow-up program be placed in a National Citizens Committee and a Federal Interagency Committee o f the White House Conference on Children in a Democracy. The National Citizens Committee should be nongovernmental in character, representing or ganizations and associations that have participated in the work o f the Conference. The Federal Interagency Committee should include representatives of Federal agencies that have participated in the Conference activities. 3. That the function of the National Citizens Committee include preparing and disseminating printed, visual, and radio material; enlisting the cooperation of national organizations in studying and furthering the objectives o f the Confer ence ; cooperating with governmental agencies in matters relating to the follow-up program; and assisting the States and Territories in the development o f State and Territorial programs adapted to the needs and interests of each State. 4. That the Conference request the Federal agencies represented in the mem bership of the Conference to form a Federal Interagency Committee o f the White House Conference on Children in a Democracy, with power to add to its mem bership, whose functions would include: interchange o f information and co ordinated planning on the part of the Federal agencies in matters related to the Conference program; cooperation with the National Citizens Committee; col laboration with such State interagency committees as may be form ed; and encouragement of cooperation between the Federal agencies and the State agencies https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 82 Proceedings o f the W hite House Conference with which they have dose relationships in carrying out the objectives o f the Conference. 5. That State follow-up programs he inaugurated, adapted to the special prob lems and circumstances in each State. In making this recommendation the Conference takes note of work already done in reviewing child-welfare conditions in certain States and Territories, notably Louisiana and Hawaii, preparatory to this session of the Conference. Development of State citizens’ and interagency committees may be found to be advisable in many States; in others, different methods o f organization would be more appropriate. The National Citizens Committee and the Federal Interagency Committee should make available to the States service in developing methods o f organizing State follow-up work. 6. That State groups responsible for follow-up programs provide leadership to local communities which desire to organize or expand local programs for de termining the ways by which children may be given more adequate care in their homes and through community services. 7. That the Conference authorize the Planning Committee to appoint a group of 5 to take responsibility for organizing and calling together a National Citizens Committee of approximately 15 to 25 members, representative of the interests o f labor, industry, agriculture, religion, citizens, and the professions. 8. That the Finance Committee o f the Conference be asked to explore the possi bilities o f financial support o f the work o f the National Citizens Committee for a definite period, sufficient to provide adequate leadership and staff assistance, with funds available if possible for assistance in the development o f State follow-up programs. 9. That in all States and in local communities existing organizations interested in child welfare participate to the fullest extent possible, and that National, State, and local organizations stress continuity and progressive development o f the services they are prepared to render. 10. That in organizing follow-up programs, National, State, and local, due con sideration be given to minority representation in planning and carrying out the follow-up work of the Conference. The W hite House Conference on Children in a Democracy recognizes the steady progress that has been made in many fields o f child welfare during the past 30 years. It likewise faces the shortcomings and deficiencies which still exist and determines to set these forth fo r the immediate consideration o f the people o f the Nation. W e raise our voices in expression o f fair claims for adequate funds to meet the needs o f children, who cannot speak for themselves. “ Our concern is every child.” In this hour o f world-wide confusion, we are gathered in our Nation’s Capital to accept a call for action to do those things that can be done now fo r children, to safeguard the strong fam ily life which is abso lutely essential to our democracy, and to plan now those things that must be left for the morrow. W e can present to the world a picture o f a nation devoting thought and resources to building for the future. Thus the fourth W hite House Conference w ill serve the child o f today and the children o f the future. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, January 18-&0,191fi 83 The Responsibility o f the Individual and the Com m unity Mbs. F ranklin D. R oosevelt I was asked to tell you this morning about individual responsibility in the matters which you have been discussing here. It is perfectly obvious that each member o f the Conference feels a personal responsibility for carrying out as far as possible in his community the ideas and the programs which have been thought out during the past few days; but that is not enough. I think more and more we realize that what we really must do is to awaken the respon sibility o f each individual as far as he can be reached in every com munity throughout the United States. Now, that is a difficult thing to do, and yet as the first thing that we have to consider in carrying out a program is how we are going to get the money, it is important that every individual make a study o f his own community and the needs o f the children in that commu nity. It is true that we cannot separate the children from the needs o f their families, but the more we know about our own community the better we shall be able to understand what we hear about commu nities in other parts o f the country. The President, last night, said that it was necessary for the country to know conditions throughout the country, that there were places that would find it extremely difficult fo r economic reasons to carry their own load, and that if the rest o f the country knew about what was happening in any locality which did not have a sufficient economic background to carry on the necessary services o f education, o f health, o f care for the young people o f the community, then the rest o f the country, realizing the importance that everywhere these things be considered, would be w illing to help bring up the economic level in their neighbors’ communities. Perhaps that seems a long way to go, and yet I think we realize that no one in this country stays forever in the place where he is born. It is true a few people never move out o f their locality, but more and more we are finding that people travel and the people who unfor tunately have come from communities which cannot give their chil dren a fair chance are going to come and live, perhaps, in the community where we pride ourselves that we give our children every thing it is possible to give them. Therefore, we have got to become national-minded. W e want to try to take an interest in the economic situation o f every part o f the country. W e want the whole country, for instance, to know when one part o f the country needs legislation to help it bring up its eco nomic status. W e all want to get back o f the measures which will help every community. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Proceedings o f the W hite House Conference 84 In the meantime it may be necessary for other communities to help those communities until they have been able to make every community in the country self-sufficient enough to carry whatever they really need to do for the well-being o f their children. I think the important thing that we want to bring home to our con stituencies is that this program must be the responsibility o f every citizen, not just to see that a child in his own community has a chance— that is very important, very necessary—but as a citizen o f a Nation to watch the children o f every community. I have seen many things in different parts o f this country, and I have seen children that I think everyone who is listening today would agree with me had very little chance o f being valuable citizens in a democracy. Democracy is being challenged today, and we are the greatest democracy. It remains to be seen if we have the vision and the courage and the self-sacrifice to give our children all over the Nation a chance to be real citizens o f a democracy. I f we are going to do that, we must see that they get a chance at health, that they get a chance at an equal opportunity for education. W e must see that they get a chance at the kind o f education which w ill help them to meet a changing world. W e must see that, as far as possible, these youngsters, when they leave school, get a chance to work and get a chance to be accepted and to feel important as members o f their communities. I think there is nothing that helps one to develop so much as responsibility, and for that reason I think it is well for us to try to bring home to every one o f our citizens the fact that our young people must be given an opportunity to feel real responsibility in their communities. I also feel that it is a pity we do not, some o f us, retire from some o f our responsibilities and turn them over to younger people in our communities, because we learn by doing and they w ill learn by doing, too. And I hope that from this Conference there will come a knowl edge throughout the country o f the needs o f young people and a willingness on the part o f more and more people to take a national point o f view and a national sense o f responsibility fo r the young people o f the Nation who w ill some day make the Nation, The Responsibility o f Government Frank B ane E xecutive D irector, Council of State Governments A ll people have not always agreed that government has any responsi bility for the welfare o f children. John Randolph, more than a hundred years ago, bitterly complained o f a new movement that had https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, January 18-MO, 1 9 $ 85 recently seized the mind o f man that government should educate our children for us, and he prophesied that such a policy would undermine the moral fiber o f the Nation and make us all laggards and, perchance, drunkards. About 85 years ago President Pierce, in vetoing a bill for Federal aid to the States fo r welfare purposes, said in no uncertain terms that the United States under the Constitution has no responsibility in this field. President T aft, some 30 years ago, questioning whether he should sign a bill just passed by Congress establishing a United States Children’s Bureau, observed that interest in the education o f children and their development was one thing, but recourse to the National Government fo r a bureau o f this sort was decidedly another thing. The President was more accurate, perhaps, than he realized. The establishment o f the United States Children’s Bureau was another thing, but a very important thing, and one which marked the beginning o f a new era fo r childhood in America, an era in which, within the short space o f one generation, all areas o f government, Fed eral, State, and local, would recognize their collective and cooperative responsibility for the welfare o f all children, would assume that re sponsibility, and would make great progress in an effective manner toward building a sound and lasting foundation for this democracy o f ours. W hat is the responsibility o f government for the welfare o f chil dren ? The answer is not difficult. Previous W hite House conferences have charted the course, have laid out a program, and we are well under way. It is the responsibility o f government to see that the children o f these United States are well-born, that they enjoy a sheltered childhood amidst healthful surroundings, that they have an opportunity to play, that educational opportunities are available to all in accordance with their needs, and last but most important, that provision is made for the economic security o f families and that there is a place for children in the economic scheme o f things when they grow up. Upon these last two, it seems, all else depends. One o f the first problems to which the newly established United States Children’s Bureau directed its attention was that o f maternal and infant hygiene. As a result o f its activities in cooperation with States and localities and o f the extension o f public-health activities and services generally there has been a great and constant decrease in infant m ortality throughout the country and the maternal death rate has been greatly curtailed. First, under the Sheppard-Towner A ct, and now under the stimu lation o f the maternal and child-health section o f the Social Security A ct, all Federal, State, and local governmental agencies are busily engaged in a Nation-wide effort to reduce further the hazards o f moth https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 86 Proceedings of the White House Conference erhood, to reduce further infant mortality, and to insure for all children a running start in the game o f life. A sheltered childhood, amidst healthful surroundings, and an op portunity to play—here, too, progress has been made, but here the unevenness o f our progress is most apparent. A ll levels o f government are now agreed that families should be kept together, and concrete governmental programs are now designed to this end, as Homer Folks said last night, after 30 years. States, and particularly municipalities, have within the short space o f 25 years adopted recreation as a regular and continuing function o f government and have built recreation programs. The city o f 10,000 or more anywhere in this country without a playground fo r children is today an exception. Despite this development, however, such facilities are not available for all children because in this country some children still must work. It is therefore, I believe, a responsibility o f government to outlaw child labor in America definitely, form ally, and effectively by ratifying the child-labor amendment now pending. A s in no other country in the world, our governments have accepted the responsibility fo r providing educational advantages to all children, and yet education, like some other more concrete commodities, suffers from problems o f distribution; excellent facilities in some parts o f the country, very poor facilities in others. The establishment o f certain minimum standards, the financing o f an adequate system in rural a9 well as urban America, the gearing o f our educational system to meet the needs o f children with differing mental and physical character istics, are problems which still confront government and to which we must devote our attention during the next decade. The question might well be raised, in fact has been raised during the past few years, Can these services to children be maintained and extended apart from the economic security o f families? And what w ill it profit us to rear, educate, and train coming genera tions if, when they grow up, many o f them find the doors o f oppor tunity plastered with “ No help wanted” signs ? Unemployment and fam ily security—these above all else seem to constitute our m ajor problems as we enter the 1940’s ; problems which are within themselves the m ajor responsibility o f our modem gov ernment. W e have attacked these problems on a broad front and we have made much progress, but in the next decade we must find a comprehen sive solution fo r our economic ills. W e are, however, well started on our main job, the main job o f every nation, that o f building citizens, and during the next decade we mean to see this job through. Just what, in a word, is the responsibility o f government? I can state it no better than a very distinguished American whose birthday https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, January 18-30,191fi 87 we celebrate next month stated it some 80 years ago. Abraham Lin coln stated that it is the responsibility o f government to do fo r the people what needs to be done but what they cannot by individual effort do at all, or do so well, for themselves. I think this Conference subscribes to just that insofar as the government’s responsibility fo r the welfare o f children is concerned. I do not know, Madam Chairman, what these services w ill cost. I have not tried to estimate it, but I do know that they are the price o f democracy, a price that we can afford, I am convinced, and a price that we must pay i f we would maintain this America o f ours as a land o f opportunity, a land o f freedom, and a land o f peace. Address by the Federal Security Adm inistrator P aul V. McNutt It is a great privilege and pleasure to participate in this Conference on Children in a Democracy, and I wish at the outset to pay tribute to the splendid leadership o f the Children’s Bureau in organizing the Conference and likewise to the distinguished membership o f the Con ference, whose careful study and care have resulted in such stimulating reports around which the discussions o f the Conference have taken place. In studying these reports and in follow ing the discussions, I have been impressed with the seriousness o f purpose behind the Con ference and the acute realization by all o f us o f the necessity fo r press ing for increased work fo r the welfare o f our children i f we are to maintain the safety o f our democracy, because this safety depends in large measure upon the welfare o f our children. A s the Administra tor o f the agency o f the Federal Government having the responsibility fo r many o f our social-security programs looking toward the security o f the fam ily, its wage earners, and individual dependent members, I am continuously aware o f the great extent to which the well-being o f our children depends upon real security fo r the family. Mr. Bane brought that fact to your attention, and through his long experience in the Social Security Board and now with the Council o f State Governments, I know that he, by direct observation, has seen the necessity for really assuring the welfare o f our children through assuring the security o f our entire family. This Conference has discussed all the elements making fo r this security. It has considered the economic aspects, the health aspects, the state o f education, recreation, and even o f religion. That this Conference is a successful conference no one would doubt who had attended its sessions or who had heard reports o f its discus sions. But the real success w ill not be measured by what is done here, however brilliant the discussions have been, however earnest has been our attention to the problems presented. It will be measured rather https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 88 Proceedings of the White House Conference by the extent to which we have learned in discussing these problems together what is to be done back in the communities. That is the test. It is the test o f the agency in which I am concerned. I go to the local communities to test the efficiency o f that agency, to see i f those who are entitled to benefits are receiving them promptly. In stimulating community action, in educating our community groups, in m obilizing our community public opinion to focus attention on the problems and on the programs already in existence for the solution o f those prob lems, in considering where these programs are insufficient or inade quately administered, we need to use all the resources at our disposal. W e must depend not only on our public agencies to further the various programs in which we take interest. Private organizations also have a great contribution to make, organizations like the Am eri can Legion with such a long history o f effective child-welfare work, and our women’s organizations and our luncheon and civic clubs, as well as the private and voluntary institutions engaged in administer ing their share o f these programs. W e want to expand that work. A ll o f them welcome efforts to intensify their work by joint and cooperative action. W e must promote this joint effort. F or this purpose the National Citizens Committee which you are organizing w ill be an effective tool. A s a public administrator I cannot close without expressing, too, the importance o f a strong public service with a high sense o f responsibility for the success o f any program fo r children. This service must be organized effectively and administered by com petent people, and to translate the high purpose o f this Conference into effective action we need to make this the beginning and not the end o f our discussion. Discussion Fred K . Hoehler, director, American Public W elfare Association, chairman o f the Committee on Organization, presented the follow ing resolution, which was adopted by the Conference: “ That the Execu tive Committee, with the Report Committee o f the Conference, be instructed to arrange fo r the distribution o f topical reports for study and discussion in connection with the follow -up program ; each report so released to have a foreword describing changes which are the result o f discussion at this Conference.” A second motion was made by Mr. Hoehler as follow s: “ That the Planning Committee be instructed to direct the Report Committee to prepare a final report based on the General Report adopted by the Conference on January 19, to include also material which is the product o f discussion on the topical reports from the group meet https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis , On Children in a Democracy January 18-&0,19JtO 89 ings o f January 18 or submitted by Conference members as such material is deemed suitable by the Report Committee, and further that the final report shall have the objective o f presenting to the people o f the Nation a comprehensive picture o f the facts relating to children in a democracy and the goals toward which attention would be directed, it being understood that the final report shall be published as the report o f the Report Committee.” This resolution was adopted. The C h a ir m a n . The time has now come to discuss the report o f the follow-up committee. It will be distributed to you. I think we ought to realize that in this Conference there are persons who are active members o f over 150 national organizations, so that from the composition o f this Conference the actual personnel for putting these suggestions into effect all over the country is already here. In ad dition to these members, a number o f national organizations that did not participate in the formation o f the recommendations have never theless been asked to come into the session this morning. These are important national bodies that have large memberships before whom these recommendations can be brought in their local meetings for discussion and for local action in implementing and carrying out such recommendations. W e also have here today, and have had throughout the Conference, representatives o f the press, representa tives o f various magazines, and representatives o f the radio. This report will be discussed under the 5-minute rule which we have had previously in all other discussions. Miss Lenroot will read the detailed recommendations so that you may have them once more in your minds. After the reading o f the recommendations by the executive secre tary o f the Conference, the chairman commented: “ I think the sug gestion that the Planning Committee select a group o f 5, and that that group of 5 take responsibility for organizing a larger group of 25 members for follow-up work, is very wise. In other words, the Planning Committee does not want to take the full responsibility for running and developing this program in the future, but it is willing to take the responsibility o f selecting a small group who will put their minds on just the one thing o f developing a permanent committee which can carry on.” Discussion o f the report o f the committee on the follow-up program brought out the following points: The assistance of the National Citizens Committee should not be limited to the States and the Territories but should include also the Philippine Islands. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 90 Proceedings of the White House Conference Emphasis should be placed upon the importance o f securing the cooperation o f the motion-picture industry and broadcasting systems in connection with follow-up activities. “I f children are really to function normally, happily, and most efficiently in democratic living, most of the responsibility must rest upon the parents. This function is implicit, but it does not appear to be sufficiently recognized in a specific way. The Conference recom mendations call upon agencies and organizations and upon Govern ment departments to do this and that and the other thing, and upon the community and citizens, but they do not with any great clearness indicate what is expected of parents.” Reference was made to the importance o f the formation o f State conferences to put into effect the findings o f the Conference, as pro vided for in the committee report. Discussion o f the composition o f the National Citizens Committee, the members o f which are to be selected by the group o f 5 to be author ized by the Planning Committee, brought a proposal that represen tation should be geographic insofar as possible, although State representation would be impossible in a group comprising approxi mately 25 members. It was suggested that the membership might be 50 or more, with a small executive committee. The Conference report does not place sufficient emphasis upon the importance o f private welfare effort. In the follow-up work boards o f private agencies and other citizen groups will be found most effective. The question was raised as to whether the follow-up program should not make specific provision for follow-up information on orderly and systematic procedure in organizing and promoting Federal and State legislation. During the coming year probably every State will be having a State conference o f social work. Instead o f having an individual White House Conference in each of the States, efforts should be made to arrange with State conference committees to have a definite part o f the program set aside for consideration o f the White House Con ference program. Local groups concerned with follow-up activities should consider securing the cooperation o f all the civic clubs and the various women’s organizations; in the larger communities councils o f social agencies are especially important. “ The National Citizens Committee might well consider not only what democracy must do for the child, but what children can do for democ racy. Children want a chance to do what they can for democracy by translating its principles in terms o f their personal lives. With the https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, January 18-&0,19JJ) 91 children with whom we work we shall try to share some o f the responsi bility for putting the program o f this Conference across and giving them that part o f it that is their burden and their due; that is, helping them to translate into the terms o f they* own living the principles that are implied in this whole program.” “ In all committees and programs set up to follow up the work o f this Conference, whether National, regional, State, or county, due considera tion should be given to minority representation in the planning and setting up o f these programs and committees and in actual partici pation in the follow-up activities.” Statements made by members o f the Conference in regard to par ticipation o f organizations in the follow-up program included the follow ing: 1 ^ V . H iscock, professor of public health, School o f Medicine, Yale University. It seems to me that this Conference is an exhibition o f joint planning and joint thinking which each one o f us may carry back to our local and State communities and organizations with a great deal o f profit, and I think this organization and the joint plan ning we have experienced here in approaching this magnificent prob lem from so many angles is something which needs to be forwarded as the crux o f the ultimate success in our joint action in the future. From the standpoint of observing the work o f these national health agencies in relation to other national welfare agencies, and from the standpoint o f observing the very many National and State agencies interested in education where, for example, in school health educa tion alone we have over 45 national agencies interested, I hope that the new National Conference for Cooperation in School Health Education, which numbers now over 50 national agencies, as well as the agencies aligned with the National Health Council, may be useful in forwarding this movement which has started here, and in helping from the vol untary approach. In the interdepartmental committee we have at the national level an illustration o f the value o f joint study and joint action which, I think, i f applied at the State and local levels, could accomplish great things. In the local health councils, local health committees o f our councils o f social agencies, we have an instru ment which the National Health Council is helping to promote and which may be useful in carrying forward this fine program. E m m a C. P u s c h n e r , director, National Child Welfare Division, American Legion. The American Legion, in its child-welfare pro gram, sets as its ideal a square deal for every child, and it will be our responsibility to bring immediately to the attention o f our members, numbering over a million and a half men and women, the informa tion that has come out o f this White House Conference on Children in a Democracy, to study that information and give it publicity, https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis g2 Proceedings of the White House Conference and to utilize it in the establishment, maintenance, and protection of proper standards and facilities for child welfare. W il l ia m F ein blo o m , director, Public Health Bureau, The Ameri can Optometric Association. Representing the American Optometric Association, I can promise the cooperation o f both our National Health Bureau and our State Health Bureau in carrying out the purposes o f this Conference and in helping conserve the vision o f our children to build up, in the words o f our President, our inter national defense. Mrs. G eorge E. C alvert , State president, Oklahoma Congress of Parents and Teachers. I happen to be here as a parent, representing the Oklahoma Congress of Parents and Teachers. I happened also to be the chairman o f the State follow-up committee of the 1930 Conference. W e organized at that tune a State-wide council of child development and parent education. It is still working, and we feel that the tie-up o f all these organizations is important on a State level, going into our study groups and particularly into our parent-teacher study groups, some o f which are still studying the children’s charter. Mrs. D o roth y J. B e l l a n o a , vice-president, Amalgamated Clothing Workers o f America. I am speaking on behalf o f labor. Labor has a great stake in this Conference. After all, the majority o f the children in our democracy are children o f workers—industrial work ers and farmers. I can assure you, Madam Chairman and members o f this Conference, that I shall give this Conference the greatest publicity in every one o f the cities and States where my organization has a membership, and we do have a membership in 32 States of this Nation. I think it is very important to make plans and to work for a better childhood. I am very much concerned about the subversive forces that are working among the young in our Nation. Rev. H. J oseph J acobi, executive director, Associated Catholic Charities o f New Orleans. When I left here in April o f last year I was determined that since I was a representative o f the Governor, I would do everything that I could to forward the interest of this Conference. So when I went back I suggested to him that he appoint someone officially to head the activities in regard to the Conference. I did not expect that he would appoint me, but he d id ; so first o f all I asked him for his full backing and for his authorization to act in his name and with his authority as the first safe step in doing any thing at all. Then to form a State-wide committee I called a small group o f four or five people who gave me suggestions for the mem bership o f the State-wide group, and it took us about 2 weeks to decide on that membership. W e got together a group o f about 25 on the State-wide group and we discussed many of the things that https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, January 18^20,19JJ) 93 were brought up here for a State-wide program. We decided to have a research committee and a publicity committee. The research committee concerned itself with the situation in Louisiana, getting together what material we had already and looking out for possible sources o f additional information as to our own situation as well as for information that would give us comparable figures and data from the rest o f the States. That committee has been working quite regularly since the middle o f August. I think I am very fortunate in knowing that I have a group of people waiting for me back home, people from the educational field, from the religious field, from the health field, from the two schools o f social work, from the two universities o f medicine, from all groups, from the parent-teachers association, from the religious groups. In addition to that our research committee has gotten up a list of all the organizations that might be interested in the work o f the Conference, and in lieu o f a State-wide conference, we have agreed that we would send representatives who will have prepared speeches and information at their fingertips, to appear at the annual meetings o f the parent-teacher, State education, and State welfare groups, at State conferences o f social workers, and at national meetings o f the religious organizations. Mrs. C h ar les W. S e w e l l , administrative director, Associated Women o f the American Farm Bureau Federation. I should only like to add to what has already been said, the very fine feeling of the Associated Women o f the American Farm Bureau Federation, pledging you our support in trying to carry out this program. Many references have been made to the rural problems, and we should like to put at your disposal the offices o f the Associated Women and the American Farm Bureau Federation to promote this feeling o f good will, and cooperation in the program. Mrs. W arren L. M abrey , secretary, National Congress of Parents and Teachers. I am here as a représentative o f the National Congress, o f Parents and Teachers, which has a membership of more than 2^4 million. Our main purpose is that of child welfare. Our member ship has been looking forward for many months to the outcome o f this White House Conference, and I can assure you o f our cooperation and the widespread publicity that will be given to the findings o f this Conference and the application that will be made in our parentteacher meetings throughout our country. E sth er C ole F r a n k l i n , associate in social studies, American Asso ciation o f University Women. Those o f us who are associated with the educational and civic groups know that whatever progress is made in social legislation and administration can be effective only in the 262205°—40---- 7 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 94 Proceedings of the White House Conference degree in which we assume our responsibility. I hesitated for that reason to pledge cooperation, because I know the vast amount o f edu cation which still needs to be done through our communities. In our welfare program in the American Association o f University Women, we welcome the impetus that has been given to the child-welfare pro grams by this Conference, its discussions, its recommendations, and to the materials which are forthcoming, we offer the cooperation o f the American Association o f University Women. M a r t A lic e J ones , director o f children’s work, International Coun cil o f Religious Education. The International Council o f Religious Education, representing the educational boards of the Protestant denominations in the United States, is giving one o f its sessions in its annual meeting next month to a consideration o f the findings and recommendations o f the White House Conference. Through our National denominational and State organizations, we will give the widest possible publicity to the recommendations for the welfare of children, in which we are all deeply interested. F red L. A dair , M. D., chairman, American Committee on Maternal Welfare. Miss Lenroot and members o f the Conference, I would likA to assure you that so far as I can judge from the attitude o f the phy sicians, doctors will not be among the least to help carry on the pro gram outlined in the reports, both the General Report and the topical reports. Doctors have little to contribute except service, but that is extremely important in bringing health to individuals and to communi ties. There are many things which pertain to health that the doctors cannot provide, such as food and proper housing and hygiene, and many things which pertain to individual as well as community health. The doctors can give advice, but they cannot always provide the means o f carrying out the advice. So it is up to other agencies to cooperate with the physicians, and I am sure the physicians will not be backward in cooperating with other agencies. There was general discussion by members and guests o f the Confer ence on the follow-up program, followed by adoption o f committee recommendations as amended. The Conference sessions closed with the following pledge, proposed by the executive secretary, Katharine F. Lenroot, in response to which the entire membership arose: The members of this Conference, hearing in mind those who are no longer with us and those who are still here to lend their support to the cause of childhood, with gratitude, reverence, and thanksgiving for the things which they did, the courage which they manifested, and the leadership which they gave during the last decade, resolve to go forward in a manner worthy of them and worthy of the children whom we serve. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, Jarmary 18-20,191fi 95 After the close o f the Conference sessions, the Planning Commit tee met to take action upon matters referred to the committee by the Conference. Dr. Henry F. Helmholz presided. A motion was made and adopted to direct the Report Committee to proceed to revise the General Conference Report as adopted by the Conference, interpreting and coordinating the suggestions made in the course o f the discussion and the official action taken by the Conference. It was voted that, in accordance with the Conference action, the Report Committee be authorized to prepare, with the aid o f the staff, and publish a final report based on the General Report, which will include also, in general, materials contained in the topical reports with such additional material collected by the staff as may be added. It was voted to accept the offer made by Miss Lenroot on behalf o f the Children’s Bureau to take the responsibility for the actual publication, both of the General Report and o f the final report o f the Report Committee. Discussion followed as to methods o f creating the National Citizens Committee, authorized by the Conference, for purposes o f follow up. The suggestion that 48 persons, one representing each State, constitute the committee was given consideration. After consider able discussion, it was voted that a committee of 5 be appointed by the Chair, after receiving suggestions from members o f the Planning Committee; this committee of 5 to appoint not less than 15 and not more than 25 persons who shall constitute the National Citizens Committee for purposes o f a follow-up program. These 5 persons are not to be excluded from membership on the National Citizens Committee but are to be the nucleus of the committee. The National Citizens Committee, when created, is to be entirely autonomous and independent o f the Conference administration. It was voted to authorize the Children’s Bureau to take such action as may be necessary, including possibly action by the Presi dent, to bring about the creation o f a Federal Interagency Committee to assist in the development o f the follow-up program. It was voted that the Planning Committee continue its existence, subject to call by the Organization Committee as may be necessary. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis O R G A N IZ A T IO N A N D M EM BERS O F T H E CONFERENCE https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis OFFICERS OF TH E CONFERENCE H onorary Chairman, THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES H onorary Vice Chairman, MRS. FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT Chairman, FRANCES PERKINS, Secretary of Labor Vice Chairmen Milburn L. W ilson Homer F olks F rank P. Graham Henry F. H elmholz, M. D. Right Rev. Msgr. R obert F. K eegan Jacob K efecs J osephine R oche E xecutive Secretary, K atharine F. L enroot Assistant Secretary, E mma O. L tjndberg ☆ Conference Committees PLANNING COMM ITTEE The Officers of the Conference and the following members; *Grace Abbott I rvin A bell, M. D. F red L. A dair, M. D. Mrs. H. W. A hart A rthur J. A ltmeyer F rank B ane Chester I. B arnard James V. Bennett M. O. B ousfield, M. D. Allen T. B urns W illiam G. Carr *C. C. Carstens Oscar L. Chapman E lisabeth Christman Courtenay D inwiddie Mrs. Saidie Orr D unbar Mrs. Gladys T albott Edwards Martha M. E liot, M. D. Charles F. Ernst F rank P. F enton Sidney E. Goldstein Ben G. Graham H arry Geeenstexn Clifford G. Grulee, M. D. Herman E. H endrix T. A rnold H tlt. W illiam H odson F red K. Hoehler Jane M. H oey H arry L. H opkins Charles S. Johnson R ev. F. Ernest Johnson R ev. George Johnson A lice V. K etjtter P aul U. K ellogg Solomon L owenstein P h ilip Murray R t. R ev. M sgr. T homas J. O’D wyer R t. R ev. Msgr. J ohn O’Grady E dward A. O’Neal T homas P a r r a n , M. D. F rederick D ouglas P atterson Mrs. J. K. Pettengill James S. Plant, M. D. L angley Porter, M. D. E mma C. Puschner H omer P. R ainey R t. R ev, M sgr. Michael J. R eady ♦Deceased. 99 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Proceedings of the White House Conference 100 F elix J. Underwood, M. D. ♦Liixian D. W ald J ames E. W est A ubrey W illiam s Abel W olman Owen D. Y oung George F. Z ook A gnes O. R egan Grace B oss Ga t B. Shepperson L ouise Stanley Mrs. Nathan Straus J ohn W. Stppebaker Louis J. T aber COMM ITTEE ON ORGANIZATION Chairman, F red K. H oehler Vice Chairman, George F. Z ook W illiam G. Carr Elisabeth Christman Mrs. Sajdie Orr D unbar Clifford G. Gruleb, M. D. J ane M. Hoey K atharine F. L enroot and the vice chairmen of the Conference R EPO RT COM M ITTEE Chairman, H omer F olks R abbi Edward L. I srael 0. A nderson A ldrich, M. D. Hugh R. J ackson C linton W. Areson Charles S. J ohnson Chester I. B arnard R ev. George Johnson F rank G. Boudreau, M. D. W tt.ltam Clayton B ower J acob K epecs R ev. Bryan J. MoE ntegart W illiam G. Carr A. Graeme Mitchell, M. D. *C. C. Carstens W . R. Ogg Grace L. Coyle Mrs. Saidie Orr D unbar James S. Plant, M. D. Homer P. R ainey Mrs. K atharine} D ummer F isher F loyd W. R eeves L oula F riend D unn F eux J. Underwood, M. D. B en G. Graham C.-E. A. W inslow W illiam H odson F red K. H oehler Research Director, P hilip Klein Assistant Research D irector, Harald H. L und ♦Deceased. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Conference Members ☆ GEO G RAPH IC D ISTR IB U TIO N ALASKA Mrs. Robert Bruce Atwood, Anchorage, director in Alaska for General Federa tion o f Women’s Clubs. Anthony J. Dimond, Juneau, Delegate from Alaska, House of Representatives, U. S. Congress. HAWAII Mrs. Elizabeth J. K. Lucas, Honolulu, county agent, City and County of Honolulu. *F. E. Trotter, M. D., Honolulu, Territorial commissioner o f public health. PUERTO RICO Ana Bosch, San Juan, associate child-labor consultant, U. S. Children’s Bureau. Beatriz Lassalle, Santurce, Chief, Bureau of Social Welfare, Department of Health. Marta Robert de Romeu, M. D., Santurce, Chief, Bureau of Maternal and Child Hygiene, Department o f Health. ALABAMA James N. Baker, M. D., Montgomery, State health officer of Alabama, Depart ment of Public Health. Loula Friend Dunn, Montgomery, commissioner, State Department of Public Welfare. Mrs. Mary H. Fowler, Birmingham, superintendent, State Training School for Girls. Frederick Douglas Patterson, Ph. D., president, Tuskegee Institute. Edward E. Strong, Birmingham, executive secretary, Southern Negro Youth Congress. ARIZONA Ann Mary Bracken, Phoenix, director, Child Welfare Division, State Board of Social Security and Public Welfare. Herman E. Hendrix, Ph. D., Phoenix, State superintendent of public instruc tion; chairman, Council of Chief State School Officers. Yic H. Householder, Phoenix, president, Arizona Society for Crippled Children. Mrs. John R. Murdock, Tempe. ARKANSAS Mrs. Edwin Bevens, Helena, chairman, Department of Public Welfare, General Federation of Women’s Clubs. W. B. Grayson, M. D., Little Rock, State health officer, State Board of Health. Mrs. Lillian D. McDermott, LL. D., Little Rock, referee, Juvenile Court of Pulaski County, ♦Deceased. 101 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 102 Proceedings of the White House. Conference Beth Muller, Little Bock, director, Child Welfare Division, State Department o f Public Welfare. Mrs. Scott Wood, Hot Springs, chairman, Committee on Juvenile Protection, National Congress of Parents and Teachers. CALIFORNIA Mrs. H. W. Ahart, Lincoln, president, Associated Women of the American Farm Bureau Federation. Kenneth S. Beam, Los Angeles, executive secretary, Coordinating Councils, Inc. Alida C. Bowler, Los Angeles, superintendent at large, field service, Office of Indian Affairs, U. S. Department of the Interior. Mrs. May P. Carmody, San Francisco, manager, Junior Division, State Depart ment o f Employment. Arlien Johnson, Ph. D., Los Angeles, dean, the Graduate School of Work, Uni versity of Southern California. Harold E. Jones, Ph. D., Berkeley, director, Institute o f Child Welfare, and professor of psychology, University of California. Ben B. Lindsey, Los Angeles, judge of the Superior Court o f Los Angeles County. Karl F. Meyer, M. D., Ph. D., Berkeley, director, curricula in public health, University o f California. Guy S. Millberry, D. D. S., San Francisco, dean, College of Dentistry, University of California. Rt. Rev. Msgr. Thomas J. O’Dwyer, Los Angeles, executive director, Catholic Welfare Bureau of Los Angeles and San Diego. Langley Porter, M. D., San Francisco, dean, Medical School, University o f California. John A. Sexson, Ed. D., Pasadena, superintendent of schools, Pasadena. Nina Simmonds, Sc. D., San Francisco, lecturer in medicine and nutrition (dentistry), University o f California. Francis Scott Smyth, M. D „ San Francisco, professor o f pediatrics, Medical School, University of California. Paul S. Taylor, Ph. D., Berkeley, associate professor o f economics, University o f California. Mrs. H. Jerry Voorhis, San Dimas. Archibald B. Young, Sacramento, chairman o f board, State Department o f Social Welfare. COLORADO Helen Burke, Denver, executive secretary, Colorado Tuberculosis Association. Very Rev. Msgr. John R. Mulroy, Denver, director, Catholic Charities o f the Archdiocese of Denver. James G. Patton, Denver, president, Colorado Farmers’ Union. Josephine Roche, LL. D., Denver, chairman, the Interdepartmental Committee to Coordinate Health and Welfare Activities. Alfred H. Washburn, M. D., Denver, director, Child Research Council. CONNECTICUT Mary F. Champlin, Hartford, medical social worker, Division of Crippled Chil dren, State Department of Health. Rev. Russell J. Clinchy, D. D., Litt. D., Hartford, the First Church of Christ in Hartford. Mrs. Herbert Field Fisher, Hartford, member of Public Welfare Council, State of Connecticut; legislative chairman of Connecticut Council o f Catholic Women. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, January 18-20, 191fi 103 Arnold Gesell, M. D., Ph. D., Sc. D., New Haven, director, Clinic o f Child Develop ment, School o f Medicine, Yale University. Hugh Hartshorne, Ph. D., New Haven, research associate in religion, Yale Uni versity. Ira Y. Hiscock, New Haven, professor of public health, School o f Medicine, Yale University. Roy L. McLaughlin, Meriden, superintendent, Connecticut School for Boys. Katharine D. Miller, M. D., Greenwich, chairman, Community Council of Green wich. Grover F. Powers, M. D., Sc. D., New Haven, professor of pediatrics, School of Medicine, Yale University. C.-E. A. Winslow, Dr. P. H., New Haven, professor of public health, School of Medicine, Yale University. DELAWARE Mrs. William S. Bergland, Wilmington, chairman, State Board o f Charities o f Delaware. Mrs. Charles F. Richards, Wilmington, member of board, Children’s Bureau of Delaware. Etta J. Wilson, Wilmington, executive secretary, Delaware Citizens Association. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA (Washington) . Arthur J. Altmeyer, Ph. D., LL. D., chairman, Social Security Board, Federal Security Agency. Edna P. Amidon, Chief, Home Economics Education Service, U. S. Office o f Edu cation, Federal Security Agency. H. Dewey Anderson, Ph. D., economic consultant, Temporary National Economic Committee, Federal Trade Commission. Mary Anderson, director, Women’s Bureau, U. S. Department o f Labor. Mrs. Katharine McFarland Ansley, executive secretary, American Home Eco nomics Association. Mary Irene Atkinson, director, Child Welfare Division, Children’s Bureau, U. S. Department of Labor. Helen W. Atwater, editor, Journal o f Home Economics, American Home Eco nomics Association. Edith M. Baker, consultant in medical social service, Children’s Bureau, U. S. Department of Labor. Oliver E. Baker, Ph. D., Sc. D., senior agricultural economist, Division of Farm Population and Rural Welfare, Bureau of Agricultural Economics, U. S. Department of Agriculture. Catherine Bauer, special consultant, U. S. Housing Authority, Federal Works Agency. Mary Beard, Litt. D., director, Nursing Service, American Red Cross. Willard W. Beatty, director, Education Division, Office o f Indian Affairs, U. S. Department o f the Interior. James Y. Bennett, director, Bureau of Prisons, U. S. Department of Justice. Fay L. Bentley, judge, Juvenile Court of the District o f Columbia. Mrs. Mary McLeod Bethune, LL.D., director, Division o f Negro Affairs, National Youth Administration, Federal Security Agency. Mrs. Clara M. Beyer, assistant director, Division o f Labor Standards, U. S. Department o f Labor. George E. Bigge, Ph. D., member, Social Security Board, Federal Security Agency, https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 104 Proceedings of the White House Conference Ruth O. Blakeslee, consultant on maternal and child health, Children’s Bureau, U. S. Department of Labor. Agnes M. Boynton, assistant to the director o f rural research, American Youth Commission. Mrs. Ruth Muskrat Bronson, associate guidance officer, Office of Indian Affairs, U. S. Department of the Interior. Mrs. Anna Lalor Burdick, Litt. D., formerly with U. S. Office of Education. Ambrose Caliver, Ph. D., senior specialist in the education o f Negroes, U. S. Office of Education, Federal Security Agency. Arno B. Cammerer, LL. D., regional director, National Park Service, U. S. Department of the Interior. William G. Carr, Ph. D., secretary, Educational Policies Commission, National Education Association. Elsa Castendyck, director, Child Guidance Division, Children’s Bureau, U. S. Department of Labor. Oscar L. Chapman, Assistant Secretary of the Interior. Elisabeth Christman, secretary-treasurer, National Women’s Trade Union League. Ewan Clague, Ph. D., director, Bureau of Employment Security, Social Security Board, Federal Security Agency. Miles L. Colean, research director, Housing Survey, Twentieth Century Fund. John Collier, Commissioner, Office of Indian Affairs, U. S. Department of the Interior. Mrs. Minnie Fisher Cunningham, senior specialist in information, Division of Information, Agricultural Adjustment Administration, U. S. Department of Agriculture. Edwin F. Daily, M. D., director, Division of Maternal and Child Health, Children’s Bureau, U. S. Department of Labor. Maxine Davis, writer. Norman H. Davis, LL. D., chairman, American Red Cross. Lindley H. Dennis, executive secretary, American Vocational Association, Inc. Naomi Deutsch, R. N., director, Public Health Nursing Unit, Children’s Bureau, U. S. Department of Labor. Marshall E. Dimock, Ph. D., administrative assistant, Immigration and Natu ralization Service, U. S. Department o f Justice. Ethel C. Dunham, M. D., director, Division of Research in Child Development, Children’s Bureau, U. S. Department of Labor. Halbert L. Dunn, M. D., Ph. D., chief statistician, Vital Statistics Division, Bureau o f the Census, U. S. Department o f Commerce. Charles W. Eliot, 2d, director, National Resources Planning Board, Executive Office of the President. Martha M. Eliot, M. D., Assistant Chief, Children’s Bureau, U. S. Department o f Labor. Mrs. Elisabeth Shirley Enochs, associate in public relations, Children’s Bureau, U. S. Department of Labor. Madeline Ensign, program director, Mutual Broadcasting Co. Joseph H. B. Evans. Mordecai Ezekial, Ph. D., economic adviser, Office of the Secretary, U. S. Department of Agriculture. Isidore S. Falk, Ph. D „ acting director, Bureau o f Research and Statistics, Social Security Board, Federal Security Agency. * Robert Fechner, director, Civilian Conservation Corps. ♦Deceased. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, January 18-&0,1040 105 Frank P. Fenton, director of organization, American Federation of Labor. Esther Cole Franklin, Ph. D., associate in social studies, American Association of University Women. Helen Fuller, administrative assistant, National Youth Administration, Federal Security Agency. Edna A. Gerken, supervisor of health education, Office o f Indian Affairs, U. S. Department o f the Interior. Willard E. Givens, LL. D., executive secretary, National Education Association. Bess Goodykoontz, D. Ped., Assistant Commissioner, U. S. Office of Education, Federal Security Agency. Rt. Rev. Msgr., Francis J. Haas, Ph. D., LL. D., dean, School o f Social Science, Catholic University o f America. Blanche Halbert, rent-relations counselor, Management Review, U. S. Housing Authority, Federal Works Agency. Agnes K. Hanna, director, Social Service Division, Children’s Bureau, U. S. Department of Labor. * Col. F. C. Harrington, Commissioner of Work Projects, Work Projects Admin istration, Federal Works Agency. Mary H. S. Hayes, Ph. D., director, Division o f Employment, National Youth Administration, Federal Security Agency. M. H. Hedges, director of research, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers. Marjorie M. Heseltine, specialist in nutrition, Children’s Bureau, U. S. Depart ment of Labor. Jane M. Hoey, LL. D., Director, Bureau o f Public Assistance, Social Security Board, Federal Security Agency. Robert C. Hood, M. D., director, Crippled Children’s Division, Children’s Bureau, U. S. Department o f Labor. Harry L. Hopkins, LL. D., Secretary o f Commerce. Mrs. Isabelle M. Hopkins, director, Editorial Division, Children’s Bureau, U. S. Department of Labor. John Ihlder, executive officer, Alley Dwelling Authority. Harry A. Jager, Chief, Occupational Information and Guidance Service, U. S. Office of Education, Federal Security Agency. Ethel M. Johnson, acting director, Washington office, International Labor Organization. Rev. George Johnson, Ph. D., LL. D., director, Department of Education, National Catholic Welfare Conference. Mordecai W. Johnson, D. D., LL. D., president, Howard University. Frances Jurkowitz, administrative assistant to the Secretary, U. S. Department of Labor. Peter Kasius, associate director, Bureau o f Public Assistance, Social Security Board, Federal Security Agency. Edward Keating, manager, Labor. Mrs. Florence Kerr, Assistant Commissioner of Work Projects, Work Projects Administration, Federal Works Agency. Hildegarde Kneeland, Ph. D., principal agricultural economist, Division of Statistical and Historical Research, Bureau o f Agricultural Economics, U. S. Department of Agriculture. John Aubel Kratz, director, Vocational Rehabilitation Division, U. S. Office of Education, Federal Security Agency. Mary LaDame, special assistant to the Secretary, U. S. Department of Labor. ♦Deceased. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 106 Proceedings o f the White House Conference Grace Langdon, Ph. D., specialist, family-life education, Work Projects Admin istration, Federal Works Agency. Rev. Lucian L. Lauerman, director, National Catholic School of Social Service, Mary E. Leeper, executive secretary, Association for Childhood Education. Katharine F. Lenroot, LL. D., Chief, Children’s Bureau, U. S. Department of Labor. Rev. Gerhard E. Lenski, Ph. D., pastor o f Grace Lutheran Church. Eduard C. Lindeman, general counsel, Work Projects Administration, Federal Works Agency. Frank Lorimer, Ph. D., secretary, Population Association o f America ; professor o f population studies, Graduate School, American University. Owen R. Lovejoy, LL. D. Isador Lubin, Ph. D., Commissioner, Bureau of Labor Statistics, U. S. Depart ment of Labor. Emma O. Lundberg, child-welfare consultant, Children’s Bureau, U. S. De partment of Labor. Mrs. Lydia Ann Lynde, extension specialist in parent education and family life, Extension Service, U. S. Department o f Agriculture. ♦Robert Marshall, Ph. D., chief, Division of Recreation and Lands, Forest Service, U. S. Department o f Agriculture. Elise H. Martens, Ph. D., senior specialist in the education of exceptional children, U. S. Office o f Education, Federal Security Agency. Geoffrey May, LL. D., associate director, Bureau o f Public Assistance, Social Security Board, Federal Security Agency. Benjamin E. Mays, Ph. D., dean, School o f Religion, Howard University. Joseph C. McCaskill, Ph. D., assistant to the Commissioner, Office o f Indian Affairs, U. S. Department o f the Interior. Beatrice McConnell, director, Industrial Division, Children’s Bureau, U. S. Department of Labor. J. J. McEntee, Director, Civilian Conservation Corps. Rose J. McHugh, chief, Administrative Service Division, Social Security Board, Federal Security Agency. Pearl Mclver, R. N., senior public-health-nursing consultant, U. S. Public Health Service, Federal Security Agency. Frank R. McNinch, special assistant to the Attorney General, U. S. Depart ment o f Justice. Paul V. McNutt, Federal Security Administrator. Mrs. Eugene Meyer, chairman, Survey Committee, Washington Council of Social Agencies. Capt. Rhoda J. Milliken, director, Women’s Bureau, Metropolitan Police De partment of the District of Columbia. Bruce M. Mohler, director, Bureau of Immigration, National Catholic Welfare Conference. Day Monroe, Ph. D., chief, Economics Division, Bureau of Home Economics, U. S. Department of Agriculture. Merrill G. Murray, Ph. D., Assistant Director, Bureau o f Old Age and Sur vivor’s Insurance, Social Security Board, Federal Security Agency. Robert J. Myers, Ph. D., director, Division o f Statistical Research, Children’s Bureau, U. S. Department o f Labor. James T. Nicholson, national director, American Junior Red Cross. Forest R. Nofifsinger, Ph. D., educational consultant, Safety and Traffic Engi neering Department, American Automobile Association. ♦Deceased. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, January 18-80,191fi 107 Mrs. John J. O’Connor, president, National Travelers Aid Association. W. R. Ogg, director of research, Washington Office, American Farm Bureau Federation. Rt, Rev. Msgr. John O’Grady, Ph. D., LL. D.f secretary, National Conference of Catholic Charities. Thomas Parran, M. D., Sc. D., LL. D., Surgeon General, U. S. Public Health Service, Federal Security Agency. Oscar M. Powell, executive director, Social Security Board, Federal Security Agency. Rt. Rev. Msgr. Michael J. Ready, general secretary, National Catholic Welfare Conference. Agnes G. Regan, LL. D., executive secretary, National Council of Catholic Women. Edith Rockwood, specialist in child welfare, Children’s Bureau, U. S. De partment of Labor. James F. Rogers, M. D., Dr. P. H., consultant in hygiene, U. S. Office of Education, Federal Security Agency. Rt. Rev. Msgr. John A. Ryan, D. D., LL. D., Litt. D., director, Department o f Social Action, National Catholic Welfare Conference. Philip E. Ryan, assistant director, Inquiry and Information Service, American National Red Cross. G. Howland Shaw, chief, Division of Foreign Service Personnel, Department of State. Sybil L. Smith, principal experiment-station administrator, Office o f Experi ment Stations, U. S. Department of Agriculture. Louise Stanley, Ph. D., Chief, Bureau of Home Economics, U. S. Department o f Agriculture. Hazel K. Stiebeling, Ph. D., senior food economist, Bureau of Home Economics, U. S. Department o f Agriculture. Collis Stocking, assistant director, Research and Analysis, Bureau of Unem ployment Compensation, Social Security Board, Federal Security Agency. Nathan Straus, Administrator, U. S. Housing Authority, Federal Works Agency. John W. Studebaker, LL. D., Commissioner of Education, U. S. Office o f Edu cation, Federal Security Agency. Carl C. Taylor, Ph. D., head, Division o f Farm Population and Rural Welfare, Bureau of Agricultural Economics, U. S. Department of Agriculture. Florence C. Thorne, assistant editor, American Federationist, American Fed eration of Labor. Josephine B. Timberlake, superintendent, the Volta Bureau. James G. Townsend, M. D., director of health, Office o f Indian Affairs, U. S. Department of the Interior. Leon E. Truesdell, Ph. D., Sc. D., chief statistician, Population Division, Bureau of the Census, U. S. Department of Commerce. Clifford E. Waller, M. D., Assistant Surgeon General, U. S. Public Health Service, Federal Security Agency. C. W. Warburton, Sc. D., deputy governor, Farm Credit Administration, U. S. Department o f Agriculture. Robert C. Weaver, Ph. D., special assistant to the Administrator, U. S. Housing Authority, Federal Works Agency; administrative assistant, Advisory Com mission to the Council of National Defense. Earlene White, president, National Federation of Business and Professional Women’s Clubs, Inc. Aubrey Williams, Administrator, National Youth Administration, Federal Secu rity Agency. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 108 Proceedings of the White House Conference Faith M. Williams, Ph. D., chief, Cost of Living Division, Bureau of Labor Statistics, U. S. Department o f Labor. Milburn L. Wilson, Sc. D., director o f extension work, U. S. Department of Agriculture. Mrs. Ellen S. Woodward, member, Social Security Board, Federal Security Agency. Thomas J. Woofter, Jr., Ph. D., economic adviser to the Administrator, Farm Security Administration, U. S. Department o f Agriculture. Betty C. Wright, executive director, American Society for the Hard o f Hearing. John C. Wright, Sc. D., assistant commissioner for vocational education, U. S. Office of Education, Federal Security Agency. George F. Zook, Ph. D., LL. D., Litt. D., president, American Council on Education. FLORIDA Walter Scott Criswell, Jacksonville, judge, Juvenile Court o f Duval County. Joseph S. Diver, Jacksonville, president, Boys’ Home Association. Marcus C. Fagg, Jacksonville, State superintendent, Children’s Home Society o f Florida. W. J. Gardiner, Daytona Beach, chairman, Underprivileged Child Committee, Daytona Beach Kiwanis Club. Mrs. Malcolm McClellan, Jacksonville, president, Florida Congress of Parents and Teachers. Eunice Minton, Jacksonville, director of public assistance, Florida State Welfare Board. Warren W. Quillian, M. D., Coral Gables. Anna M. Tracy, Tallahassee, dietitian and associate professor, Florida State College for Women. Mrs. J. Ralston Wells, Daytona Beach, president-director, Florida Federation of Women’s Clubs. GEORGIA Thomas Franklin Abercrombie, M. D., Dr. P. H., Sc. D., Atlanta, director, Georgia Department o f Public Health. Mrs. Frank C. David, Columbus, member o f county board o f public welfare. Arthur Raper, Ph. D., Atlanta, research secretary, Commission on Inter-racial Cooperation. Willis A. Sutton, D. Ped., Atlanta, superintendent o f schools. Forrester B. Washington, Atlanta, director, Atlanta University School o f Social Work. Josephine Wilkins, Atlanta, president, Georgia League o f Women Voters; member of the coordinating committee, Citizens’ Fact Finding Movement. IDAHO Mrs. John E. Hayes, Twin Falls, first vice president, National Congress of Parents and Teachers. ILLINOIS Edith Abbott, Ph. D., LL. D., Litt. D., Chicago, dean, School of Social Service Administration, University o f Chicago. ♦Grace Abbott, LL. D., Chicago, professor o f public welfare, School o f Social Service Administration, University of Chicago. Deceased. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, January 18-420, 191$ 109 Fred L. Adair, M. D., Chicago, chairman, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecol ogy, University o f Chicago. C. Anderson Aldrich, M. D., Winnetka, professor of pediatrics, Northwestern University Medical School. Will W. Alexander, LL. D., Chicago, vice president, Julius Rosenwald Fund. Pierce Atwater, Chicago, executive secretary, Community Fund o f Chicago, Inc. Frank Bane, Chicago, executive director, Council of State Governments. Lita Bane, Sc. D., Urbana, head, Home Economics Department; vice director of extension, University o f Illinois. Jessie F. Binford, Chicago, executive director, Juvenile Protective Association of Chicago. M. O. Bousfield, M. D., Chicago, director, Negro Health, Julius Rosenwald Fund. William Clayton Bower, LL. D., Chicago, professor o f religious education, Divinity School, University of Chicago; vice president, Religious Education Association. Sophonisba P. Breckinridge, Ph. D., LL. D., Chicago, professor o f public-welfare administration, School o f Social Service Administration, University of Chicago. Charlotte Carr, Chicago, director, Hull House. Anne S. Davis, Chicago, assistant chief, Division of Women’s and Children’s Employment, State Department of Labor. Paul H. Douglas, Ph. D., Chicago, professor of political economy, University of Chicago. Mrs. Katharine Dummer Fisher, Winnetka. Clifford G. Grulee, M. D., LL. D., Evanston, clinical professor of pediatrics, Rush Medical College (Chicago). Fred K. Hoehler, Chicago, director, American Public Welfare Association. Mrs. A. H. Hoffman, Elgin, national child-welfare chairman, American Legion Auxiliary; superintendent, Yeomen City o f Childhood. Joel D. Hunter, Chicago, general superintendent, United Charities o f Chicago. Paul Hutchinson, D. D., Chicago, managing editor, The Christian Century. Mary Alice Jones, Ph., D., Chicago, director of children’s work, International Council of Religious Education. Jacob Kepecs, Chicago, executive director, Jewish Children’s Bureau o f Chicago. Lon W. Morrey, D. D. S., Chicago, supervisor, Bureau of Public Relations, American Dental Association. Mary E. Murphy, Chicago, director, Elizabeth McCormick Memorial Fund of Chicago. William F. Ogburn, Ph. D., LL. D., Chicago, professor o f sociology, University o f Chicago. Edward A. O’Neal, D. Agr., Chicago, president, American Farm Bureau Federation. Floyd W. Reeves, Ph. D., LL. D., Chicago, professor of administration, Univer sity o f Chicago; director, American Youth Commission; executive assistant for labor supply, Advisory Commission to the Council of National Defense. Mrs. Kenneth F. Rich, Chicago, director, Immigrants’ Protective League o f Chicago. Lydia J. Roberts, Ph. D., Chicago, chairman, Department of Home Economics, University of Chicago. C. Rufus Rorem, Ph. D., Chicago, director, Commission on Hospital Service, American Hospital Association. Charles H. Schweppe, Chicago. 262205°—40----- 8 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 110 Proceedings of the White House Conference The Most Rev. Bernard J. Sheil, D. D., V. G., Chicago, director general, Catholic Youth Organization of the Archdiocese of Chicago. Mrs. Ida B. Wise Smith, LL. D., Evanston, president, National Woman’s Christian Temperance Union; vice president, World’s Woman’s Christian Temperance Union ; chairman, Committee on Citizenship for National Council of Women. Marietta Stevenson, Ph. D., Chicago, assistant director, American Public Welfare Association. Edward H. Stullken, Chicago, principal, Montefiore Special School. Ethel Verry, Chicago, executive secretary, Chicago Orphan Asylum. Coleman Woodbury, Ph. D., Chicago, director, National Association of Housing Officials. Rachelle S. Yarros, M. D., Chicago, professor o f social hygiene, University of Illinois. Edna Zimmerman, Springfield, superintendent of child welfare, Division of Child Welfare, Department o f Public Welfare. INDIANA Mildred Arnold, Indianapolis, director, Children’s Division, State Department of Public Welfare. Cleo W. Blackburn, Indianapolis, superintendent, Manner House. E. M. Dill, D. D. S., Plainfield, superintendent, Indiana Boys’ School. Mrs. Mary L. Garner, Indianapolis, director, Bureau of Women and Children, Division o f Labor, State Department o f Commerce and Industries. Howard B. Mettel, M. D., Indianapolis, chief, Bureau of Maternal and Child Health, Indiana State Board o f Health. DeWitt S. Morgan, LL. D., Indianapolis, superintendent o f schools, Indianapolis public schools. Emma O. Puschner, Indianapolis, director, National Child Welfare Division, American Legion. Mrs. Charles W. Sewell, Otterbein, administrative director, Associated Women o f the American Farm Bureau Federation. IOWA Mrs. F. R. Kenison, Madrid. Everett D. Plass, M. D., Iowa City, professor and head, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, State University of Iowa. George D. Stoddard, Ph. D., Iowa City, director, Iowa Child Welfare Research Station, State University of Iowa. George M. Strayer, Hudson, president, Iowa Rural Young People’s Assembly. Laura L. Taft, Des Moines, director, Division o f Child Welfare, Iowa State Board o f Social Welfare. Ruth UpdegrafE, Ph. D., Iowa City, assistant professor and supervisor of the preschool laboratories, Iowa Child Welfare Research Station, State University of Iowa. KANSAS C. Q. Chandler, Wichita, chairman, Kansas Crippled Children’s Commission. Anne Laughlin, LL. D., Topeka, State Administrator, National Youth Admin istration of Kansas. Helen C. Mawer, Topeka, director, Bureau of Child Welfare, State Department of Social Welfare. E. G. Padfleld, M. D., Salina. Martin F. Palmer, Sc. D., Wichita, director, Institute o f Logopedics, The Municipal University o f Wichita. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Ghildren in a Democracy, January 18-420,19Jfi X11 Esther E. Twente, Lawrence, assistant professor of sociology, University o f Kansas. KENTUCKY Irvin Abell, M. D., Sc. D., Louisville. Henley V. Bastin, Anchorage, superintendent, Louisville and Jefferson County Children’s Home. Mrs. Mary Breckinridge, R. N., LL. EK, Wendover, director, Frontier Nursing Service, Inc. H. L. Donovan, Ph. D., LL. D., Richmond, president, Eastern Kentucky State Teachers College. Mark F. Ethridge, Louisville, vice president and general manager, Courier-Journal and Louisville Times. A. T. McCormack, M. D., Sc. D., LL. D., Louisville, State health commissioner, State Department o f Health. Annie S. Veech, M. D., Louisville, director, Division of Maternal and Child Health, Department o f Public Health of Louisville. Margaret Woll, Frankfort, commissioner, State Department of Welfare. Ralph H. Woods, Ph. D., Frankfort, State director of vocational education,' Department of Education. LOUISIANA Rupert E. Arnell, M. D., New Orleans, clinical professor of obstetrics and gynecology, Louisiana State University School of Medicine. Mrsi René Baus, Gramercy, State treasurer, Parent-Teacher Association. Albert W. Dent, New Orleans, superintendent, Flint-Goodridge Hospital. Jess W. Hair, Baton Rouge, State supervisor of health and physical education, Department of Education. Rev. H. Joseph Jacobi, New Orleans, executive director, Associated Catholic Charities of New Orleans. Elizabeth Wisner, Ph. D., New Orleans, dean, School o f Social Work, Tulane University. MAINE William B. Jack, Portland, Superintendent of schools. George W. Leadbetter, Augusta, commissioner, Department of Institutions. Mrs. Noel C. Little, Brunswick, chairman, Maine Women’s Legislative Council. Margaret Payson, Portland, president, Children’s Service Bureau of Portland. MARYLAND Paul T. Beisser, Baltimore, general secretary, Henry Watson Children’s Aid Society ; president, Child Welfare League o f America, Inc. Nicholson J. Eastman, M. D., Baltimore, professor of obstetrics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. Anita J, Faatz, Baltimore, director, Social Work Department, State Department of Public Welfare. Allen W. Freeman, M. D., Baltimore, professor o f public-health administration, School of Hygiene and Public Health, Johns Hopkins University. Harry Greenstein, Baltimore, executive director, Associated Jewish Charities of Baltimore ; president, American Association of Social Workers. Sidney Hollander, Baltimore, chairman, committee on child care, State Depart* ment of Public Welfare. Rabbi Edward L. Israel, LL. D., Baltimore, Har Sinai Congregation ; chairman, Social Justice Commission, Central Conference o f American Rabbis ; vice pres ident, Synagogue Council o f America. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 1 12 Proceedvngs o f the White House Conference J. H. Mason Knox, M. D., Baltimore, chief, Bureau o f Child Hygiene, State Department of Health. Winthrop D. Lane, Baltimore. E. V. McCollum, Ph. D., Sc. D., Baltimore, professor of biochemistry, School of Hygiene and Public Health, Johns Hopkins University. Joseph W. Mountin, M. D., Bethesda, chief, Division o f Public Health Methods, National Institute of Health. Carroll E. Palmer, M. D., Ph. D., Bethesda, passed assistant surgeon, U. S. Public Health Service. Edwards A. Park, M. IX, Baltimore, pediatrician-in-chief, Johns Hopkins Hospital. Lowell J. Reed, Ph. D., Baltimore, dean, School of Hygiene and Public Health, Johns Hopkins University. Joseph N. Ulman, Baltimore, judge of Supreme Court. Abel Wolman, Dr. Eng., Baltimore, professor of sanitary engineering, Johns Hopkins University. MASSACHUSETTS John E. Burchard, Cambridge, director, Albert Farwell Bemis Foundation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Neil A. Dayton, M. D., Boston, director, Division o f Mental Deficiency, Depart ment of Mental Health. Robert L. DeNormandie, M. D., Boston, member, American Committee on Maternal Welfare. Abigail A. Eliot, Boston, director, Nursery Training School of Boston. Frederick May Eliot, D. D., LL. D., Boston, president, American Unitarian Association. William Healy, M. D., Boston, director, Judge Baker Guidance Center. Cheney C. Jones, LL. D., Boston, superintendent, The New England Home for Little Wanderers. T. Duckett Jones, M. D., Boston, director of research in rheumatic fever and heart disease, House o f the Good Samaritan. Marion A. Joyce, Boston, director, Division of Child Guardianship, Massachusetts Department o f Public Welfare. Theodore A. Lothrop, Boston, general secretary, Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children. Grace S. Mansfield, Roxbury, assistant professor of education, Teachers College o f the City o f Boston. Kate McMahon, Boston, associate professor o f social economy, Simmons College School of Social Work. Robert B. Osgood, M. D., Sc. D., Boston, professor emeritus of orthopedic Surgery, School of Medicine, Harvard University. Wm. Stanley Parker, Boston, architect. Herbert C. Parsons, Boston, director, Massachusetts Child Council. David R. Porter, D.D., Litt. D., Mt. Hermon, headmaster, Mount Hermon School; chairman, Administrative Committee o f Northfield Schools. Richard M. Smith, M. D., Sc. D., Boston. Harold C. Stuart, M. D., Boston, assistant professor of pediatrics and child hygiene, School of Public Health, Harvard University. Douglas A. Thom, M. D., Boston, director, Habit Clinic for Child Guidance. Miriam Van Waters, Ph. D., Framingham, superintendent, State Reformatory for W omen; member of board, American Youth Commission. Alfred F. Whitman, Boston, executive secretary, Children’s Aid Association. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, January 18-420,1940 113 MICHIGAN William Haber, Ph. D., Ann Arbor, professor o f economics, University of Michigan; executive director, National Refugee Service. Icie Macy Hoobler, Ph. D., Detroit, director of research laboratory, Children’s Fund of Michigan. Fred R. Johnson, Detroit, general secretary and State superintendent, Michigan Children’s Aid Society. Mrs. Thomas F. McAllister, Grand Rapids, director, Women’s Division, Demo cratic National Committee. Mrs. Angus D. McLay, Birmingham, vice president, Michigan League o f Women Voters. ♦Herbert P. Orr, Caro, president, Michigan Juvenile Delinquency Prevention Council. Mrs. J. K. Pettengill, Detroit. Mrs. William G. Rice, Houghton, vice president, Michigan Conference of Social Work. Grace Ross, R. N., Detroit, president, National Organization for Public Health Nursing. Lillian R. Smith, M. D., Lansing, director, Bureau of Maternal and Child Hygiene, Michigan Department o f Health. Mrs. Dora H. Stockman, LL. D., East Lansing. Marguerite Wales, R. N., Battle Creek, nursing-education consultant, W. K. Kellogg Foundation. Edward A. Ward, D. O., Saginaw, member of executive committee, American Osteopathic Association. Edna Noble White, Ped. D., LL. D., Detroit, director, Merrill-Palmer School. MINNESOTA John E. Anderson, Ph. D., Minneapolis, director, Institute of Child Welfare, University of Minnesota. Rev. James A. Byrnes, St. Paul, executive secretary, National Catholic Rural Life Conference. A. J. Chesley, M. D., St. Paul, executive officer, State Department of Health. Charles F. Hall, St. Paul, consultant, Bureau of Child Welfare, Division o f Social Welfare, State Department of Social Security. Henry F. Helmholz, M. D., Rochester, professor of pediatrics, Graduate School, University of Minnesota. H. E. Hilleboe, M. D., St. Paul, director, Crippled Children’s Division, Division of Social Welfare, State Department of Social Security. Hyman S. Lippman, M. D., Ph. D., St. Paul, director, Amherst H. Wilder Child Guidance Clinic. Mrs. Juanita Jackson Mitchell, St. Paul. John Gundersen Rockwell, Ph. D., S t Paul, State commissioner o f education. Richard E. Scammon, Ph. D., LL. D., Minneapolis, distinguished-service pro fessor, Graduate School, University of Minnesota. Sister Katharine, O. S. B., Ph. D., Duluth, secretary, Board of Administration, College of St. Scholastica; consulting psychologist, Duluth Mental Hygiene Clinic. Gertrude Vaile, Minneapolis, associate director, graduate course in social work, University of Minnesota. MISSISSIPPI G. D. Humphrey, Ph. D., State College, president, Mississippi State College. R. W. Reed, Tupelo, chairman, State Board of Public Welfare. ♦Deceased. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 114 Proceedings o f the White House Conference Felix J. Underwood, M. D., Jackson, State health officer. E. Leroy Wilkins, M. D., Clarksdale, State chairman, child-welfare committee, American Legion. MISSOURI Herschel Alt, St. Louis, general secretary, St. Louis Children’s Aid Society; general manager, St. Louis Provident Association. E. Van Norman Emery, M. D., St. Louis, professor of social psychiatry, De partment of Social Work, Washington University. Mrs. George H. Hoxie, Kansas City, chairman, Department of Government and Child Welfare, Missouri League o f Women Voters. Mrs. Warren L. Mabrey, Cape Girardeau, secretary, National Congress of Parents and Teachers. Mrs. Arthur B. McGlothlan, St. Joseph, member, State Social Security Commission. Rev. Alphonse M. Schwitalla, S. J., St. Louis, president, Catholic Hospital Association. William H. Stead, Ph. D., St. Louis, dean, School of Business and Public Ad ministration, Washington University. Borden S. Veeder, M. D., Sc. D., St. Louis, professor of clinic pediatrics, Uni versity Medical School; editor, Journal of Pediatrics. MONTANA Edythe P. Hershey, M. D., Helena, director, Maternal and Child Health Divi sion, Montana State Board of Health. Mrs. J. H. Morrow, Moore, State chairman, American Home, Montana Federa tion of Women’s Clubs. Mrs. Mildred K. Stoltz, Valier, State director of education, Montana Farmers’ Union. G. H. Van de Bogart, Ph. D., Havre, president, Northern Montana College; president, Montana Conference o f Social Work. NEBRASKA Frank Z. Glick, Ph. D., Lincoln, director, graduate school o f social work, Uni versity of Nebraska. Ernest W. Hancock, M. D., F. A. A. P., Lincoln, instructor in pediatrics, Uni versity of Nebraska School of Medicine; medical director, Lincoln Junior League Baby Clinics; attending pediatrician, Nebraska State Orthopedic Hospitals. . Charles F. McLaughlin, Omaha, Member, House of Representatives, U. S. Congress. Mrs. Maud E. Nuquist, Lincoln, member, State Board of Control; president and director, State Federation o f Women’s Clubs. Rev. Joseph H. Ostdiek, LL. D., Omaha, diocesan superintendent of schools. NEVADA Cedi W. Creel, Reno, University of Nevada; member, Association of Land Grant Colleges and Universities. Mrs. Sallie R. Springmeyer, Reno, member, Nevada State Board o f Health. Christie A. Thompson, Reno, maternal and child-health advisory nurse, State Department o f Health. NEW HAMPSHIRE Mary M. Atchison, M. D., Concord, director, Division o f Maternal and Child Health and Crippled Children’s Services, State Board o f Health. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, January 18-20,19Ifi 115 Mrs. La Fell Dickinson, Keene, second vice president, General Federation of Women’s Clubs. Harry O. Page, Concord, commissioner, State Department of Public Welfare. Mrs. Abbie C. Sargent, Bedford, director o f women’s activities, New Hampshire Farm Bureau Federation. NEW JERSEY S. Josephine Baker, M. D., Dr. P. H., Princeton. Chester I. Barnard, Sc. D., LL. D., Newark, president, New Jersey Bell Tele phone Co. William J. Ellis, Ph. D., LL. D., Trenton, commissioner, State Department of Institutions and Agencies. Edward L. Johnstone, Woodbine, superintendent, Woodbine Colony. Clara H. Krauter, Newark, principal, Essex County Vocational School for Girls. Alpheus Thomas Mason, Ph. D., Princeton, professor of politics, Princeton University. James S. Plant, M. D., Sc. D., Newark, director, Essex County Juvenile Clinic. Ellen C. Potter, M. D., LL. D., Trenton, director of medicine, State Department of Institutions and Agencies. A. L. Threlkeld, Ed. D., LL. D., Montclair, superintendent of public schools. Henry W. Thurston, Ph. D., Montclair, emeritus, Department o f Child Welfare, New York School o f Social Work. LeRoy A. Wilkes, M. D „ Trenton, executive officer, Medical Society o f New Jersey. Mrs. Edith Elmer Wood, Cape May Courthouse. NEW MEXICO Sophie D. Aberle, M. D., Ph. D., Albuquerque, general superintendent, United Pueblos Indian Agency; field service, Office of Indian Affairs, U. S. Depart ment of the Interior. Hester B. Curtis, M. D., Sante Fe, director, Division o f Maternal and Child Health, State Department o f Public Health. Mrs. Jennie M. Kirby, Sante Fe, director, New Mexico Department of Public Welfare. *Verna L. Nori, Santo Domingo, principal, Indian Day School; field service, Office of Indian Affairs, U. S. Department of the Interior. Brice H. Sewell, Sante Fe, State supervisor of trade and industrial education, Department of Vocational Education. NEW YORK David C. Adie, LL. D., Albany, commissioner, State Department of Social Welfare. Elmer F. Andrews, New York. Ruth Andrus, Ph. D., Albany, chief, Bureau of Child Development and Parent Education, New York State Department of Education. Clinton W. Areson, Industry, superintendent, New York State Agricultural and Industrial School. Reginald M. Atwater, M. D., Dr. P. H., New York, executive secretary, Ameri can Public Health Association. Sanford Bates, LL. D., New York, executive director, Boys’ Clubs o f America, Inc. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 116 Proceedings of the White House Conference Mrs. Dorothy J. Bellanca, New York, vico president, Amalgamated Clothing Workers o f America. Mrs. Gladys Huntington Bevans, New York, writer on parent education, New York News Syndicate, Inc. William Frederick Bigelow, LL. D., Litt. D., New York, editor, Good House keeping. Elsie M. Bond, New York, assistant secretary, State Charities Aid Association. Mrs. Helen Judy Bond, Ph. D., New York, head, Department of Household Arts and Sciences, Teachers College, Columbia University. Mrs. Ella A. Boole, Ph. D., LL. D., Brooklyn, president, World’s Woman’s Chris tian Temperance Union. Mary E. Boretz, New York, executive director, Foster Home Bureau of the Hebrew Sheltering Guardian Society. Frank G. Boudreau, M. D., New York, executive director, Milbank Memorial Fund. Howard S. Braucher, New York, secretary, National Recreation Association. Edmund de S. Brunner, Ph. D., L. H. D., New York, professor of education, Teachers College, Columbia University. Bradley Buell, New York, field director, Community Chests and Councils, Inc. Allen T. Burns, New York, executive vice president, Community Chests and Councils, Inc. Bailey B. Burritt, New York, chairman, executive council, Community Service Society. Edmond Borgia Butler, New York, professor o f law, Fordham University. Joseph Cadden, New York, executive secretary, American Youth Congress. James B. Carey, New York, president, United Electrical, Radio, and Machine Workers of America ; secretary, Congress of Industrial Organizations. *C. C. Carstens, Ph. D., New York, executive director, Child Welfare League of America, Inc. William L. Chenery, New York, editor, Collier’s. Charles L. Chute, New York, executive director, National Probation Association. Everett R. Clinchy, Ph. D., New York, director, National Conference of Chris tians and Jews. Joanna C. Colcord, New York, director, Charity Organization Department, Russell Sage Foundation. Hazel Corbin, R. N., New York, general director, Maternity Center Association. H. Ida Curry, New York, acting director, National Citizens Committee, White House Conference on Children in a Democracy. Mrs. Rachel Davis-Du Bois, Ed. D., New York, educational director, Service Bureau for Intercultural Education. Mark A. Dawber, D. D., New York, executive secretary, Home Missions Council. Dorothy Deming, R. N., New York, general director, National Organization of Public Health Nursing. Marion Dickerman, New York, principal, Todhunter School. Courtenay Dinwiddie, New York, general secretary, National Child Labor Committee. Mary E. Dreier, New York, vice president, National Woman’s Trade Union League of America. Louis I. Dublin, Ph. D., New York, third vice president and statistician, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company. Mary Dublin, New York, general secretary, National Consumers League. ♦Deceased https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Ghildren in a Democracy, January 18-20,19Iß 117 Dorothy Ducas, New York, director of women’s activities, Committee for the Celebration of the President’s Birthday. Franklin Dunham, Mus. D., litt. D-, New York, educational director, National Broadcasting Co. Mrs. Ernest Frederick Eidlitz, New York, president, National Association of Day Nurseries. Kendall Emerson, M. D., New York, managing director, National Tuberculosis Association. William Feinbloom, Ph. D., New York, director, Public Health Bureau, The American Optometrie Association. Carl Feiss, New York, associate in architecture, School of Architecture, Colum bia University. John A. Ferrell, M. D., New York, associate director, International Health Division, Rockefeller Foundation. Marshall Field, New York. ♦John H. Finley, LL. D., Litt. D., New York, editor, New York Times. Sterling Fisher, New York, director of education, Columbia Broadcasting System. Homer Folks, LL. D., New York, secretary, State Charities A id Association. Joseph K. Folsom, Ph. D., Poughkeepsie, professor o f economics and sociology, Yassar College; chairman, National Council on Parent Education. Lawrence K. Frank, New York, vice president, Josiah Macy, Jr. Foundation. Yasha Frank, New York, program consultant, Columbia Broadcasting System. Edward S. Godfrey, Jr., M. D., Albany, commissioner, State Department of Health. Abraham Goldfield, New York, executive director, Fred L. Lavanburg Foundation. Sidney E. Goldstein, New York, associate rabbi, Free Synagogue of New York .C ity; chairman, New York State Conference on Marriage and the Family. Abel J. Gregg, senior executive for work with boys, National Council of the Young Men’s Christian Association. Mrs. Sidonie Matsner Gruenberg, New York, director, Child Study Association of America. Helen Hall, New York, director, Henry Street Settlement. Helen M. Harris, New York, administrator, National Youth Administration for New York City. Shelby M. Harrison, LL. D., New York, general director, Russell Sage Foundation. Samuel W. Hartwell, M. D., Snyder, professor of psychiatry, School of Medicine, University of Buffalo. George J. Hecht, New York, publisher, The Parents’ Magazine. Mrs. Charles E. Heming, New York, chairman, Department of Government and Education, New York State League of Women Voters. Charles E. Hendry, New York, director, program and personnel training, Boys’ Clubs of America, Inc. Daniel Paul Higgins, New York, president, Catholic Youth Organization o f the Archdiocese of New York. T. Arnold Hill, LL. D., New York, director, Department of Industrial Relations, National Urban League, Inc. William Hodson, New York, commissioner of public welfare of the- City of New York. Robert B. Irwin, New York, executive director, American Foundation for th» Blind. ♦Deceased https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 118 Proceedings o f the White House Conference Hugh R. Jackson, New York, director o f public assistance, City o f New York Department of Welfare. A. LeRoy Johnson, D. M. D., Sc. D., New York. P. Ernest Johnson, D. D., New York, executive secretary, Department of Research and Education, Federal Council of the Churches of Christ ia America. Eugene Kinckle Jones, LL. D., New York, executive secretary, National Urban League, Inc. Dorothy C. Kahn, New York, American Association o f Social Workers. Clara Kaiser, New York, instructor in group work, New York School o f Social Work. Rt. Rev. Msgr. Robert F. Keegan, New York, executive director, Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of New York. Alice Y. Keliher, Ph. D., New York, chairman, Commission on Human Relations, Progressive Education Association. Paul U. Kellogg, New York, editor, The Survey Midmonthly and Survey Graphic. Mrs. Austin L. Kimball, Buffalo, president, National Young Women’s Christian Association. Freda Kirchwey, New York, editor and publisher, The Nation. Paul J. Kohler, Buffalo, chairman, International Committee on Underprivileged Child, Kiwanis International. George W. Kosmak, M. D=. New York, editor, American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. Louis Kraft, New York, executive director, Jewish Welfare Board. C. E. Krumbholz, D. D., New York, secretary, department o f welfare, National Lutheran Council; secretary, children’s; division, National Lutheran Inner Mission Conference. Gertrude B. Lane, New York, editor, Woman’s Home Companion. Ruth Lamed, New York, associate international director and case consultant, International Migration Service, Inc. Joseph P. Lash, New York, national secretary, American Student Union; vice chairman, American Youth Congress. Henry Goddard Leach, Ph. D., New York, editor, Forum. Clare L. Lewis, New York, associate director, New York State Employment Service. Mrs. Clara Savage Littledale, New York, editor, Parents’ Magazine. Solomon Lowenstein, D. H. L., New York, executive vice president, Federation for the Support of Jewish Philanthropic Societies o f New York. Harry L. Lurie, New York, executive director, Council o f Jewish Federations and Welfare Funds, Inc. Bertha McCall, New York, general director, National Travelers’ Aid Association. Rev. Bryan J. McEntegart, LL. D., New York, director, division o f children, Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of New York. Rustin McIntosh, M. D., New York, professor of pediatrics, College o f Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University. Mary Jeanne McKay, New York, president, National Student Federation of America. Jack McMichael, New York, chairman, American Youth Congress. Mrs. Eleanor Brown Merrill, New York, executive director, National Society for the Prevention of Blindness. Frieda S. Miller, New York, industrial commissioner, State Department of Labor. Mrs. Marion M. Miller, New York, educational director, United Parents’ Association. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, January 18—20,19lß 119 Harold Mitchell, M. D., New York, district health officer, Department o f Health, Borough of Queens. Grace Morin, Ithaca, head, Department o f Household Art, New York State College o f Home Economics, Cornell University. Claude W. Munger, M. D., New York, director, St. Luke’s Hospital. H. S. Mustard, M. D., New York, Department o f Preventive Medicine, New York University College of Medicine. Frank J. O’Brien, M. D., Ph. D., New York, director, Bureau o f Child Guidance, Board of Education of the City of New York. Basil O’Connor, New York, president, The National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis, Inc. Almon R. Pepper, New York, executive secretary, Department of Christian Social Relations, National Council, Episcopal Church. Walter W. Pettit, Ph. D., New York, director, New York School of Social Work. William Ward Plummer, M. D., LL. D., Buffalo, president, American Orthopedic Association. Asa Philip Randolph, New York, international president, Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters ; member, executive committee, Pioneer Youth. Grace A. Reeder, Albany, director, Bureau o f Child Welfare, State Department of Social Welfare. Flora M. Rhind, New York, secretary for general education, General Education Board. John L. Rice, M. D., New York, commissioner of health, Department of Health. Mrs. Paul Rittenhouse, New York, national director, Girl Scouts, Inc. W. Carson Ryan, Ph. D., Ed. D., LL. D., New York, staff associate, Carnegie Foun dation for the Advancement of Teaching. Joseph J. Schwartz, New York, executive director, Brooklyn Federation of Jewish Charities. George N. Shuster, New York, president, Hunter College. Harriet Silverman, New York, executive secretary, People’s National Health Com mittee; chairman, educational committee, American Labor Party, Assembly District Branch. Mrs. Mary K. Simkhovitch, L. H. D., New York, director of Greenwich House. Sister Agnita Miriam, New York, superintendent, New York Foundling Hospital. Donald Slesinger, New York, executive director, the American Film Center, Inc. George W. Smyth, White Plains, judge, Children’s Court, County of Westchester. William F. Snow, M. D., New York, general director, The American Social Hygiene Association, Inc. Mabel Keaton Staupers, R. N., New York, executive secretary, National Associa tion o f Colored Graduate Nurses. Rabbi Milton Steinberg, New York, Park Avenue Synagogue. George S. Stevenson, M, D., New York, medical director, National Committee for Mental Hygiene, Inc. Major Julia C. Stimson, R. N., Sc. D., New York, president, American Nurses’ Association. Mrs. Nathan Straus, Valhalla, member of board, New York Section, National Council of Jewish Women; member, Executive Committee, National Council for Mothers and Babies. Arthur L. Swift, Jr., New York, Union Theological Seminary. Linton B. Swift, New York, general director, Family Welfare Association o f America. Charles W. Taussig, New York, chairman, National Advisory Committee, National Youth Administration. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 120 Proceedings of the White House Conference « Ruth Taylor, Valhalla, commissioner of public welfare, Westchester County. Frederick F. Umhey, New York, executive secretary, International Ladies’ Garment Workers’ Union. Mr. DeForest Van Slyck, New York, executive secretary, Association of Junior Leagues o f America, Inc. ♦Lillian D. Wald, LL. D., New York, president, board of directors, Henry Street Settlement. Rose T. Weiner, New York, secretary, The Health Security Council o f the American Labor Party ; secretary, Women’s Division of the A. L. P. Dorothy P. Wells, New York, vocational expert, National Board, Young Women’s Christian Association. James E. West, LL. D., New York, chief scout executive, Boy Scouts of America. Walter West, New York, executive secretary, American Association o f Social Workers. Walter White, New York, secretary, National Association for the Advancement of Colored Peoples Albert W. Whitney, New York, consulting director, National Conservation Bureau. Otis L. Wiese, New York, editor, McCall’s Magazine. G. Dorothy Williams, Ithaca, extension specialist in foods and nutrition, Cornell University. Herbert D. Williams, Ph. D., State School, superintendent, New York State Training School for Boys. Lewis A. Wilson, Sc. D-, LL. D., Albany, associate commissioner for vocational education, New York State Education Department. Leland Foster Wood, Ph. D., New York, secretary, Committee on Marriage and the Home, Federal Council o f the Churches of Christ in America. Owen D. Young, LL. D., Litt. D., New York, chairman o f board, General Electric Company ; chairman of the American Youth Commission. Mra Gertrude Folks Zimand, New York, associate general secretary, National Child Labor Committee. NORTH CAROLINA Mrs. W. T. Bost, Raleigh, commissioner, North Carolina State Board of Charities and Public Welfare. Mrs. Margaret H. Caldwell, Greensboro, superintendent, National Juvenile Grange. Harriet Elliott, Greensboro, dean of women, Woman’s College o f the University o f North Carolina; member o f Advisory Commission to the Council of National Defense. Frank P. Graham, LL. D., Litb. D., Chapel Hill, president, University of North Carolina. I. G. Greer, Thomasville, general superintendent, Baptist Orphanage of North Carolina. Joseph B. Johnston, Barium Springs, superintendent, Presbyterian Orphans’ Home of the Synod of North Carolina. Aldert S. Root, M. D., Raleigh, North Carolina State chairman, American Academy of Pediatrica NORTH DAKOTA Theodora Allen, Bismarck, supervisor, Division of Child Welfare, State Public Welfare Board. Mrs. Gladys Talbott Edwards, Jamestown, national director o f junior education, Farmers’ Educational and Cooperative Union of America. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis « On Children in a Democracy, January 18-20,191fi 121 Maysil M. Williams, M. D., Bismarck, State health officer, State Department of Health. E. A. Willson, Bismarck, executive director. Public Welfare Board of North Dakota. OHIO Richard A. Bolt, M. D., Dr; P. EL, Cleveland, director, Cleveland Child Health Association. Mrs. Wilson M. Compton, Bowling Green. Grace L. Coyle, Ph. D., Cleveland, director of the group-work course, School of Applied Social Sciences, Western Reserve University. Tam Deering, Cincinnati, director o f recreation, Public Recreation Commission. Harry L. Eastman, Cleveland, judge, Cuyahoga County Juvenile Court; presi dent, Association o f Juvenile Court Judges o f America. Philip C. Ebeling, J. D., Dayton, president, U. S. Junior Chamber of Commerce. Joseph W. Fichter, Oxford, lecturer, Ohio State Grange; assistant to the vice president o f Miami University. Rt. Rev. Msgr. John R. Hagan, S. T. D., Ph. D., Cleveland, superintendent, Cleveland Catholic Schools. Charles W. Hoffman, Cincinnati, judge, Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court. Mrs. James T. Hoffman, Cleveland, League of Women Voters; member of Tremont City-Wide Planning Committee. Harry W. Howett, Elyria, director o f social service, National Society for Crip pled Children o f the U. S. A., Inc. Howard R. Knight, Columbus, general secretary, National Conference o f Social Work. A. Graeme Mitchell, M. D., Cincinnati, professor o f pediatrics, University of Cincinnati, College o f Medicine; director, The Children’s Hospital Research Foundation. Jean C. Roos, Cleveland, head of the Stevenson Room for Young People, Cleve land Public Library. Agnes H. Schroeder, Cleveland, associate professor o f medical social work, School o f Applied Social Sciences, Western Reserve University. Paul Sears, Ph. D., Sc. D., Oberlin, professor of botany, Oberlin College. Charles L. Sherwood, Columbus, director, State Department o f Public Welfare. Louis J. Taber, Columbus, master, the National Grange. Rt. Rev. Msgr. R. Marcellus Wagner, Ph. D., LL. D., Cincinnati, director, Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Cincinnati. P. K. Whelpton, Oxford, assistant director, Scripps Foundation for Research in Population Problems, Miami University. OKLAHOMA Mrs. George E. Calvert, Oklahoma City, State president, Oklahoma Congress of Parents and Teachers. Mrs. Amy D. Crooks, Delaware. Laura E. Dester, Oklahoma City, supervisor, Division o f Child Welfare, State Department of Public Welfare. Benjamin Dwight, Oklahoma City, organization field agent, Office o f Indian Affairs, U. S. Department o f the Interior. Clark H. Hall, M. D., F. A. A. P., Oklahoma City, professor o f pediatrics, School o f Medicine, University of Oklahoma; head of department in State University Hospitals. Alice Sowers, Ph. D., Norman, professor of family-life education, University of Oklahoma. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 122 Proceedings of the White House Conference OREGON Joseph B. Bilderback, M. D., Portland, the Children’s Clinic. Mrs. Henry Roe Cloud, Pendleton, Umatilla Indian Agency. Mrs. Saidie Orr Dunbar, Portland, president, General Federation o f Women’s Clubs (Washington, D. C.). Elmer R. Goudy, Portland, administrator, State Public Welfare Commission of Oregon. Mrs. Thomas Honeyman, Portland, member, State Public Welfare Commission of Oregon. Frederick M. Hunter, Ed. D., LL. D., Eugene, chancellor, Oregon System of Higher Education. Donald E. Long, Portland, judge, Court of Domestic Relations, Juvenile Court. Elnora E. Thomson, R. N., Portland, director of nursing education, Medical School, University of Oregon. PENNSYLVANIA Gustavus H. Bechtold, D. D., Philadelphia, executive secretary, Lutheran Chil dren’s Bureau; vice president, Board of Social Missions o f the United Lutheran Church. Almena Dawley, Philadelphia, chief social worker, Child Guidance Clinic. Karl de Schweinitz, L. H. D., Philadelphia, director, Pennsylvania School of Social Work.. Mrs. Gertrude M. Dubinsky, Philadelphia, executive director, Juvenile Aid Society. Edith M. Everett, Philadelphia, director, White-Williams Foundation. Ben G. Graham, Sc. D., LL. D., Pittsburgh, superintendent o f schools, Board o f Education. Rufus M. Jones, D. D., LL. D., Litt. D., Haverford, professor emeritus, Haverford College. Ralph Munn, Pittsburgh, director, Carnegie Library o f Pittsburgh; president, American Library Association. Philip Murray, Pittsburgh, chairman, Steel Workers’ Organizing Committee. Clarence E. Pickett, Wallingford, executive secretary, American Friends Service Committee. Rev. James A. Reeves, S. T. D., LL. D., Litt. D., Greensburg, president, Seton Hill College. Edwin D. Solenberger, Philadelphia, general secretary, Children’s Aid Society of Pennsylvania. Alexander J. Stoddard, Ed. D., Philadelphia, superintendent of schools. Carroll P. Streeter, Philadelphia, associate editor, Farm Journal and Farmer’s Wife. Katharine Tucker, R. N., Philadelphia, director, Department o f Nursing Educa tion, University of Pennsylvania. Mrs. Helen Glenn Tyson, Ph. D., Pittsburgh, secretary, Family and Child Welfare Division, Public Charities Association of Pennsylvania. Philip F. Williams, M. D., Philadelphia, chairman, American Committee on Maternal Welfare. Donald Young, Ph. D „ Philadelphia, professor o f sociology, University o f Penn sylvania ; member o f staff, Social Science Research'Council. RHODE ISLAND Richard D. Allen, Providence, assistant superintendent o f schools. Harry B. Freeman, Providence, president, Rhode Island Society for Prevention o f Cruelty to Children. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, January 18-&0,19JiO 123 Anna I. Griffith, Providence, administrator, Children’s Bureau, State Department of Social Welfare. Arthur H. Buggies, M. D., Sc. D., Providence, superintendent, Butler Hospital. SOUTH CAROLINA Kate Bullock, Columbia, chief, Division of Child Welfare, State Department of Public Welfare. Roger L. Coe, Ph. D., Columbia, South Carolina State director, National Youth Administration. A. C. Flora, Columbia, superintendent o f schools ; member of board o f directors, National Education Association. A. T. Jamison, D. D., Greenwood, superintendent, Connie Maxwell Orphanage. Hilla Sheriff, M. D., Columbia, assistant director, Division o f Maternal and Child Health, State Board o f Health. Thomas Benton Young, Florence, chairman, State Board of Public Welfare. SOUTH DAKOTA J. W. Kaye, Aberdeen, member, Unemployment Compensation Commission. Mrs. Grace W. Martin, Pierre, director, Division o f Child Welfare, State Social Security Commission. Karl Mundt, Madison, member, House of Representatives, U. S. Congress. S. B. Nissen, Sioux Falls, editor, South Dakota Education Association Journal ; executive secretary, South Dakota Education Association. Benjamin Reifel, Pierre, field agent, Indian Organization, Office o f Indian A f fairs, U. S. Department o f the Interior. •Alvin Waggoner, Pierre, chairman, South Dakota Social Security Commission. TENNESSEE Horton Casparis, M. D., Nashville, professor of pediatrics, School of Medicine, Vanderbilt University. George H. Cate, Nashville, president, Board of Education o f the City of Nashville. William E. Cole, Ph. D., Knoxville, head, Department of Sociology, University of Tennessee. Cara L. Harris, Memphis, field secretary, Tennessee Congress o f Parents and Teachers. Charles S. Johnson, Litt. D., Nashville, director, Department of Social Science, Fisk University. Camille Kelley, Memphis, judge, Juvenile Court. Mrs. A. H. Roberts, Nashville, director, Child Welfare Division, State Department of Public Welfare. TEXAS W. R. Banks, Prairie View, principal, Prairie View State College. J. J. Brown, Austin, director, Vocational Rehabilitation and Crippled Children’s Division, State Department of Education. Mrs. Irene Farnham Conrad, Houston, executive secretary, Council o f Social Agencies. Mrs. Violet S. Greenhill, Austin, chief, Division of Child Welfare, State Depart ment of Public Welfare. Gaynell Hawkins, Dallas, educational director, Civic Federation of Dallas. Mrs. Val M. Keating, San Antonio, associate director, Division of Employment, Texas Work Projects Administration. ♦Deceased. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 124 Proceedings of the White Rouse Conference Herschel T. Manuel, Ph. D., Austin, professor of educational psychology, School of Education, University of Texas. Pansy Nichols, Austin, executive secretary, Texas Tuberculosis Association. E. E. Oberholtzer, Ph. D., LL. D., Houston, superintendent of schools. Homer P. Rainey, Ph. D., Austin, president, University of Texas. Edwin G. Schwarz, M. D., Fort Worth, cochairman, American Association of Pediatrics (Texas). James L. Stephenson, Dallas, executive director, Housing Authority of the City of Dallas; president, Association of Texas Housing Authorities. Mrs. Elbert Williams, Dallas, national president, Camp Fire Girls. UTAH Ernest A. Jacobsen, Logan, dean, School of Education, Utah State Agricultural College. Mrs. Vyvyan Parmelee, Salt Lake City, director, Bureau of Assistance and Service, State Department of Public Welfare. Mrs. Louise Y. Robison, Salt Lake City, general president, National Woman’s Relief Society of the Church of Latter Day Saints;'member, State board of Welfare. Kate Williams, Salt Lake City, director, Social Service Exchange; chairman, Child Welfare Services Advisory Committee of the State Department of Public Welfare. VERMONT Paul D. Clark, M. D., Burlington, director, Maternal and Child Health Division, State Department of Public Health. Marian W. Elder, Burlington, executive secretary, Howard Relief Society. Mrs. Dorothy Canfield Fisher, Ph. D., Arlington. Mary Jean Simpson, Burlington, dean of women, University of Vermont. VIRGINIA Janet L. Cameron, Blacksburg, State food specialist, Extension Service, State Agricultural College. A. L. Carson, Jr., M. D., Richmond, assistant director, Bureau o f Maternal and Child Health, Virginia State Department of Health. Sidney B. Hall, Ed. D., Richmond, superintendent of public instruction, State Board of Education. Latham Hatcher, Ph. D., Richmond, president, Alliance for Guidance of Rural Youth. Thomas B. Morton, Richmond, commissioner of labor, State Department o f Labor and Industry. Mrs. Jennie B. Moton, Capahosic, head field oflicer, Agricultural Adjustment Administration, Southern Division. W. L. Painter, Richmond, director, Children’s Bureau, State Department of Public Welfare. James Hoge Ricks, Richmond, judge, Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court. Gay B. Shepperson, McLean. Mrs. Ora Brown Stokes, Richmond, president, Southeastern Federation of Colored Women’s Clubs. Mrs. Elwood Street, Richmond, chairman, National Council for Mothers and Babies. WASHINGTON Mrs. George Norman Campbell, Ph. D., Kalama, study-group chairman, American Association of University Women. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis On Children in a Democracy, January 18S 0,19JJ) 125 Charles F. Ernst, Olympia, director, State Department of Social Security. John F. Hall, Seattle, State director, Washington Children’s Home Society; member of advisory committee, Children’s Division, Washington State Depart ment of Social Security. Herbert L. Moon, M. D., Seattle. Lamont A. Williams, Everett, manager, Everett District Puget Sound Power and Light Co. ; chairman, child welfare, Area E, American Legion. Ernest F. Witte, Ph. D., Seattle, director, Graduate School o f Social Work, University o f Washington. WEST VIRGINIA A. W. Garnett, Charleston, director, State Department o f Public Assistance. Hortense P. Hogue, Point Pleasant, home-demonstration agent, Agricultural Extension Service, University of West Virginia. George M. Lyon, M. D., Huntington, chairman, Committee on Postgraduate Education, American Academy of Pediatrics; chairman, Committee on Post graduate Medical Education, West Virginia State Medical Association. Mrs. Ruth Pell Miller, Charleston. Ruth C. Schad, Charleston, supervisor, division o f child welfare, Children’s Bureau, State Department of Public Assistance. WISCONSIN Clarence A. Dykstra, LL. D., Litt. D., L. H. D., Madison, president, University of Wisconsin. Dorothy C. Enderis, Milwaukee, director of municipal recreation, Department of Municipal Recreation and Adult Education, Milwaukee Public Schools. Benjamin Glassberg, Milwaukee, superintendent, Milwaukee County Department of Public Assistance. C. A. Harper, M. D., Madison, State health officer, State Board of Health. John P. Koehler, M. D., Milwaukee, commissioner of health, Milwaukee City Health Department. Mrs. A. W. Schorger, Madison. Edwin E. Witte, Ph. D., Madison, chairman, Department of Economics, University of Wisconsin ; member of council, American Association for Labor Legislation. Elizabeth Yerxa, Madison, director, Bureau of Child Welfare, State Department of Public Welfare. WYOMING Esther L. Anderson, Ph. D., Cheyenne, State superintendent of public instruction, Department of Education. Mrs. Harriett Werntz, Gillette. 262205°— 40------9 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis GENERAL R E PO R T ADOPTED BY T H E C O N FE R E N C E January 19 , 1940 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis CONTENTS F o r ew o r d ............................................................................................................................ Page v Pr e f a c e ............................................................................................. . ................................. vn T h e G oals of D e m o c r a c y ............................................................................................... j Reviewing the reco rd ...................................................................................... 4 O ur concern, every ch ild .......................................................................................... g T h e C h ild F a m il y ................................................................................................ jq T he family as the threshold of dem ocracy............................................................ 10 in t h e Families and their incomes.................................................. 12 Families in need of assistance..................................................................................... 21 Families and their dwellings..................................................................................... 24 29 R elig io n in t h e L ives of C h il d r e n .............................................................................. C o m m un ity ................................................................... 32 Schools............................... . . ....................................................................... .............. 33 Leisure-time services.................................................................................. .............. \ 37 E d u c a t io n a l S e r v ic e s in t h e Libraries........................................................................................................................ 41 P ro tectio n A gain st C h ild L a b o r ...................................................... 43 Y outh 47 and T h eir N e e d s .................................................................................................. C h il d r e n ......................................................................... 51 T h e two fronts............................................................................................................. 52 C onservin g the H ealth of Conditions favoring child health............................................................................. 53 Objectives for the coming decade........................................................................... 55 C h ild r en U n d er S p e c ia l D is a d v a n t a g e s ................................................................... 62 Social services for children........................................................................................ 62 Children in minority groups..................................................................................... 67 69 Children in migrant families.................................................................................... P u blic A dm inistration and F in a n c in g ......................................................................... 75 Size of administrative u n its........................ 75 Sharing of financial responsibility......................................................................... 76 Professional personnel and lay participation............................................... G o vern m en t C all to b y the 79 Pe o p l e ................................................................... 82 83 A c t io n ....................................................................... m https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis CONTENTS IV CHARTS Chart 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Per-capita income, 1935-36, by size of family„. ............. .................. Income payments in the United States, 1929-39..........* . . . . <.......... Secondary-education enrollment, 1890-1936........ * * •. - ................... Infant mortality in the United States................................................. Mortality from tuberculosis, 1910-38................................................. Who are the babies that die?............................................................. Children and income, rural and urban..................................... . https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Page 13 20 34 51 55 57 77 FOREW ORD The W hite House Conference on Children in a Dem ocracy met for its second session in Washington, D. C., January 18 to 20, 1940. This session was the culmination of months of planning and preparation by the Planning Committee of 72 members, the R eport Committee, the staff, and members of the Conference. M any members served as consultants to those responsible for the development o f reports on various aspects of the relation between children and our American Dem ocracy. Reports submitted in advance were reviewed by the entire membership, which had been somewhat augmented during the months between the initial session, April 26, 1939, and the January meetings, so that it now comprises 676 per sons. Thus the Conference, organized at the suggestion of the President o f the United States, was truly a citizens5 enter prise, in which those representing many types o f professional and civic interest, practical experience, and political and religious belief joined together to consider the aims o f our American civilization for the children in whose hands its future lies. The January sessions had but two aims— consideration of and action upon the reports prepared under the direction of the Report Committee, and discussion of the ways in which the Conference findings could be translated into action. The report presented herewith is the General Report adopted by the Conference after full consideration in group meetings and in general session. The Report Committee has followed faithfully the instructions of the Conference to incorporate in v https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis FOREWORD VI the report the changes agreed to in the general session, in accordance with authority granted by the Conference in the following motion, which was adopted unanimously: That the Conference adopt the report as amended, as a whole, subject to editorial changes by the Report Committee, and that the report be published as the General Report of the White House Conference on Children in a Democracy . The Report Committee was authorized also to prepare a final report, based on the General Report, the topical reports with suggestions as to their revision made in group meetings January 18 and in correspondence, and other material avail able to the committee. This final report will not be completed for some months. In the meantime the topical reports, with changes based on discussion in group meetings, will be made available for study and discussion. As Chairman of the Conference and on behalf of the Plan ning Committee, I wish to acknowledge the great debt which the Conference owes to the Report Committee and its chair man, Homer Folks, the members of the Conference who have given so freely o f their time and thought, and the Conference staff. Frances Perkins, Chairman. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis PREFACE The Report Committee, to which was entrusted the prepara tion of reports to be submitted to the W hite House Conference on Children in a Dem ocracy, was appointed in M arch 1939, shortly after the organization o f the Conference. This com mittee, o f 27 persons, is widely representative o f different pro fessions and interests affecting the welfare o f children, including medicine, public health, education, social service, child guid ance, religion, public administration, agriculture, and general civic interests. A modest fund having been placed at the disposal o f the com mittee, it selected a research staff comprising the persons whose names are listed elsewhere. Under the leadership o f Philip Klein, o f the New York School o f Social W ork, who has served as research director, the staff prepared a series o f documents on the several fields of interest within the scope o f the Conference. Each document, containing factual material, opinions, sugges tions, and recommendations, was submitted to a group o f con sultants with special experience and judgm ent in the subject. After revision in the light o f these consultations the documents were submitted to the Report Committee for study, revision, and action. O n the basis of these statements and other material assembled by the staff, the Report Committee prepared a general confer ence report, which was submitted to the Conference at its meeting January 18. The recommendations in the report were discussed in groups meeting on the same day, and their suggestions for revision were reviewed by the Report Com VII https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis V ili PREFACE mittee. The whole report, with changes approved by the com mittee, was considered, amended, and unanimously adopted by the Conference in general session January 19. Great credit is due to the staff as a whole, and in particular to its director, for discriminative collection and summarizing of material, careful interpretation o f subject matter, drafting of the topical statements and o f the General Conference Report, and patient revision in the light o f protracted discussions on the part o f the Report Committee. In addition to its own staff, the Report Committee received valuable help from staff members o f various Federal bureaus and agencies, o f whom some gave regular service for consider able periods. The experience, opinions, and conclusions of these Federal agencies having to do with one or another phase o f the well-being of children, were freely placed at the disposal o f the staff and the committee. Special acknowledgment is due to the Chief and the mem bers o f the staff o f the Children’s Bureau, who were at all times at the service o f the Conference. W ithout their con tinuous and able service the work o f the Conference could not have been brought to a successful conclusion. T o the members o f the R eport Committee the chairman wishes to record his very sincere appreciation o f their patience, deep interest, objectivity, and resourcefulness in arriving at a final group judgm ent on highly important subjects, often con troversial in nature, in which in each case only a few o f the Report Committee members were themselves expert. It is a notable tribute to their deep interest in the subject that in every instance full agreement was reached. The report as a whole stands as a product in the making o f which every member of the committee had an equal responsibility. Clarity and con viction are furthered by the absence o f minority reports. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis ix PREFACE The report contains 98 recommendations, which grew out of the experience and considered judgm ent of the staff, consultant groups, and members of the committee. It is submitted by the Conference to the American people in the hope that it may, in 'some degree, clarify the present situation of the children of America and stimulate increased interest and greater effort toward a more complete realization of the ideals of the Amer ican people for their children— the children of the American Dem ocracy. _ H omer F olks, Chairman o f the Report Committee. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACY The Goals of Democracy W hite H ouse C onference on Children in a Dem oc- ( £ ) racy, the fourth in a series of children’s conferences held during the past 30 years, addresses itself to the interests of all the children of the Nation and to every aspect of child welfare, including home life, material security, education, health, and general preparation for the responsibilities of citizenship. At the first meeting of the Conference on April 26, 1939, President Roosevelt said: Democracy must inculcate in its children capacities for living and assure opportunities for the fulfillment of those capacities. The success of democratic insti tutions is measured, not by extent of territory, finan cial power, machines, or armaments, but by the desires, the hopes, and the deep-lying satisfactions of the individual men, women, and children who make up its citizenship. The people of the United States have talked and lived dem ocracy for a century and a half. W e have never felt that it has reached its full stature nor that it has operated satis factorily in every field of human endeavor. W e have not always agreed as to the exact meaning of democracy, but we have never lost our belief in certain fundamental democratic principles. These fundamentals include, above all, freedom of the individual as it is inscribed in our fundamental law, with its Bill of Rights assuring freedom of speech, press, religion, https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 2 CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACY and public assembly. W hile the individual is becoming less significant as a unit in our elaborate system of production and distribution, his worth and integrity remain the cornerstone o f our democratic philosophy. These principles we wish to preserve for our children, and we hope so to educate them that they may improve upon and transmit this heritage to com ing generations. The development o f science and invention, and the growth o f industry have created new and com plex conditions, in which the freedom o f the individual is endangered. Legal safeguards alone are not sufficient to insure liberty, unless the individual also has a reasonable degree o f econom ic oppor tunity. This is less easily provided in an industrial society than under pioneer conditions with unlimited free land.. Thus we have com e to include in our basic concept o f democracy the principle that in the pursuit o f happiness all men should have as nearly equal econom ic opportunity as their unequal natural endowment and the slow process o f econom ic change permit. Hard, uncomfortable facts have been accumulating which show that far too many American children belong to families that have no practical access to econom ic opportunity. These families, living in actual distress or in constant insecurity, are trapped in circumstances from which their own knowledge and initiative cannot extricate them. Not merely thousands but millions o f children live under these handicaps, which they can escape only by outside help. And this is happening not by econom ic necessity but in a country blessed with splendid natural resources and a high level of public intelligence. In addition to the striving for individual freedom and eco nom ic opportunity the developing national ideal includes, with new emphasis, capacity for cooperative life as a test o f successful democracy. Thus varied forms o f cooperative activity, both https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis THE GOALS OF DEMOCRACY 3 local and on a national scale, are developing and strengthening the traditional American spirit of neighborly cooperation and civic responsibility. In educating our children we desire, therefore, to give them freedom to express their natural interests, to enjoy life, and to gain that self-reliance which is hardly less important today than it was to the early American pioneer. W e wish to rear them so that they may successfully participate in our demo cratic way o f life. W e seek to develop in them an appreciation o f the expanding forms of civic responsibility and an under standing o f the nature o f social life and the satisfactions of cooperative enterprise. The complexities o f modern life require a structure o f govern ment and a social and econom ic order which will com bine maximum individual freedom with maximum opportunity for every man to find a place among his fellows, to achieve selfsupport, preserve self-respect, and render community service. Events o f recent years have proved that the preservation and further development o f the better life in a dem ocracy cannot be left to chance; they do not just happen. Plans must be made and adjusted to meet changes in the national econom y, in international relations, and in scientific knowledge. These changes require far-reaching modifications in our edu cational system, in family life, in local government, and in the relative responsibilities of local community, State, and Nation. They call for more awareness o f the Nation as a unit and of goals national in scope. Is the realization of such national standards and aspirations com patible with continued freedom? W e believe that it is. In fact, this development is a true continuation o f the process by which the Constitution was formed and adopted, bringing the powers and resources o f the Nation of 1787 into line with the responsibilities and problems of that time. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Since that CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACT 4 date the process has given us a rich and growing body o f social legislation, a series o f amendments to the National Consti tution, and many Federal services o f fundamental importance. It has given us an increasingly interwoven system o f State and Federal services in the conservation o f natural resources, in public education, and in public health and welfare. Can a free people by conscious effort and thoughtful plan ning make certain that the needs o f all their children will be met? Can they rear them so that their capacities will be developed for cooperative action in exercising the responsibili ties o f citizenship in a democracy? Can they bring up children who in turn will maintain and cherish their freedom? W e believe they can, and in the means for accomplishing these ends we find the agenda o f this Conference and o f the new decade. R eview in g the Record The decades before 1930 were a period o f great progress in the United States. Through many ups and downs— “ cycles55 in the economist’s way o f speaking— prosperity was increasing, the standard o f living was rising, and a unified national con sciousness was growing. Perhaps public attention through this period was centered too much on technical advances and the marvels o f a mechanized civilization. Even in fields o f more strictly human services technical progress was emphasized, as in medicine, public health, psychology, mental hygiene, gov ernmental administration, and education. But in some o f the less tangible ways also great strides were made toward better social conditions in the United States. These were real achievements expressing an enhanced appreciation o f human values. As crude exploitation o f the resources o f a virgin land and of the opportunities presented by a growing population slowly gave way to the growth o f a more settled American culture, https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis THE GOALS OF DEMOCRACY 5 efforts and funds were invested in the general welfare in generous and increasing amounts. A growing social conscience was becom ing evident in the activities o f individuals and groups, and in the functions o f governments. The enactment of social legislation is one example o f this process. It included protection of women and children in in dustry and the establishment of public agencies to deal with labor, public welfare, health, workmen’s compensation, and mothers’ pensions. The labor movement was gaining in strength, despite many setbacks, and wages and conditions of work were slowly improving. Public expenditures increased for parks, museums, schools, playgrounds, libraries, medical services, and research in such diverse fields as agriculture and medicine. School authorities conducted extensive and fruitful experiments in kindergartens, vocational preparation, and the development of secondary edu cation. Underlying much of this progress was general interest in the new psychology with its illumination of human motives and its tolerant understanding of the vagaries of human behavior. The creation of many new agencies to serve the public, as distinct from those designed for profit or livelihood, is also evi dence o f the new emphasis on human values in the decades before 1930. Social agencies to help people in trouble were established in large numbers and under many forms and auspices. They were supported by public funds, voluntary contributions, and the resources of many new “ foundations.” The present Conference comes after 10 years of econom ic depression unprecedented in length and of great intensity. A large section o f the population was left without income for months or even years. Since the econom ic soundness o f a country underlies a continuance of its freedom, the develop ment of its culture, and the quality of its public services, we 262205°— 40------10 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 6 CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACY might have expected that the decade following 1929 would ex hibit the worst conditions ever suffered by the people o f this country, and either a retrogression to pioneer hardship or an attempted escape by the way o f dictatorship through which some European countries have looked for salvation. It is to the everlasting credit o f this democracy that despite the strains o f the past decade we not only have maintained our social institutions and public services but have notably im proved some of them. The resiliency o f this commonwealth and its ability to avoid any serious loss of morale under longcontinued hardships have proved it to be a stable form o f gov ernment adaptable to a machine-age civilization and capable o f meeting new human needs by democratic methods. Basic problems o f agriculture, banking, finance, conserva tion o f natural resources, employment, econom ic security, housing, and long-range econom ic stabilization have been examined during this period and remedial processes have been set in motion. The health o f the Nation has been studied and appraised; medical science has been brought more extensively into public service. Death rates have been reduced, tuberculosis has been more nearly brought under control, the health o f children has been improved. M edical services have been expanded; public-health administration has been mobilized through local, State, and Federal agencies for steady progress toward building a healthy Nation. M ore has been learned about health dangers and deficiencies, the means of reducing some o f them have been found, and programs o f action have been established. Education, recreation, and the problems o f youth have been studied by public and voluntary bodies on a national scale and with a realism often enhanced by local participation and initiative. Nation-wide programs for the benefit o f youth have been established. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis THE GOALS OF DEMOCRACY 7 But the purpose o f this Conference is not to boast o f the achievements o f our dem ocracy in prosperity and depression, but rather to press forward to achievements worthy o f the freedom and wealth o f our Nation. It is especially gratifying to note how fast and how consistently the general standard of living and the national income o f this country have risen through the decades despite the interruptions of depressions. It is heartening to review the progress made and to observe the stability o f our democratic institutions under strain. But a special obligation o f this Conference is to point out the short comings and deficiencies that still exist. For every proof of progress that betokens our abilities, there is evidence o f lags unworthy of our resources and our intelligence. In some ways the financial collapse o f 1929 and its aftermath o f prolonged depression are evidences o f this type. Even though there were danger signs o f econom ic unsoundness— soil erosion, mortgage foreclosures, bank failures, wild financial speculation, concentration of financial control and increase of m onopoly, growing unbalance between productive capacity and consuming power— still the year 1929 appeared to be a high plateau o f prosperity, until it suddenly terminated in a precipice o f tumbling destruction. The fact that the prosperity o f the twenties rested on eco nom ic practices which led to the stupendous losses o f the thirties was an indication that in our preoccupation with the wonders o f science we had neglected to develop the institutions necessary for its sound utilization. It is evident that much progress has been made in this respect since the drastic lesson o f 1929. It is equally evident that despite all that has been done to meet the conditions o f the depression, there are still great areas o f distress among our population to which this Conference is bound to call attention, since they endanger the welfare of millions o f children. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 8 CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACY Great inequalities have been discovered throughout the country in the available opportunities for children and youth in rural areas, in low-incom e groups, among the unemployed, among migrant workers, and in various minority groups. Honest inquiry has uncovered conditions unworthy o f a dem ocracy with resources like ours and dangerous to its future. Because this democracy has shown itself bold and capable o f dealing with a catastrophic depression without loss of courage or determination, the W hite House Conference on Children in a Dem ocracy feels free to call public attention to the many conditions that still are hazardous to children and to the future o f our democracy. It has no misgivings about this Nation’s capacity to face unpleasant facts, its will to take on new and growing responsibilities, and its readiness to accept great burdens— for the goal is clear and abundant resources are at hand. Our Concern, E very C h ild The White House Conference on Children in a Dem ocracy speaks to all the people for all the children. There are some 36 million children under 16 years o f age in the United States, and about 5 million more aged 16 and 17— altogether nearly a third o f the population.1 Each year about 2 million babies are born. For numbers alone, if for no other reasons, these voteless fellow citizens who hold the national future in their bodies and minds are necessarily a first interest of the Nation. Concern for the child begins before his birth in concern for his parents; it continues until the child reaches maturity. During this period of childhood, roughly 20 years, it is possible to distinguish certain needs o f the child as an individual and other needs which are identical with those o f his family or 1As estimated by the Bureau of Research and Statistics of the Social Security Board with the advice of the U. S. Bureau of the Census. The number of children under 16 is their estimate as ofJuly 1, 1938; the number 16 and 17, as ofJuly 1, 1937. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis THE GOALS OF DEMOCRACY 9 his community. The child receives or should receive serv ices from many individuals, groups, and agencies in addi tion to his own family. Each has its special task; none can be performed successfully without regard for the others. H ow ever, the best intentions of one group have often been nullified by ignorance o f the work of another, or by the interference or inefficiency of others. T oo often people have failed to recog nize the simple truth that the child cannot be broken up into parts— one for the parent, another for the teacher, one for the public official, another for the playground, and still another for the church. The child is an indivisible whole as he grows from infancy to m anhood and must be planned for and served as such. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis The Child in the Family The vast majority of children are members of families. Their world opens up in a family, and they continue to spend most of the hours o f the day in or about the home, even after school and playmates have begun to claim a large place in their thoughts and activities. Home and family are the first condition of life for the child. They are first in importance for his growth, development, and education. The child has food and shelter if his family has a home and provides food. He is content and happy if he is well, if he has par ents and others to love and be loved by. Education begins in the home, where he learns to speak, to walk, to handle things, to play, to demand, to give, to experiment. Religious faith is imparted in the family long before he goes to church. Adventure and safety, contentment and rebellion, cooperation, sharing, self-reliance, and mutual aid are family experiences. The Fa m ily as the Threshold o f Democracy In spite of the great changes which have occurred in family life, especially in cities, there is still no more far-reaching educational institution than the family. It can be a school for the democratic life, if we make it so. W hat does the family teach? W hat services does it inaugurate? W hat bearing do these have on community services— schooling, religious guid ance, recreation, employment, medical care, social services, and protection against exploitation? 10 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis THE CHILD IN THE FAMILY 11 Giving the child food, shelter, and material security in general is a primary task o f the family. In the family there is opportunity also to teach the elements o f personal hygiene, health, and the prevention o f disease. Relationships with the doctor, the hospital, and other community services may be established. When the child reaches the school and the church, for example, he is likely to esteem them in accordance with the values which the family has placed upon them. Less conspicuous but more important by far is what the child acquires through the family in regard to his relations with his fellows. Standards o f conduct may be formed by fear or by example; they may be enforced by authority or by persuasion. It is in the relations o f members o f the family to one another that the quality of the American democratic way may find opportunity for its most conspicuous realization. Self-sufficiency, enterprise, initiative, and cooperation are virtues sought in children as well as in adults. The dem o cratic family life consists of give and take, with freedom for each individual to express his own interests at the same time that he is tolerant and helpful to others. Children are helped to develop these standards and capac ities by sharing in family discussions and duties. Essential foundations are thus laid for participation in a dem ocratic society. H ow can the family make the best of its opportunities as the first school in dem ocratic life? The Conference makes the following recommendations: 1. It is essential to democracy that self-respect and selfreliance, as well as respect for others and a cooperative attitude, be fostered. These characteristics may be best acquired in childhood if the relationship among members of the family is of a democratic quality. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACY 12 2. The democratic principle should be applied not only within the family but also by the family and its members in their relationships with others within the home and at church, club, place of employment, and elsewhere. 3. Parent education should be extended as a useful means for helping to bring about this type of family life. Fam ilies a n d T h eir Incomes A necessary condition o f the family’ s capacity to serve the child is an income sufficient to provide the essentials o f food, clothing, shelter, and health, as well as a home life that means for the child education, happiness, character building. Parents, being human, differ from one another in com petence, character, capacity to plan, energy, industry, re sourcefulness. For this reason some parents will achieve a fine home under adverse conditions while others will fail to do so under favorable circumstances. These differences among parents are to be found in high places and low, among the wealthy and the poor. They involve good fortune for one child or an added handicap for another. Whatever these differences may be, some degree of material security is essential for the life and happiness of every family. This was once an agricultural country. of the people were rural. In 1820, 93 percent M oney incomes were extremely small, but many of the necessities for health and happiness, according to the standards of the time, were supplied by the farm and community without cost. By 1930 only one person in four lived on a farm, a smaller proportion in villages, and more than half in cities, where many families cannot even see a green tree without paying carfare. City costs of living not only are high in terms of the price of certain essential goods but also include items that in the country are “ free as air.” https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis THE CHILD IN THE FAMILY Families are smaller than they used to be. 13 The average, once nearly six persons per family, now is barely four. Rural families are larger than city families but are steadily decreasing in size. Our standard o f decent living has been raised to conform with advancing knowledge. Our ancestors could drink pol luted water, could lose a high percentage o f mothers by child bed fever, could bury one baby out of three, without feeling rebellious against society, because no human being knew how to prevent those calamities. But suffering and death that we know how to prevent are an outrage against decency, not to be suffered in meek submission but to be fought with every new weapon our generation has discovered. One may find some satisfaction, o f course, in comparing the plane o f living of American families, both urban and rural, with the levels of existence o f the past or with the existence o f many millions of people in other parts o f the world. there is widespread actual need. Despite this, however, M any children, as well as many adults, lack sufficient food and adequate shelter, and many millions of Americans lack needed medical attention. W ith the decrease in family size and the notable develop ment o f science and industry, it might be assumed that all families today would be assured of income sufficient for their needs. Estimates based on the number of children in families at different income levels in 83 cities show that one-half to two-thirds of the children in American cities live in homes where the family income is less than the equivalent o f $1,260 for a family of four.2 There is ample evidence, although it is not 2 The number of children in families at different income levels was computed from data of the N ational H ealth Survey, 1 9 3 5 , in 83 cities in 19 States (U. S. Public Health Service). In another study (Intercity D ifferences in C ost o f L ivin g , M a rch 1 9 35, 5 9 C ities, by Margaret Loomis Stecker; Works Progress Administration Research Monograph XII, 1937) $1,261 was found to be the average cost for a family of four of a level of living defined for the purpose of that study as a “maintenance level of living.” This study was made in 59 cities of more than 25,000 population, containing 60 percent of the total population in communities of more than 25,000 population in the United States. All regions were represented. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 14 CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACY exactly comparable with these data, to indicate that the eco nom ic situation of farm families is no better. The failure o f income to keep pace with the needs o f the family is illustrated in chart 1. The per capita income de creases sharply as the family increases in size, dropping to an average o f $221 for each person in families of seven or more persons, in contrast to $774 for each person in 2-person families. It is clear that the safety o f our democratic institutions requires that as many families as possible be enabled to earn a decent income on a normal self-supporting basis. It is clear also that measures are required to supply substitute income where there is none or where income is insufficient to meet family needs. Twenty-five percent o f the people not on relief obtain their incomes from farming and nearly 40 percent depend on wages in industry and trade and in other nonagricultural occu pations.3 Basic econom ic measures must be concerned, there fore, with agriculture and with wages. Farm income becomes available when agricultural products find a market, and wage income is available when industrial products find a market. Farm prices and wages should be sufficient to meet the basic needs o f the worker and his family. The basic econom ic problem o f our children is the econom ic problem o f the Nation— to find a sound balance o f wages, prices, and financing that will provide a growing purchasing power to industrial workers and farmers and profitable invest ment for capital. The changing econom ic structure o f modern civilization and o f national and world markets calls for meas ures, directed toward these ends, o f a kind different from those that were thought suitable for an earlier economy. 8 For description of occupational classifications see Consumer Incomes in the United States (National Resources Committee, 1938), table 9, p. 26, and p. 44. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis THE CHILD IN THE FAMILY 15 Chart 1 PER-CAPITA INCOM E 1935-36, BY SIZE O F FA M ILY AVERAGE ANNUAL INCOME PER PERSON NOT RECEIVING RELIEF O I SINGLE MEN O « SINGLE WOMEN FAMILIES O I 2 PERSONS oo 3 -4 PERSONS o o 5 -6 PERSONS 7 OR MORE PERSONS RECEIVING SOME RELIEF SINGLE MEN AND WOMEN FAMILIES (AVERAGE 4.5 PERSONS) Source: Consumer Incomes In the United States, p. 46. Washington, 1938. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis National Resources Committee. 16 CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACY The average income o f farm families, after allowance is made for the value o f home-consumed produce, is far below the average o f the Nation.4 This income has been especially depressed and uncertain under conditions that followed over expansion during the W orld War. Far-reaching adjustments in agriculture have been needed and continue to be needed to keep the agricultural income from falling lower. Increased industrial employment would undoubtedly im prove the market for farm products, but special measures for agriculture would still be necessary. Am ong these are adequate provisions for soil and forest conservation as a permanent na tional policy; strengthening of Federal agencies for agricultural credit; special measures designed to achieve a better balance between agricultural prices and industrial prices; efforts directed toward increasing nonmonetary farm income through agricul tural research and agricultural extension service; services to assist migration and resettlement of farm families from de pressed or submarginal areas; and social-security laws adapted to the needs of agricultural workers. Industrial workers, as well as farmers and farm laborers, re quire measures for assuring incomes adequate for their family needs. Am ong measures appropriate to wage earners are minimum-wage legislation and laws safeguarding the right of collective bargaining. Measures like these tend to make em ployment more stable and to protect the income of the work ingman and his family. In order to enable families in all income groups, especially those at the lower income levels, to spend their incomes more effectively, education in consumer purchasing should be ex panded. Efforts of public and private agencies to improve the 4 For farm-family income see Consum er Incom es in the U nited S tates, table 8, p. 25, and table 18B, p. 99. For figures on levels of living in farm families (household facilities, diet, and so forth) see Agriculural O utlook Charts, 1940 (Bureau of Agricultural economics and Bureau of Home Economics, U. S. Department of Agriculture, 1939). https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis THE CHILD IN THE FAMILY 17 marketing of consumer goods and to provide consumers with more information to help them purchase more effectively should be encouraged. In addition to measures which provide employment under the ordinary conditions of production through the use of pri vate capital investment, there has been a steadily growing demand in recent years for public works through which em ployment might be provided from public funds. This has come about in part as a result of the growing realization of the need to conserve and develop national resources and an appreciation of the value of public provision for sanitation, highways, educa tion, recreation, public health, hospitals, and other public services. Under conditions of modern life several million men annually must be employed in supplying our society with needed public works, and for them public works should be so conducted as to afford a dependable source of employment. In addition, it is clear that whenever private industry cannot find profitable use for all the available workers, the time, skill, and morale of the unemployed should be salvaged. This can be done in large part by increased provision for public employment. While there has been a gratifying improvement recently in business and employment, there is little doubt that for some time there will continue to be a large volume of unemployment and periods of expansion and contraction in private employ ment. Unemployment is the major economic problem of the present day. There is much unemployment even in most prosperous times and students of the problem are in agreement that the level of unemployment has been rising the world over. The main reliance for providing employment in our economy must be placed upon private employment. Every effort should be made both to impress industry with its responsibilities in https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACT 18 this respect and to help it to meet these responsibilities to the fullest possible extent. At the same time it needs ever to be borne in mind that for some years to come many people who are both willing and able to work cannot be employed unless private employment is supplemented by a well-considered and well-administered public-work program. It seems necessary that a system of appropriate and adequate work projects for the unemployed, as well as extensive public-work programs, be part of a continuing national policy, adjusted to the fluctuations of private employment. Work programs, including both construction operations and the provision of services, should be adapted to the needs of the rural as well as the city population, should provide especially for the needs of youth, and might well develop or expand vari ous types of services administered through existing agencies to promote the health and welfare of children and adults. A flexible, large-scale, low-cost housing program under Federal leadership in cooperation with State and local governments is desirable not only to supply urgently needed low-rent dwellings for low-income families but also to create useful employment, provide an outlet for idle capital, and improve community life. The income of many families has been made more adequate and secure by the development of various types of social insur ance. The economic-security measures incorporated in the Social Security Act of 1935 have become an accepted part of our national life. Their old-age-benefit provisions have been transformed by amendments enacted in 1939 into a type of family insurance through old-age and survivors benefits. Ex tension o f the coverage of unemployment compensation and old-age and survivors insurance, liberalization of the benefits provided, and provision for insurance against loss of income through temporary or permanent disability are opportunities https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis THE CHILD IN THE FAMILY for further advance. 19 Workmen’s compensation laws in most States are in need of strengthening as to coverage, benefits, and methods of administration. Although social-insurance benefits, public assistance, work relief, and general-relief payments made during the past decade have been of great significance from the point of view both of the social policies involved and of the number of persons bene fited, they constitute in aggregate amount but a small propor tion o f the total income payments received by the American people, as is indicated in chart 2. Most of these economic-security measures are already a part of the programs of State and Federal governments. They will become more effective as public opinion attains greater economic understanding and social insight. Reference to public-work and housing programs and to extending, liberalizing, and supplementing the various forms ^ of social insurance should not convey the impression that these are the only measures which can and should be developed to cope with the problem of unemployment. There are many other ways in which government can contribute to its solution; for example, better training of youth for the needs of industry, vocational information and guidance, retraining of workers who have lost their opportunities for employment through prolonged unemployment or technological changes, improved placement services, and research and planning for the devel opment and conservation of our natural resources. These measures are primarily the responsibility of government. Likewise, much more can be done by industry to provide regular employment, to create jobs, to find suitable work for those thought to be misfits, and to perform more fully than it has in recent years the function of taking risks which in our economic system belongs primarily to industry. # https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis l to o Chart 2 M O N TH LY INCOM E PAYM ENTS IN THE UNITED STATES, 1929-39 MILLIONS OF D O LLA R S 8 ,0 0 0 6,000 5 ,0 0 0 4 ,0 0 0 3 ,0 0 0 2,000 2,000 1,0 0 0 1,000 ‘ 1929 1930 |93l 1932 1933 J934 1935 1936 1937 1938 1939 Based on index numbers supplied by N ational Income Division, Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce, U. S. Department of Commerce. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACT 7 ,0 0 0 THE CHILD IN THE FAMILY 21 Fam ilies in N e e d o f Assistance During the process of adjustment to a changed economic situation many families and children are left without an assured livelihood because of unemployment, disability, low wages, or other factors beyond their control. It is becoming the estab lished American policy that these families be given adequate economic assistance. This economic assistance has been called by various names, such as general relief, public assistance, work programs, old-age assistance, aid to dependent children, and allotment of surplus commodities. The number of families requiring economic aid is so great that the standards of assistance affect the standards of American living as a whole. Between 6 and 8 million children in 1939 were in families dependent for food and shelter on various forms of economic aid. The following table 5 shows the approxi mate number of children involved: Children in families receiving economic assistance TYPE OF ASSISTANCE March 1939 Work Projects Administration wages............................... General relief, State and local. . . .................................... Aid to Dependent Children............................................... Farm Security Administration grants............................... 4.500.000 2.400.000 720.000 300.000 August 1939 3.000. 000 2.000. 000 751.000 170.000 It is common knowledge that the assistance given to many families is not enough to permit a good home for the children.6 5 Table prepared by research staff of the Conference from information obtained from Social Security Board, Work Projects Administration, and Farm Security Administration. The major sources of financial assistance, Federal, State, and local, are included in these figures. The estimates on general relief and aid to dependent children were obtained from the Social Security Board. The number of families receiving aid from private agencies is unknown, as is the number receiving only surplus commodities. A large number of farm families at low income levels receive small loans for farm equipment and advice on home and farm management from the Farm Security A d m in , istration. The number of children under 16 in families receiving these loans and services was estimated to be 1,175,000 in March 1939 and 1,150,000 in August. 8Average amounts per case for general relief for December 1939 ranged from about $3 to about $36. Social Security B ulletin, February 1940, p. 58. 2 6 2 2 0 5 °— 40--------11 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 22 CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACY It is common knowledge, too, that there are families in need which receive no assistance.7 The Conference recognizes that economic aid must continue to be given from publié funds to a considerable number of families; that local, State, and Federal governments should share the responsibility; and that new, hitherto untried methods may have to be introduced and earlier measures extended. In 1935 the Federal Government assumed responsibility for providing employment for employable persons, chiefly through the Works Progress Administration. Although it has not actually cared for all so-called employables, its share of the total national relief burden has continued to be much larger than the aggregate burden carried by the States. Some States have been able to meet general-relief needs for those not designated as employable or not cared for by other forms of economic assistance. Other States, however, have found it impossible to carry this part of the burden. This has resulted in uneven and frequently extremely low standards of relief, as well as neglect of many families in need of aid. Unless some other way, not yet suggested, can be found, the Con ference believes that the Federal Government will need to take steps to strengthen general-relief systems in the States, including standards of administration, through financial par ticipation in these programs. The Conference makes the following recommendations: 1. Measures for unemployment compensation, work m en’ s compensation, and old-a¿e and survivors beneñts, 7One source of such knowledge is Som e A spects o f the R elief Situation in Representative a mimeographed report prepared by the American Association of Social Workers in May 1939. This report contains the following statement: “Some sections, mainly in the South and Southwest, report ‘no general relief’ to employables regardless of the degree of need, and that aid to unemployables, if given at all, is limited to sporadic grants in emergencies. In these areas Federal surplus commodities are the only aid available to thousands of needy families.” A reas o f the U nited States, https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis THE CHILD IN THE FAMILY 23 which are of special importance in relation to children, should be extended as to coverage and liberalized as to benefits provided, and insurance against loss of income through temporary or permanent disability should be developed. 2. The Federal Government should adopt a policy of continuing and flexible work programs for the unemployed, operated and primarily financed by the Federal Govern m ent and carried on in cooperation with State and local governments. The amount of work provided in each State should be in proportion to the number of needy unem ployed. As supplementary to this program and in no way displacing it, the Federal Government should provide aid to the States for general relief covering all persons in need who are not in the categories now the objects of special Federal concern. Federal aid for general relief should be adjusted in each State to the economic capacities and relief needs of that State. 3. States should provide substantial financial assistance to local units to make possible adequate public assistance and relief. State assistance should be adjusted to need and financial capacity of the local units. 4. Aid to Dependent Children should be further devel oped with the objective of enabling each eligible family to provide adequate care for its children. Rigid limitations on the amounts of grants to individual children or fam ilies should be removed from State and Federal laws. Necessary appropriations should be made by State and local governments and by the Federal Government. Fed eral aid should be equitably adjusted to the economic capacities and the needs of the several States. 5. State laws making legal residence a prerequisite for economic aid should be made uniform and reasonable, with no more than a year required for establishing resi dence. The Federal Government should take full responsi bility for developing plans to care for interstate migrants https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACY 24 and transients, such plans to be administered in coopera tion with the States but with the Federal Government assuming complete financial responsibility. The States should assume the responsibility for State residents who are without legal local residence, with such aid as may be made available by the Federal Government for general public assistance. 6. In all systems of economic aid safeguards should be provided to assure staff selected on the basis of merit, adequate in number and qualifications to administer the benefits and to provide or obtain for each family the services needed. 7. Provision should be made for continued study of the problems of economic need and the operation of the various forms of economic aid in the light of changing conditions. Fam ilies a n d T h eir D w ellin gs The words “ home55 and “ family55 are often used inter changeably. Perhaps they should be so used. When a dwell ing is really a home it is because of the life that the family breathes into it. The character of a dwelling is important to every member of the family, but especially to children, who spend so much time in and near the house and are peculiarly susceptible to environmental influences. The design, construction, and sur roundings of a family dwelling should therefore be developed with adequate reference to children’s needs. For all persons the dwelling should at least afford shelter that is safe against the elements; it should have sunlight and air; it should be safeguarded against fire and against impure water and improper disposal of sewage and garbage. The dwelling should be well designed and large enough to offer such separate sleeping accommodations as the age and sex of its occupants may require; it is desirable that there should https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis THE CHILD IN THE FAMILY 25 be separation of sleeping, living, and cooking quarters, and opportunity for privacy. A dwelling in which children are brought up should meet other specifications also. The single-family house with its own yard is unquestionably the best type. Indoor and outdoor play space, at least for children not old enough to reach recre ation places unaccompanied by an older person, and accessi bility to school, doctor, church, library facilities, recreational opportunities, and neighbors are important. A suitable dwelling place is therefore a matter not only of the design of the structure itself but also of the character of the immediate surroundings and of the planning of whole neighborhoods for mutual protection and advantage and for freedom from traffic hazards and other dangers and demoral izing influences. Farm, village, and urban dwellings present different kinds of problems. Farm and other rural homes house half the Nation’s children under 15 years of age. children are members of large families. Many of these When the farmer chooses a home he considers the land and equipment, with which he must earn his living, as well as the dwelling. His limited resources of necessity may go into care of machinery and stock rather than into improvement of the house. M od ern conveniences are usually expensive to install on the farm. Accessibility to community facilities constitutes a peculiarly difficult problem in rural areas. Contrary to general opinion, many farm houses are in effect “ slum” structures, and this is particularly true of a large number of rented farms whose occupancy changes often. For example, 1 million of the 3 million farm-tenant families moved in a single year.8 Upkeep of the dwellings is usually 8The R eport o f the P resident's Com m ittee on Farm Tenancy, 1937 (p. 7) showed that in the spring of 1935, 34.2 percent of the 2,865,000 tenant farmers of the Nation had occupied their farms only 1 year. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACY 26 poor. Far below even this range are the shelters (or camps) of migrant families. The Farm-Housing Survey made in 1934, covering 620,000 farm dwellings, showed that 18 percent were more than 50 years old, and only 16 percent were less than 10 years old. Less than 12 percent had bath tubs, 8 percent had central heating, 18 percent had a home plant or a power line furnish ing electricity, 17 percent had running water in the house.9 In the city certain facilities such as indoor flush toilets, baths, and central heating are essential. This is especially true in multiple-dwelling structures. A recent study 10 showed that of some 8 million urban dwellings 15 percent were without such toilets, 20 percent were without baths. One of every six dwellings needed major repairs or was unfit for use. The undesirable dwellings in the main were occupied by families with low incomes. Sixty times as many “ unfit for use55 dwellings were occupied by city families paying $10 or less per month in rent as were occupied by those paying $50 or more; twenty times as many “ in need of major repairs” were occupied by the $10 group as by the $50 group.11 The housing situation cannot be corrected overnight. Because of underbuilding during the depression years, there is an accumulated numerical shortage of more than 1%million dwellings in cities and villages, in addition to about 2% million 9 From an unpublished report by the Bureau of Home Economics, based on T he Survey (U. S. Department of Agriculture Miscellaneous Publication No. 323, Washington, D. C.), directed by the Bureau of Home Economics, in coopera tion with the Bureau of Agricultural Engineering, Extension Service, and Office of the Secretary, U. S. Department of Agriculture. 10 U rban H o u sin g ; a sum m ary o f real-property inventories conducted as w ork p rojects, 1934—3 6 , by Peyton Stapp, p. 4. Works Progress Administration [now Work Projects Adminis tration]. Washington, 1938. The data were obtained in 203 urban communities, which included more than two-fifths of the urban families in the United States. New York City was not included in the figure for dwellings in need of major repairs or unfit for use. “ The statements in this paragraph are based on compilations from surveys for 22 of the cities. F a rm -H ou sin g https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis THE CHILD IN THE FAMILY 27 worn-out houses in need of replacement.12 Some 3 million farm dwellings fail to meet minimum health and comfort standards.13 In the past, private capital, loans, and traditional ways of financing have provided the funds used in the con struction of dwellings. The old ways obviously are not suffi cient either for community planning or for financing the hous ing of low-income families. Since the solution is not likely to be an early general increase in family income great enough to make low-rent housing attractive to private enterprise, it is clear that local, State, and Federal governments must take some responsibility and leadership in this field. Fortunately the past decade has been an epoch-making period in the history of housing. It has seen local, State, and Federal governments enter this field, especially for low-income groups, to an extent that gives promise of notable achievement. The Conference makes the following recommendations: 1. The Federal Government should continue and expand its program of promoting slum clearance and new housing for low-income groups through further authorization of Federal loans and appropriations for Federal grants to local housing authorities. 2. The Federal Government should give attention to rural areas where half of the Nation's children live. Fed eral housing programs for rural areas should be adapted to rural conditions and should include grants and loans for construction of new homes and repair of substandard dwellings when their condition warrants, assistance in providing safe water supply and sanitation, and encourage m ent of electrification. 3. State and municipal governments should enact legis lation to provide loans and grants for public housing and 12Introduction to H ou sing , F a cts and Principles, by Edith Elmer Wood, p. 70. U. S. Housing Authority, Federal Works Agency. Washington, 1939. 12 Estimate based on information in F a rm -H ou sin g Survey. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 28 CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACY to authorize cooperation with the Federal Government in housing programs. 4. Better housing for families of moderate income should be promoted by safeguarding credit for housing purposes to assure low interest rates and long-term amortization, thus serving to stimulate private building and home ownership; by encouraging cooperative effort of industry and labor to reduce building costs; and by encouraging housing cooper atives and other agencies in which the motive of profit is subordinated to that of social usefulness. 5. Adequate regulatory laws should be enacted, and they should be enforced by competent inspection departments in every city. Such departments should have budgets sufficient for enforcement of laws and regulations concern ing construction, management, maintenance, and repair of dwellings, and demolition of buildings when necessary. Local governments should modernize their building, sani tary, zoning, and housing codes to conform to present knowledge of sanitary and other requirements and to eliminate needless cost. 6. Public-assistance budgets should include provision for housing adequate for family needs. In each com m u nity rent allowances should be based on the rental cost of such housing. 7. Continuous research by public and private agencies should be part of housing programs. Appropriations should be made for this purpose to governmental agencies participating in housing. 8. Since an enlightened public opinion is essential in housing, as in every other socially important field, citizen committees should be organized in communities to pro mote public interest, understanding, and support. Housing facts and problems should be made widely known to the public through formal and informal education. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Religion in the Lives of Children The child, whether in the family, the school, the church, or leisure-time activities, needs to have a personal appreciation of ethical values consistent with a developing philosophy of life. Increasingly as he matures, he needs to see life whole and in its complex relationships. Here the potent influence of religion can give to the child a conviction of the intrinsic worth of persons and also assurance that he has a significant and secure place in an ordered universe. Democracy seeks to reconcile individual freedom with social unity. In the development of the children of a democracy a proper balance must be maintained. Historically religion has succeeded in maintaining such a balance by placing its em phasis upon the worth of the individual and at the same time upon human fellowship. The primary responsibility for the religious development of the child rests upon the parents. In the family he is first introduced to his religious inheritance as he is introduced to his mother tongue. Here the foundations are laid for the moral standards that are designed to guide his conduct through life. A child’ s religious development is fostered and strengthened by participation in the life of the family in which religion is a vital concern. Responsibility for the religious growth of chil dren and youth is shared by the church and other social organizations that are concerned with their guidance. Despite the various efforts made by church groups to edu cate their children in religion, the religious needs of many children are imperfectiy met at the present time. It has been estimated that approximately one-half of the children and 29 * https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACY 30 youth in the United States receive no religious instruction outside the home.14 President Roosevelt has said, “ W e are concerned about the children who are outside the reach of religious influences and are denied help in attaining faith in an ordered universe and in the Fatherhood of God.” The Conference makes the following recommendations: 1. Parents, teachers, and others responsible for guiding children should be ever alert to the importance to the child of facing specific life situations. Such situations may provide the occasions for vital and creative religion to function. Adult leaders of children should be persons of the utmost personal integrity and of the highest ideals who have themselves a vivid appreciation of spiritual values. 2. Whole-hearted recognition and appreciation of the fundamental place of religion in the development of cul ture should be given by all who deal with children and by representatives of the press, radio, and motion picture. Religion should be treated frankly, openly, and objectively as an important factor in personal and social behavior. When religion enters normally into the subject matter of courses such as literature, the history of ideas, philosophy, psychology, and the social sciences, the attitude referred to should be maintained. 3. Further exploration should be made of the use of religious resources in personal counseling as it relates to the welfare of children. 4. Churches and synagogues need to emphasize the common ends which they share with one another and with other com m unity agencies. Religion should be one of the unifying factors influencing the divergent elements that constitute the community. Although they hold to different creeds, the churches should constitute a bulwark 14 Estimate for 1926 of the Department of Research of the International Council of Religious Education. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis RELIGION IN THE LIVES OF CHILDREN 31 against factionalism and antagonism in local comm uni ties. Churches and synagogues should recognize their responsibility to the com m unity and contribute to mutual good will and cooperation on the part of all groups by discovering and emphasizing their common objectives, by helping people to understand and appreciate the loyalty of other groups to their own convictions, and by utilizing their resources for the welfare of the com m unity. They should seek every opportunity to cooperate with other com m unity agencies in specific projects which contribute to the welfare of children. 5. Practical steps should be taken to make more avail able to children and youth through education the resources of religion as an important factor in the democratic way of life and in the development of personal and social integrity. To this end the Conference recommends that a critical and comprehensive study be made of the various experiences both of the churches and of the schools in dealing with the problem of religious education in relation to public education. The purpose of such a study would be to discover how these phases of education may best be provided for in a total program of education, without in any way violating the principle of the separation of church and State. To conduct such a study a privately supported nongovernmental commission should be created which will have on it representatives of national educational and religious educational organizations, and other representa tives of the principal religious bodies. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Educational Services in the Community Formal education centers in the school and extends to other agencies, such as the library and the recreation center. is an essential part of every child’s education. Play Reading may be learned in school but it soon becomes the means of inde pendent recreation and cultural growth. Thus the library, the school, and the recreation center join in a comprehensive educational system. No hard and fast lines separate the functions of these agencies. Educational programs, whether they refer to class instruc tion, to recreation, or to reading, should be available equitably to all children. T o approach this equity is an essential part of the program of action proposed by this Conference. A pri mary responsibility of our democracy is to establish and main tain a fair educational opportunity to which every American child is entitled. This should be a Nation-wide goal, sought through all the thousand varieties of local conditions and traditions. benefits. In this there is a value beyond direct educational Every American child should be able to feel pride and patriotism because his country assures educational oppor tunity for him and for every other child. W e should remember, too, that changes in our national life, in economics and culture, often require modifications in the scope, content, method, and management of educational serv ice. The scope of education is gradually being extended to age limits above and below the traditional 6-to-16 period. The content of education should deal with the personal, social, and economic issues of the day; its method should take account of scientific discoveries in child growth, child care, and the 32 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis EDUCATIONAL SERVICES IN THE COMMUNITY 33 learning process. And the management of the educational services should seek always to combine maximum efficiency with the requirements of individual initiative and freedom. Schools The fundamental purposes of the American schools are sound. Their successes and shortcomings in attaining these purposes are well known. The Advisory Committee on Edu cation, the United States Office o f Education, the Educational Policies Commission, the American Youth Commission, and many other agencies have reported the present situation and recent changes. Those who established this Republic recog nized the relationship between an educated electorate and representative government. The principle of providing edu cational opportunity for every child was recognized in State constitutions as the several States were admitted to the Union. This principle has gradually assumed the substance of reality. Elementary education now reaches well over 90 percent of all children of appropriate ages. The enrollment in secondary schools has doubled or nearly doubled in every decade from 1890 to 1930,15 as is indicated in chart 3. During the past decade this growth has continued. Secondary education is rapidly becoming, both in public opinion and in actual fact, a part of the general educational opportunity which all chil dren may expect and enjoy. Yet a substantial proportion of the adults in the United States did not finish elementary school. Nearly a million children of elementary-school age are not in school, and school opportunities for hundreds of thousands of children of migrant and rural families and of Negroes are often deplorable or entirely lacking.16 18 Statistical Sum m ary o f Education, 1 9 3 5 -3 6 , p. 7. U. S. Office of Education Bulletin 1937, No. 2. Washington, 1939. 16 Advisory Committee on Education: R eport o f the Com m ittee, February 1938, pp. 9-11, 31—34, 133. Washington, 1938. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACY 34 Chart 3 SECONDARY-EDUCATION ENROLLMENT, 1890-1936 I890 358,000 o 1900 19 10 696,000 i,m,ooo 2,495,000 I930 4,800,000 6,425,000 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Each symbol represents 6 00,000 students in public and private schools. Source: Statistical Summary of Education, 1 9 3 5 -3 6 , p. 7. U. S. O ffice of Education Bulletin, 1937, N o. 2. EDUCATIONAL SERVICES IN THE COMMUNITY 35 National resources for increasing opportunities and for reduc ing inequalities in education are not lacking. Nevertheless, there are States in this country that compared with other States, have twice the population 5 to 17 years of age in pro portion to adults 20 to 64 but only one-fifth the amount of income per child of school age.17 The resources of many school districts and even of entire States and regions cannot keep pace with the needs of the school population nor provide suitable standards of educational efficiency. The Conference makes the following recommendations: 1. Units of local school attendance and administration should be enlarged wherever necessary in order to broaden the base of financial support and to make possible a modern well-equipped school for every child at a reasonable percapita cost. 2. Substantial financial assistance should be granted by every State to its local school systems for the purpose of equalizing tax burdens and reducing educational ine qualities. 3. An extended program of Federal financial assistance to the States should be adopted in order to reduce inequali ties in educational opportunity among States. Because the minority groups have proportionately more children than others and live to a greater extent in areas with the least resources, the principle of Federal aid to States for services affecting children is extremely important for their welfare. 4. The supreme educational and social importance of individual traits should be recognized throughout the educational system. An educational system that truly serves a democracy will find no place for the philosophy or the methods of mass production. 17 E qual Educational Opportunity f o r Youth, by Newton Edwards, pp. Ill, 154-155. American Council on Education. Washington, 1939. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACY 36 5. Schools should give increased attention to tional needs of individual children, including are physically handicapped, mentally retarded, handicapped; these needs should be m et with the educa those who or socially minimum emphasis on the handicap. 6. The professional education of teachers should be enriched by study of the principles of child development, the role of education in an evolving social order, and the significance of democratic procedures in school life. 7. Teachers and other workers in all branches of educa tion should be selected and retained in service on the basis of professional qualifications alone. They should be adequate in number to permit them to give attention to the needs of each individual child. 8. School system s should provide nursery school, kinder garten, or similar educational opportunities for children between the ages of 3 and 6. 9. Local school systems should provide free educational opportunities, in accordance with individual needs, for youth up to 18 or 20 years of age, in preparation for higher education, in basic and specialized vocational training, or in general educational advancement. 10. Schools should make available to young people, while in school and after they leave school, systematic personal and vocational guidance and organized assistance in job placement, in cooperation with public employment services. 11. School health supervision education should be made more the health of the child and to standing of the principles and and health and safety effective so as to protect give him better under practices of social and comm unity hygiene. 12. Schools should assume further responsibility for providing wholesome leisure-time activities for children and their families, and new school buildings should be planned and equipped with these functions in mind. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis EDUCATIONAL SERVICES IN THE COMMUNITY 37 13. Education for civic responsibility should be empha sized with the aim of developing personal integrity and intelligent loyalty to democratic ideals and institutions. For this purpose the child’s learning experiences should include participation in the activities of comm unity life, on a level appropriate to his degree of maturity. 14. Schools should cooperate with other community institutions and agencies that serve the child. Close coop eration with parents is especially important. 15. Research divisions should be established by local school systems wherever possible and by State departments of education. Budgets for the United States Office of Education should be increased to permit the extension of research and related services. Planning of educational policies and programs at all levels should be based on research. 16. The traditional concern of American education with ethical values as well as mental and physical development should continue to be the fundamental obligation of the schools. It is desirable that the teaching and administra tive staffs should maintain among themselves and in their attitudes toward children the processes and viewpoints characteristic of a democratic society. Such attitudes will thrive only in an atmosphere of freedom to teach and freedom to learn. Leisu re-T im e Services The educational importance of play and of the constructive use of leisure time has been given substantial recognition only since the turn of the century. Consequently the provision of opportunity for recreation and informal education still lacks full acceptance as a public responsibility and the existing facilities lag far behind desirable standards. All children and youth need experience through which their elemental desire for friendship, recognition, adventure, crea262205°— 40------12 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 38 CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACY tive expression, and group acceptance can be realized. Normal family life contributes much toward meeting these basic emo tional needs. Voluntary participation in informal education and recreation under favorable conditions also contributes greatly. Such activities help to meet certain developmental needs— the need of congenial companionship with the opposite sex, the need for emotional development and a healthy inde pendence, and other needs that arise at different stages in the individual’s progress toward maturity. They furnish, finally, an important means whereby the child can express his need for the development of motor, manual, and artistic skills, for contact with nature, for the socializing experience of group life, and for responsible participation in community life. M uch recreation, perhaps the best of it, is enjoyed in family units or is provided under circumstances that serve both young and old. The provision of opportunities for the entire population, developed through cooperative, intelligent planning, is the concern of both public and private agencies. Private agencies provide a medium by which groups of citizens through volun tary effort can identify, interpret, and seek to meet special community needs. This is especially important in areas of activity which are yet unrecognized by the larger community. Private agencies usefully emphasize responsibility and partici pation on the part of volunteers, and bring volunteer and pro fessional leaders into creative association. Both public and private agencies are experimenting in new areas of need and in new methods of work. Private agencies often prepare the community for larger public effort and for the transfer of services from private to public auspices. Local, county, State, and National parks, school and com munity playgrounds, and, more recently, the recreation proj ects of the W. P. A. have also helped to give recreation a signifi cant place in the total educational enterprise. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 39 EDUCATIONAL SERVICES IN THE COMMUNITY Within any community, State, or region opportunity for leisure-time activities must be planned. If it grows hap hazardly, with school, parks, and private agencies acting independently, the program may be wasteful and retarded. Planning, on the other hand, may lead to coordination of services and facilities. It also helps to bring about public recognition of the fact that recreation for young and old requires leadership, equipment, and trained personnel. Cognizance must also be taken of the vast increase in, and growing importance of, recreation under commercial auspices. This is not limited to entertainment and cultural opportunities, such as are provided by radio, motion pictures, and the theater. It includes also many opportunities for sports and active recreation. Commercial recreation is usually available only to those who can afford to pay for it, but it is largely influenced, in both quality and quantity, by the character and amount of the demand. Educational agencies can play a role in pro moting intelligent choice and appreciation of these forms of recreation. There are distinctive recreational needs and opportunities in rural and in urban surroundings. The natural surround ings of the countryside enrich the life of the rural child. Organ ized recreation, on the other hand, has been more available to city children. Leaders in the field of play and recreation, from the earliest innovators to present administrators, have emphasized the need for balance between organization and spontaneity in the development of the play life of the child. Whether in city or country, organized programs under com petent leadership have been found of importance for the formation of democratic habits and attitudes. Recreation for children in a democracy should reflect the values that are implicit in the democratic way of life. This means, among other things, a program that emerges from the https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 40 CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACY life of the people; a leadership that responds to the vital needs and interests of children; a relationship with people in the community that involves them in responsible participation both in planning and in management; and a form of adminis tration that is democratic and elicits the values of group experience. With these considerations in mind the Conference makes the following recommendations: ^* Y he development of teciesition end the constructive use of leisure time should be recognized as a public respon sibility on a par with responsibility for education and health. Local communities, States, and the Federal Gov ernment should assume responsibility for providing public recreational facilities and services, as for providing other services essential to the well-being of children. Private agencies should continue to contribute facilities, experi mentation, and channels for participation by volunteers. 2. Steps should be taken in each comm unity by public and private agencies to appraise local recreational facilities and services and to plan systematically to m eet inade quacies. This involves utilization of parks, schools, museums, libraries, and camp sites; it calls for coordina tion of public and private activities and for the further development of private organizations in providing varied opportunities for children with different resources and interests. Special attention should be directed toward the maximum utilization of school facilities for recreation in both rural and urban areas. 3. Emphasis should be given to equalizing the oppor tunities available to certain neglected groups of children, including— Children living in rural or sparsely settled areas. Children in families of low income. Negro children and children of other minority groups. Children in congested city neighborhoods. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis EDUCATIONAL SERVICES IN THE COMMUNITY 41 Children just leaving school and not yet adjusted to outside life, with special emphasis on unemployed youth. Children with mental, emotional, or physical handi caps. 4. Public and private organizations carrying responsi bility for leisure-time services should assist and cooperate in developing public recognition of the fact that recreation for young and old requires facilities, equipment, and trained personnel. 5. Schools and other educational and civic organizations should promote intelligent choice and appreciation of various forms of commercial recreation. 6. Because of the growing significance of radio and motion pictures in their impact on children and youth, social organizations and entertainment industries, insofar as they are concerned with the leisure time of children, should collaborate wherever possible in order to provide programs that will contribute to the sound development of children. 7. A privately supported nongovernmental national commission on recreation should be created to study leisure-time needs and resources and to make recom mendations concerning the development of recreation and informal education. Libraries Little argument is needed to convince the American people of the importance of public libraries. Whether for leisure, for education, for vocational advancement, for research, or for the dissemination of knowledge, the library is an indispensable public service. The free public library is a characteristic in stitution of democratic life. Most public libraries are munici pal, town, or county institutions. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis A smaller number are CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACY 42 partly endowed and partly dependent upon public appro priations. School libraries have become a cardinal feature of modern schools. In recent years many traveling libraries and branch libraries in isolated areas have been developed. Nevertheless, according to figures collected by the American Library Association in 1938, more than 18 million persons under 20 years of age are still without local public-library service. O f these young persons more than 17 million live in rural areas. The best type of library to serve rural areas is the county or regional library. Last year 400 of more than 3,000 counties in the United States were served by such libraries.18 More libraries are needed both in schools and for general public use in all regions of the country. The shortage is especially acute in rural areas, where there is little hope of obtaining them through local funds. The Conference makes the following recommendations: 1. The States should encourage and assist in the exten sion and development of local public-library service and give financial aid for the maintenance of such service. In rural areas provision should be made for traveling libra ries to reach isolated homes and communities. 2. Federal grants to the States for general public educa tion should be available for school libraries. Special Federal grants should be made available for extension of library service to rural areas. 3. Libraries should provide for special collections and personnel to serve children. Provision should also be made for material and for library advisory service for parents on subjects relating to child care and training. 4. Libraries should be staffed by personnel trained and qualified specifically for this work. 18 R eport o f the L ibra ry E xten sion B oa rd o f the Am erican L ibra ry A ssociation f o r the Tear 1939. Bulletin of the American Library Association,Vol. 33, No. 9 (September 1939), pp. 552-557. The association estimates that the number of counties now served is 450. E nding J u ly 3 1 , https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Protection Against Child Labor C h ild la bor is still a serious p rob lem in this cou n try in spite o f progress in its con trol under State and Federal laws. A l though the n u m ber o f em ployed children has decreased to a m arked degree in recent years, children under 16 still cut short their education to g o to w ork, or engage in w ork during vacation and outside school hours under conditions detri m ental to their fullest physical, m ental, and social grow th. A cco rd in g to estimates o f the N ational C hild L a b o r C o m m ittee, at least h alf a m illion children under 16 are still gain fully em p loyed. F or the still larger num ber o f you n g workers betw een 16 and 18 years o f age existing safeguards for p rotec tion from hazardous o r otherwise detrim ental conditions o f em ploym en t are far from adequate. T h e developm ent o f p u b lic op in ion favorable to the exten sion o f the period o f school attendance for children and the protection o f you n g persons from unfavorable em ploym ent conditions after they leave school has resulted in restrictive and regulative legislation, b oth State and Federal. T h e Fair L a b o r Standards A c t o f 1938, w ith its basic 16-year m inim um age, n o w governs the em ploym ent o f children in industries p rod u cin g goods for interstate com m erce. But the great m ajority o f child workers, particularly those under 16 years o f age, are in industries w h ich are strictly intrastate in scope and therefore not subject to the Federal act. T hese industries also are less w ell regulated b y State law than factory work, w h ich to a large extent is subject to the Federal act because o f its interstate character. O n ly 12 State laws set a basic m ini m u m age o f 16 for em ploym ent. T h ere are still large areas o f 43 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACY 44 ch ild em ploym ent, such as industrialized agriculture, street trades, dom estic service, and industrial hom e w ork, w here m u ch exploitation exists that escapes legislative control and w here special adm inistrative problem s m ake effective regula tion difficult o f achievem ent. M a n y you n g workers are subject to undue industrial health and safety hazards. T h e effective ness o f the protective standards that have been set up b y law is often lessened b y lack o f adequate adm inistrative m achinery. P revention o f the exploitation o f children and youth in prem ature and harm ful la b or must be accom pa n ied b y p ro vision for educational training, op en to all children, during the years left free from w age earning. recognize the changing conditions T his education should of em ploym ent, and adaptations that are needed in all educational program s as described in the sections on educational services and on youth and their needs. S uch education, m oreover, should be adapted to the individual needs o f the pupils and should equ ip them w ith the know ledge, skills, and habits that they w ill need in m aking adjustm ent to the industrial and social problem s o f the m odern w orld. T h e fact can n ot be too strongly em phasized that the w ork o f children in certain phases o f agriculture is different today from w hat it was w hen children w ere m ain ly w orking for their parents o r coop eratin g in harvesting a n eigh b or’ s crops. W ith the developm en t o f intensive cultivation o f specialized crops there has grow n u p the practice o f using large num bers o f children in industrialized agriculture under conditions w hich in m an y instances differ little from those o f “ sw eatshop” em p loym en t and w h ich require the same kind o f safeguards as those fou n d necessary w ith reference to industrial em ploym ent. T h e C onference endorses the follow ing requirem ents, n ow w idely accepted as m inim um for protective legislation: https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis PROTECTION AGAINST CHILD LABOR 45 1. A minimum age of 16 for all employment during school hours and for employment at any time in manu facturing or mining occupations or in connection with power-driven machinery. 2. A minimum age of 16 for employment at any time in other occupations, except as a minimum age of 14 may be permitted for limited periods of work after school hours and during vacation periods in agriculture, light non manufacturing work, domestic service, and street trades. Determination of desirable standards for legislation gov erning child actors requires further study. 3. A minimum age of 18 or higher for employment in hazardous or injurious occupations. 4. Hours-of-work restrictions for persons up to 18 years of age, including maximum hours, provision for lunch period, and prohibition of night work, the hours permitted not to exceed 8 a day, 40 a week, and 6 days a week. 5. Requirement of employment certificates for all minors under 18, issued only after the minor has been certified as physically fit for the proposed employment by a physi cian under public-health or public-school authority. 6. At least double compensation under workmen’s com pensation laws in cases of injury to illegally employed minors. 7. Minimum-wage standards for all employed minors. 8. Abolition of industrial home work as the only means of eliminating child labor in such work. 9. Adequate provision for administration of all laws relating to the employment of children and youth. T h e C onference also makes the follow in g recom m en dation : 10. Ratification of the child-labor amendment to the Constitution of the United States should be completed immediately. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 46 CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACY W ith reference to provision o f school facilities as it bears on ch ild labor, the C onference recom m ends the follow in g: 11. Compulsory school attendance laws should be adjust» ed to child-labor laws, since school leaving and child labor are closely related. Schooling during at least 9 months of the year should be both compulsory for and available to every child up to the age of 16. 12. It is the obligation of the comm unity to provide a suitable educational program for all youths over 16 who are not employed or provided with work opportunities. . 13. Financial aid from public sources should be given whenever necessary to young persons to enable them to continue their education even beyond the compulsoryattendance age if they wish to do so and can benefit thereby. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Youth and Their Needs T h e transition from ch ild h ood to youth is gradual. Boys and girls from 16 to 20 years are on the threshold o f life as adults, w hen they w ill carry responsibility n ot on ly for their ow n lives b u t for the life o f the N ation as a w hole. T hey are entering the period w hen decisions must be m ade in regard to the kinds o f lives they w ill live and the kinds o f social an d political program s they w ill endorse b y their votes and their opinions. T h e circum stances and state o f m in d o f youth are, therefore, o f utm ost im portance n ot on ly for their ow n future bu t for the future o f ou r society. W h a t does youth expect? T radition ally, in the U n ited States, the you n g person ou t o f school looks forw ard to a j o b o f som e kind in w h ich there is opportu n ity for advan cem ent; he looks forw ard to self-support and independence, to the establishm ent o f a fam ily, and to participation in the social an d civ ic life o f the com m unity. W h a t is the situation o f you th today? The A m erican Y o u th C om m ission, in its leaflet, P rogram o f A ction for A m erican Y ou th , estimates, on the basis o f the u n em ploy m ent census o f 1937, that one-third o f the u n em ployed workers in the U n ited States are you n g persons betw een 15 and 25 years o f age and that abou t 4 m illion youth o f these ages are ou t o f w ork. T h e rate o f u nem ploym ent is higher for you th than for any other age group. Even in fairly pros perous times, you n g persons have difficulty in getting started at useful em ploym ent. W h a t does you th have in the absence o f jo b opportu n ity and self-support? M a n y are m em bers o f families that are not 47 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACY 48 self-sustaining and therefore have few resources. S ch ool p ro grams are n ot sufficiently adapted to the needs o f youth, in spite o f great progress in the enlargem ent o f secondary-educa tion facilities to the p oin t w here the num ber o f you n g persons enrolled in secondary schools represents nearly three-fourths o f the p op u la tion 14 to 17 years o f age.19 R ecreation al facili ties also are insufficient for the you n g person approach in g adu lth ood. S ch ool program s for older age groups should be thorough ly reorganized in order to m eet the cultural and vocational needs o f a large p rop ortion o f you n g people not adequately served now . B roader con ception s particularly im portant. o f vocational are T ra in in g for specific skilled jo b s can be on ly part o f a suitable program . jo b preparation T h ere are relatively fewer opportu nities in the skilled and unskilled fields than form erly, and m ore in semiskilled occupations. T h e increase in openings for em ploym en t in service trades calls for greater social adjustm ent and adaptability. It is o f prim ary im por tance that you n g p eop le receive general preparation that w ill be o f practical value to them in seeking and in beginning em p loym en t u nder the conditions and relationships w h ich actually prevail in industry and business today. Schools should help you n g p eop le to obtain a general understanding o f social and eco n o m ic problem s and to acquire w ork habits suited to the kind o f opportunities w h ich w ill b e available. Schools should take particular pains to introduce you n g p eople to the cultural and educational opportunities that can be continued after they leave school. V oca tio n a l preparation, general and specific, and em p loy m ent services are n ot in themselves enough. be op en to actual em ploym ent. T h e w ay must T h e C ivilian Conservation 19Figures in Statistical Summary o f Education, 1935—3 6 (U. S. Office of EducationBulletin, 1937, No. 2, p. 12) show this proportion to be 67 percent during the school year 1935-36. The corresponding estimate for 1938, according to the Office of Education, is 72 percent. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis YOUTH AND THEIR NEEDS 49 Corps and the National Youth Administration, both initiated and conducted by the Federal Government, are designed to meet some of the employment needs of youth. They have made outstanding contributions by programs combining work and education. the C. C. C. An enrollment of 300,000 is authorized in O n its work program for out-of-school youth, the N. Y. A. gave part-time employment to an average of about 235,000 in 1939. There have been few comparable activities under State or local governments. Thus at a given time probably less than one-seventh of the young persons out of school and out of work are being aided through these con structive efforts. The C. C. C. and the N. Y. A. must be regarded as pioneer experiments showing what needs to be done on a much larger scale, rather than as services actually covering all the present needs of youth. The situation of youth calls urgently for action. The Conference believes that the cost of constructive pro grams will be less than the ultimate cost of the neglect of youth. The Conference makes the following recommendations: 1. Programs of general secondary education based on changes in industrial demands and opportunities and contributing significantly to responsible citizenship, whole som e family life, constructive use of leisure time, and appreciation of our cultural heritage should be developed. 2. Vocational preparation, guidance, and counseling services adapted to modern conditions and the changing needs of youth should be extended in the school systems, and when carried on under other auspices, should be conducted in cooperation with the schools. 3. Placement services for young workers should be staffed by properly qualified and professionally trained workers, with full cooperation between the schools and the public employment services. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 50 CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACY 4. Federal, State, and local governments should provide work projects for youths over 16 not in school who cannot obtain employment. Such work should be useful, entail* ing possibly the production of some of the goods and services needed by young people themselves and other unemployed persons. Civilian Conservation Corps and National Youth Administration activities should be con tinued and enlarged to serve more fully the purposes for which these agencies were created. There should be further experimentation in pait-tim e work and part-time schooling. No person should be arbitrarily excluded from work programs or other programs for youth because of a delin quency record. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Conserving the Health of Children Medical science has made notable progress during the past decade in knowledge of how to reduce illness and deaths of mothers in childbirth, how to prevent deaths of infants, and how to feed and protect the child during the first critical years of his life. Knowledge of how to immunize children against Chart 4 INFANT M ORTALITY IN THE UNITED STATES YEAR RATE Each symbol represents 10 deaths per 1,000 live births. Source: Reports of the U. S. Bureau of the Census. certain diseases of childhood has increased, as has better under standing of nutrition. New chemicals have been discovered to treat some of the diseases that have taken a heavy toll of child life in the past. The close relation between physical and mental health has been emphasized and this relationship is being brought home to parents, to the benefit of child and family. The progress achieved during the present century in reduc tion of the infant death rate is shown in chart 4. 51 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACY 52 The T w o Fronts There are two great fronts in the preservation of health and treatment of disease, whether we speak of adult or child. On the one front general measures are applied to prevent well people from becoming ill; on the other, patients are treated to restore them to health and to limit the spread of disease. On both fronts organization and administration are needed, as well as technical knowledge, in medicine and in kindred sciences. Otherwise knowledge is sterile; and we already know more than we actually put to use. General preventive measures are of many kinds. Some are almost impersonal, like control of water supply, safe sewage disposal, and sanitary inspection. are not directly involved. In these doctor and patient Other measures do involve medical practitioners, doctor, dentist, and nurse, even though there is no patient yet to treat. Among these are immunization and the prevention of diseases due to nutritional deficiency. Diph theria and smallpox as dread menaces of childhood are rapidly diminishing through immunization; improved nutrition is gradually reducing the high incidence of rickets, scurvy, and pellagra. Many individuals with tuberculosis are discovered by such methods as large-scale testing of adolescents before the disease passes beyond easy control. Akin to this type of pre ventive work is health education, whether by routine health and dental supervision by physician, dentist, and nurse or by lectures, demonstrations, publications, school instruction, or other means of public information. Preventive measures are communicated, person to person, by those having professional responsibilities. The participation of the general public con verts this information into health measures. When illness strikes, the patient becomes the center of atten tion and recovery the immediate goal. “ Medical care” then takes a prior place to prevention and public-health administra https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis CONSERVING THE HEALTH OF CHILDREN tion. 53 Yet even here prevention and administration continue to be important. In most communicable diseases the treatment of the patient cannot be divorced from control of their spread. In diphtheria, tuberculosis, or syphilis the patient is also the spreader of disease, and treatment goes hand in hand with control and prevention. It is impossible, for example, to deal with tuberculosis as a public-health problem without caring for the tuberculous patient as a sick person seeking recovery. The physician who applies splints to a child’s leg in the early stages of an attack of infantile paralysis is practicing preventive as well as curative medicine. M uch of the most effective education of the general public is achieved through the instruction in hygiene that is given to patient and family by doctor, nurse, and medical institution. All this may be said with especial force and pertinence of the child, whose health from before his birth and through his adolescence depends as much on general public-health meas ures and health education of the mother as it does on medical and nursing supervision, immunization, and preventive treat ment in the home, at school, and in general community life. Conditions F a vo rin g C h ild H ealth A health program for the American child during the coming decades will have important new assets. For example, we know more about the health, growth, and development of the child than ever before. Therefore our practical objectives are higher, particularly as to nutrition, protection from infec tion, and preventive care of sight, hearing, teeth, and so forth. We know how far we have advanced but also how far we lag behind in the application of available medical knowledge, especially in the less favored parts of the country and among certain groups of the population. There are resources that can be more fully drawn upon for child health: school, clinic, 262205°— 40- 13 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACY 54 health department, hospital, physicians, dentists, nurses, nutri tionists, teachers, and social workers especially trained in child care. These are available through local, State, and Federal governments and to some extent through private agencies. Another factor favorable to the health and general welfare of the child has been a great improvement in public health. The preservation of many adults from preventable disability and death has held together hundreds of thousands of families and kept intact homes for numbers of children who would otherwise have been orphaned or exposed to serious depriva tions. No other achievement is so significant in this connec tion as the prevention of death and disability from tuberculosis. This disease picks off especially persons in the prime of life, when as earners and housewives they are the mainstays of the family. There were 31,000 fewer deaths from tuberculosis in 1938 than in 1928 in the United States. Sixty percent of this saving of lives represents persons between 20 and 45 years of age. It should also be noted that the maternal death rate declined from 69 per 10,000 births in 1928 to 44 in 1938. Thus are the parents of many children spared and many homes preserved. Chart 5 shows the decline in the death rate from tuberculosis among persons of all ages since 1910. The steady development of medical science and of publichealth administration is opening up new and important areas of prevention of illness and mortality among adults. Most important perhaps is the recent vigorous Nation-wide move ment for the control o f syphilis, which has taken on larger proportions in a brief period than any other similar movement. M ore recent and less advanced, but extremely important, is the effort to apply newly acquired knowledge to the control of pneumonia. This effort is already bearing demonstrable and even notable results. The means for the control of cancer are https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis CONSERVING THE HEALTH OF CHILDREN 55 still limited in range and type, but promise tangible results in the avoidance or postponement of deaths from cancer of certain types. All these health movements are in reality protectors of families and their children. Chart 5 M ORTALITY FROM TUBERCULOSIS, 1910-38/ UNITED STATES YEAR RATE Each symbol represents 10 deaths per 100,000 population. Source: Reports of the U. S. Bureau of the Census. Objectives fo r the Com ing D ecade At different stages in the growth of the modern publichealth movement emphasis was given to different goals or measures. Today the real dangers to the health of America are not plague, cholera, and yellow fever. In preserving the health and safety of the child attention today is concentrated largely on the following objectives: Reduction in maternal deaths.— Since the mother is the most important protector of the child’s health, she requires care before, during, and after childbirth. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Each year until very CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACT 56 recently some 14,000 mothers have died from conditions di rectly due to pregnancy and childbirth, despite remarkable progress in obstetric science and skills and in public-health measures. In the past few years a substantial improvement has been made in this respect; but in 1938 there were still nearly 10,000 maternal deaths, and there is urgent need for improved care in many areas. The decline in the rate for the Nation as a whole masks rates for certain States that are two or three times as high as the lowest.20 It is estimated that at least one-half of these maternal deaths are preventable. Reduction in deaths of infants.— Notwithstanding the progress that has been made in reducing mortality in the first year of life, there are still each year some 50,000 deaths of infants in the second to twelfth month of life, of which many are prevent able. There has been but slight decline in the death rate of infants under 1 month of age, and no decline in the death rate on the first day of life. There are still some 75,000 stillbirths each year, and 70,000 deaths of infants before they are a month old.20 One-third of the deaths of young infants and a consider able proportion of the stillbirths are believed to be preventable. Provision of doctors and nurses.— Sufficient qualified profes sional care is not available to meet the needs of the American people, and the distribution of such care is uneven among geographical areas and economic strata of the people. favored urban areas are well supplied. A few Many rural areas are most inadequately provided with doctors, dentists* and nurses; some are practically without access to their services. Each year nearly a quarter of a million mothers are not attended by a physician at childbirth; about a quarter of a million new born babies lack the benefit of medical care in the first, most critical days of life.20 In thousands of homes no skilled nurse 20 u. S. Bureau of the Census: Vital Statistics, Special Reports. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis CONSERVING THE HEALTH OF CHILDREN is available to help the physician at childbirth. continues beyond childbirth. 57 This situation Lack of medical attention among children is reported in illnesses due to acute communi cable and respiratory diseases which disable the child for a week or longer. The proportion of such illnesses not receiving medical treatment varies in different economic groups and sizes of communities from one-fifth to three-fifths.21 Figures are available showing that for lack of prompt and competent medical attention hundreds of thousands of children suffer from correctible deficiencies of sight, hearing, teeth, and mouth formation, and from aftereffects of disabling diseases. Deficiencies in individual medical care are paralleled by lack of hospitals and clinics. In an astoundingly large portion of the country, especially in rural areas and small communities, there are no readily available hospital or out-patient clinic facilities for mother or child. Many of the causes of this serious situation are economic in nature. The health of the majority of persons is pur chasable, and many families are able from their own resources to provide the necessary care for their children. But a larger number cannot afford to do so; the population in many areas cannot support doctor and nurse; communities of limited size and means cannot afford hospitals, clinics, and competent personnel for health administration. The remedy is, in the main, to direct a suitable portion of the Nation’ s resources to areas where unmet needs are great. The Conference makes the following recommendations: 1. The health and well-being of children depend to a large extent upon the health of all the members of their families. Preventive and curative health service and medical care should be made available to the entire 21 T he D isa blin g D isea ses o f Childhood , by Dorothy F. Holland. American Journal of Diseases of Children, Vol. 58, No. 6 (December 1939), pp. 1157—1185. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 58 CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACY population, rural and urban, in all parts of the country » A considerable portion of the population is able to obtain from its own resources all or part of the necessary medical service. Another large section of the population, how ever, consists of families whose incomes are below the level at which they can reasonably be expected to budget all the varying costs of illness without interfering with the provision of other items essential to the family’s health and welfare; for these there should be available adequately supervised medical and dental care through a program financed by general tax funds, social-insurance systems, or such combination of methods as may be best suited to local conditions. To achieve these ends will require éxpansion of full-time local public-health services organized on a city, county, or district basis; construction and adequate support of health centers and hospitals as needed, especially in rural areas, and more effective use of existing medical services and facilities; more effective coordination of comm unity publichealth and medical services conducted by various agen cies, public and private. 2. F,or all women during maternity and for all newborn infants, complete service for maternity care and care of newborn infants should be available through private resources or public funds. Such service involves— Care of the mother throughout pregnancy, including the service of a qualified physician, of a public-health nurse, preferably one with training in obstetric care and care of newborn infants, and of a dentist, and nutrition service and social service when needed. Care at delivery by a qualified physician, aided by a nurse trained and experienced in delivery nursing care, or such care as may be given by qualified and appropriately supervised nurse-midwife services when care by a physician is not available. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis CONSERVING THE HEALTH OF CHILDREN 59 Obstetric and pediatric consultation^ service when needed to aid general practitioners in their care of mothers and infants. Hospital care, as necessary, in an approved hospital provided with obstetric and pediatric consulting staff, isolation facilities for infectious patients, and facili ties for care o / emergency or complicated cases, for transportation, and for social service. After the birth of the child medical and nursing care for the mother in home, hospital, or clinic; supervision of nutrition of the nursing mother; and medical and nursing supervision of the newborn infant. 3. For all infants and children preventive and curative medical services should be available, including adequate means for control of communicable disease. These serv ices, financed through private resources or public funds, include— The supervision of health and development of infant and child at stated intervals throughout the period of growth, and care by qualified physician and publichealth nurse when needed, at home, in child-health conferences, in schools, and in physicians’ offices, including preventive dentistry by qualified dentists for children of preschool and school age and social services as needed. Health instruction in schools and health education of parents in methods of conserving both physical and mental health. More intensive and widespread programs of safety education. Effective nutrition services. Mental-health service when needed. Medical care for sick children in home, clinic, or office of qualified physician. Facilities should be available https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 60 CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACY for expert diagnosis and care of sick children, for con sultation by pediatricians in appropriately organized diagnostic and treatment clinics, and for social serv ices as needed. Hospital care, as necessary, in an approved hospital provided with pediatric consulting staff and separate wards for children; convalescent care, as necessary for medical, social, or economic reasons, for children in need of prolonged care to restore health and fit them for family life and comm unity life. 4. In the sharing of responsibility for public maternal and child-health services by local communities, States, and the Federal Government, the following principles should be observed: The local comm unity should provide maternity care and health and medical services for children, as needed, as part of its public-health responsibility, utilizing available qualified services and facilities. The State should give leadership, financial assistance, specialized service, and supervision in the development of local services, and should be responsible for setting standards of care and service acceptable on a State wide basis. The Federal Government should assist States through financial support, research, and consultation service, and should be responsible for setting standards of care and service acceptable on a Nation-wide basis. Federal grants to the States for the expansion of ma ternal and child-health services, including hospital and medical care, should be made on a basis that will raise most effectively the level of service in those areas where it is not adequate and so reduce existing ine qualities in these fields of service. 5. In recognition of the fundamental importance of nutrition to the health of children, the President is re- https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis % CONSERVING THE HEALTH OF CHILDREN 61 quested to appoint a national nutrition committee com posed of physicians and other scientists, economists, agricultural experts, consumers’ representatives, teachers, and administrators. Such a committee should review our present knowledge, coordinate the various efforts now being made to improve nutrition, and point the way to ward a national policy in this held. 6. A broad program of education to enlighten citizens in all the aspects of the program of health and medical services for mothers and children is a fundamental necessity. Because of the primary importance of personnel training and of research, the Conference urges special emphasis on the following recommendations: 7. In undergraduate professional schools and graduate curricula the training of personnel to develop and carry on maternal and child health is a major problem. Special provision should be made for training such personnel. 8. Particular training should be given to nurse-midwives to prepare them for work in remote rural areas, under the supervision of physicians qualified for this purpose. 9. Adequate support should be given to research as well as to direct service through public appropriation and private grants, since research underlies all advance in practical programs of health and medical care, including dental health for mothers and children. The results of research may markedly reduce the costs of care. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Children Under Special Disadvantages A true concern for all children must take into account the fact that many of them labor under heavy handicaps in com petition with their fellows. In some rural areas the majority of children are handicapped in this sense. T o meet the needs of these children it is important to extend activities in housing, education, recreation, libraries, economic security, health, and medical care, and to adapt many of them to rural conditions. It is fortunate that in the face o f an appalling increase in destitution among the families of the Nation during the depres sion, local, State, and Federal governments have assumed responsibility for economic aid to families to an extent not known before in our country’s history. That children gener ally have not suffered serious conditions of starvation or disease has been due, above all, to the acceptance of responsibility for their assistance by governmental agencies. Social Services fo r Children In smaller numbers children suffer from many types of handicap within the family, or in their own mental or physical development, which require special attention. Argument is no longer necessary to convince the American public that society as a whole has the responsibility of providing for children to the extent that their natural guardians are unable to give them adequate care and protection. Authority for such social protection is found generally in legislation, but inadequate personnel and facilities have greatly limited its effectiveness. Certain physical and mental handicaps, such as defective vision or hearing, crippling conditions, and mental deficiency, https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis CHILDREN UNDER SPECIAL DISADVANTAGES are the more obvious disabilities. 63 State and local govern ments, with Federal aid for the care of crippled children, are providing adequate physical, educational, and social care for many handicapped children, but others still remain without such services as would prepare them for a full or partial shar ing in community living on equal terms with their fellows. Children whose handicaps are less tangible— arising from unhappy or disrupted family relationships, or emotional and psychological disturbances— need to be discovered, studied, and treated according to their needs, within their own homes if possible. Until recent years society has made little public provision for social services to children that will reach them in their own homes before their difficulties have become serious or have led to grave consequences. Recently provisions of the Social Security Act and other Federal and State legislation have served as a foundation for the introduction or extension of services of this type in close cooperation with other com munity measures, whether under public or under private auspices. This Conference recognizes that in a democracy responsi bility for the care of children centers in the family. Social services furnish the means by which society helps to meet the special needs of children whose well-being cannot be fully assured by their families and by those community services that are intended for all children alike. The primary objective of child-welfare service is to provide for every child who has some special need whatever assistance and guidance may be required to assure him security and protection, within his own home if possible, and opportunity for his growth and develop ment. T o attain this objective the Conference makes the following recommendations: https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 64 CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACY 1. Social services to children whose home conditions or individual difficulties require special attention should be provided in every county or other appropriate area. An obligation rests upon both public and private agencies for the development of adequate resources and standards of service. This should apply not only to agencies dealing specifically with child welfare but also to any organization whose work affects children. 2. The local public-welfare department should be able to provide all essential social services to children, either directly or through utilizing the resources of other agen cies. Public and private child-welfare agencies should co operate in a program which will assure the proper service to every child in need. Child-welfare services should be based on the following principles: Public child-welfare services should be available to every child in need of such help without regard to legal residence, economic status, race, or any consideration other than the child’s need. Public-welfare agencies should assume continuing re sponsibility for children received into their care as long as they are in need of public protection or support. Children should be given whatever service they need from public-welfare agencies without court com m it ment, unless change of legal custody or guardianship is involved, or legal action is needed because of the cir cumstances of the parents’ neglect or the child’s de linquency. Public child-welfare services should be provided as part of general public-welfare administration, which should also include aid to dependent children and general relief. For children who require care away from their own homes, there should be available such types of familyhome and institutional provision as may be n e cessa ry to insure their proper care, having due regard for special handicaps and problems of adjustment. Child caring agencies and institutions should have adequate https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis CHILDREN UNDER SPECIAL DISADVANTAGES 65 funds for the maintenance of children, and also for such services as are required to m eet their physical, emotional, educational, and religious needs, utilizing to the fullest extent com m unity reso u rces available for these purposes. Where public funds are paid to private agencies and institutions, they should be given only in payment for care of individual children whose admission to service has been approved by the public agency and who remain its responsibility. Such payments should be made on a per-capita, per-diem basis and should cover as nearly as possible maintenance costs. If service is needed by the family while the child is in foster care, there should be a definite understanding between the public-welfare department and the private agency as to which is to render such service. 3. It is the function of the juvenile court to provide legal action based on social study, with a view to social treat ment, in cases of delinquency requiring court action and in cases involving adjudication of custody and guardian ship or enforcement of responsibilities of adults toward children. As local public-welfare departments become equipped for adequate child-welfare service, juvenile courts should be relieved of cases not coming within these classes. Courts dealing with children’s cases should have judges and social-service staff qualified to give adequate services to children. In the larger communities a probation staff of qualified workers is required. In less populous areas the court may use the services of child-welfare workers in the public-welfare department. Social service is needed in connection with court action in cases of delinquency and neglect and in many cases of other types. Social investigation and service, for example, are necessary in cases of divorce and legal separation when custody or responsibility for the support of children must be adjudicated; in cases of adoption, of determination of https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 66 CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACY paternity and support of children horn out of wedlock, and of desertion and nonsupport of families. Where jurisdiction over these cases is not placed in the juvenile court, such service should be supplied either by the court having jurisdiction or through cooperative arrangements with the juvenile court or community welfare agencies. 4. The State welfare department should provide leader ship in developing State and local services for children and in improving standards of care, and should administer such services as cannot be provided appropriately in local units. It should have a division responsible for prom ot ing the interests and welfare of children and a definite appropriation for this purpose. Besides general prom o tion and leadership, the service for children provided by the department should include State financial assistance to local units of government to enable them to undertake preventive measures and, when necessary, service to chil dren, and to reduce prevailing inequalities in local com munity services. 5. The Federal Government should enlarge its childwelfare activities so as to make them more fully available to the States, and through the States to local units of gov ernment, and to private child-welfare agencies and parents. These activities should include publication of childwelfare information; research; advisory service to authori ties and agencies responsible for developing and adminis tering child-welfare programs; leadership and funds for demonstration of service and development of methods of administration; and grants to States for assistance to needy children in their own homes and for such other forms of service to children in need of special protection as experience may prove to be necessary. 6. Community, State, and Federal child-welfare services should be developed on the basis of careful planning par ticipated in by health, educational, and social-service agencies, public and private, and by representative citi- https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis CHILDREN UNDER SPECIAL DISADVANTAGES 67 zens. Interdepartmental cooperation in the administra tion of these programs should be developed by Federal, State, and local governments. Children in M inority Groups The children in families of minority groups often suffer several types of handicaps. Their parents have less chance for employment and economic advancement; they experience a degree of social exclusion; they may receive an unequal share in public and private services: school, recreation, mediChart 6 W HO A RE THE BABIES THAT DIE? WHITE 47 PER 1,000 NEGRO 78 PER 1,000 Each symbol represents 10 deaths per 1,000 live births in 1938. Source: Reports of the U. S. Bureau of the Census. cal care, and welfare service. The largest minority group and the greatest sufferers from discrimination are Negroes, but minority status is also experienced to a degree which varies from time to time and from place to place by Indians, Mexi cans, Jews, and some foreign-born people. There are about 5 million native-born children under 16 years of age in the United States who are other than white, and about 8 million children who are of foreign-born or mixed parentage. One of the disadvantages suffered by Negro children is strikingly illustrated in chart 6, showing the high infant death rate among Negroes in comparison with the infant death rate among white children. Science has made it clear that strict race lines cannot be drawn and also that no factual basis exists for any assumption https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 68 CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACY that one race is superior to another. The reasons for preju dice and discrimination must, therefore, be sought mainly in social and economic rather than in biological factors. The problem is a large one quantitatively in the United States and one which must be met if we are to give all children reasonable opportunity for health and happiness. The educational program for reducing inequalities of the minority groups will of necessity be of long duration. It will be based on the conviction, held by this Conference, that the denial of opportunity to any child on the basis of race, color, or creed is undemocratic and is dangerous to the wel fare of all children. The effort to eliminate race prejudice and accompanying discrimination must be made in home and school, local and national organizations, public and private agencies. The effort to obtain equality of opportunity for children without regard to race, color, or creed should be pursued in the places and institutions that have potentially the greatest influence upon children. The first of these is the family; parents have a particular obligation to protect and strengthen the natural tolerance of their children. Schools are next in strategic position to foster tolerance and promote cooperation. Success depends upon the attitude of the teachers in the daily life of the school. Opportunity presents itself particularly in the teaching of social sciences. We need better literature on race relations and great care in the selection of textbooks on the subject. The Conference makes the following recommendations: 1. Civic and social agencies, labor and consumer organ izations, political parties and governmental agencies, not only should place no obstacles in the way of adequate representation and participation of minority groups both in the ranks and in administrative and policy-making https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis CHILDREN UNDER SPECIAL DISADVANTAGES 69 activities, but should welcome and encourage such par ticipation. 2. In housing programs financed by Federal, State, and local governments, persons should be given equitable benefits according to need, regardless of race, creed, and color; moreover, programs should be so administered as to assure important minority groups due participation in the development and operation of housing programs. 3. Employers and labor organizations should establish outspoken policies against discrimination on grounds of race and color; anti-alien bills which exploit race preju dices should be discouraged; practices which limit the suffrage of citizens in minority groups should be corrected; and organizations deliberately exploiting race prejudice should be condemned. 4. In the local use of Federal and State grants the same standards should be applied to minority groups as to others, and this should be a specific legislative requirement enforced by public opinion and safeguarded by the right of the individual to appeal and to obtain a fair hearing. 5. The kind of protection afforded by fair labor standards legislation and certain social-insurance benefits should be provided for those engaged in agriculture and domestic service, occupations which include a large proportion of certain minority groups. Children in M ig ra n t Fam ilies In recent years another group of disadvantaged children has become increasingly conspicuous— the children in migrant agricultural families. Through press, motion pictures, Gov ernment reports, and literature the plight of these families has become known to a large part of the American public. There are about one-third of a million such families in interstate migration comprising about a million persons.22 Up to a 22 Estimate of Farm Security Administration in M ig ra n t p. 1 (Washington, November 20, 1939). w ays o f m eeting it, 262205°— 40------ 14 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Farm L a b or; the problem and 70 CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACY decade or two ago we thought of migrant agricultural labor as a body of men following the harvest through the wheat belt from Texas to Canada, and then either returning to their homes or wintering in midwestern cities like Minneapolis, Kansas City, or Omaha. The migrant family of today repre sents a far different problem. It is, in a sense, today’s version of the family of the covered wagon that trekked to Oregon, of the early settler who left Massachusetts to found towns in Connecticut, and of the Scotch-Irish and German families who crossed the Appalachians and helped to create some of our oldest States. This migrant family of our day represents part of the con tinuous history of the development of agriculture in this country. Tenant, share-cropper, farm owner, and agricul tural laborer have been “ normal” patterns in agricultural occupation. Perhaps the heavily mortgaged ownership of the recent decades might be regarded as still another. The conditions in American agriculture have been changing as a result of soil exhaustion, erosion, changes in production, and, in recent years, the introduction of industrial agriculture — that is, of large-scale farming by corporate owners. The development of cotton and fruit raising has converted part of agriculture into an intensely seasonal occupation requiring concentration of large numbers for a brief period at a given place while offering practically no employment for the rest of the year. Under these circumstances some sections of industrial agri culture have resorted to practices that had existed in industry for many years, such as the creation of large labor reservoirs to meet increasing demands for labor, to keep wages low, and to prevent labor organization. Wholesale importation of labor from one part of the country to another has been used to augment the supply of agricultural workers and has aggra https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis CHILDREN UNDER SPECIAL DISADVANTAGES vated the natural difficulties inherent in the problem. 71 Em ployer-employee relations tend to be in the crude stages in which labor organization is looked upon with suspicion and resentment. It is estimated that more than half the area of the United States is involved in this migration.23 Some of it represents places from which the migrant family was forced out by agri cultural necessity; others are places affording seasonal labor to the migrant worker. The farmer and his family forced from their land, seeking a living, and offering the labor of husband, wife, and children to the demands of industrialized agriculture confront “ not a theory but a condition.55 They are lured to California, to Arizona, to other States, sometimes deliberately, sometimes by rumors. They exhaust their slender means in getting there. Wages tend to be low, periods of labor short, move ment haphazard. The family is underfed, exposed to disease. The children do not stay in one place long enough for school; the adults do not stay long enough to exercise their rights of citizenship; conditions of housing are usually miserable, whether provided by employer or improvised into shanty towns by migrants. These families are among the best prospects for malaria and typhoid. The migrant agricultural family is really a family, not just a group of laborers. A special study of 6,655 such families, comprising 24,485 persons in California, showed that 36 per cent of these persons were children under 15 (and the majority of these under 10). Another 9 percent were between 15 and 19. These children bear the full brunt of the deprivations of migrant families. Moreover, nearly two-thirds of the children in the migrant agricultural family, as exemplified by these 6,655 studied, are in families of 5 and more persons, and even 23M ig ra n t Farm L a bor, by Frederick R. Soule, p. 4. Farm Security Administration. San Francisco, 1938, https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 72 CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACY up to 10 and more— the old-fashioned American rural family, this time on wheels instead of on their own land.24 T o meet this complicated and deplorable situation, instances have occurred of employers acting individually as enlightened and public-spirited citizens. There has been the beginning of effective labor organization. Intelligent planning to meet the public-health problems involved has been attempted by at least one State authority, with some supervision of shelter. The Federal Government has recognized the interstate and even national aspects of the problem and has assisted in numerous ways, through the Farm Security Administration, in providing relief, housing, health service, school space, and indirectly giving protection from exploitation. T o the extent that this service rescued thousands of families from starvation and disease, we have another example of the competence of this democracy to adjust its instrumentalities of government to the needs of the people. Many studies of the problem indicate that neither the legal nor the economic problems, nor those of health and schooling for the children, can be handled by the States to which these migrants go as their exclusive burden and responsibility; that the benefits offered through labor organization are seriously retarded by the handicaps of unsympathetic employer organi zation and unenlightened local public opinion; that such pro tection against unemployment, old age, and disabling accident as has been provided for industrial employees is not available for these workers; that meanwhile close to half a million children are deprived of assurance of adequate food, clothing, shelter, education; and that these families represent on the whole farmers of excellent work habits, Americans for genera tions back. 24 A Study o f 6 ,6 5 5 M igra n t H ouseholds Administration. San Francisco. 1939. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis in C alifornia, 1938, pp. 53—55. Farm Security CHILDREN UNDER SPECIAL DISADVANTAGES 73 The situation of the migrant agricultural family is somewhat similar to that of the pioneer of past generations. However, we now know more about the economic factors involved and have had some experience in administrative and governmental procedures for dealing with both the economic and the human problem. In the light of this perspective and experience it should be possible to plan intelligent and constructive meas ures. Leadership should be taken by the Federal Govern ment, since the situation is not bounded by State lines and is part of the national agricultural problem. The problem of the migrant family is national in scope. But shelter, education for children, health supervision, and medical care must be made available locally wherever and whenever needed. A plan that will assure migrant families and their children essential minimum provisions for their well being must place administrative and financial responsibilities where they belong, and must assure the availability of services and facilities wherever such families may need them.' It is recommended, therefore, that the Federal Government accept responsibility for the development of an inclusive plan for care of migrant families. the following principles: Such a plan should be based on 1. Financial responsibility for interstate migrants should lie with the Federal Government, since local public opinion and existing settlem ent laws and other statutes deny assistance or comm unity services to many migrant fam ilies. In the actual provision of such facilities and services the Federal Government should operate through State and local authorities wherever practicable, but should take direct responsibility for their operation whenever neces sary. 2. State and local governments should take financial and administrative responsibility for families that migrate within State boundaries. Actually groups of migrant fam - https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 74 CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACY ilies often include both interstate and intrastate migrants. In the provision of services, therefore, Federal, State, and local governments should work out cooperative plans which will assure the provision of services to families when needed, regardless of where ultimate financial responsi bility may lie. 3. Government employment services should take respon sibility for the orderly guidance of migrant labor in seasonal employment in agriculture and other occupations. 4. Plans for the employment of migrant families should take into account the desire for resettlement of those families for which seasonal labor is only a makeshift and whose primary desire is to carry on independent farming operations. 5. To deal with the more immediate and also the con tinuing problems of agricultural workers and their families, which constitute at present the majority of migrant fami lies, it is desirable that measures relating to wages and hours, collective bargaining, and social security be extend ed as soon as practicable to all agricultural labor, with such adaptations as may be necessary to m eet their needs. 6. Housing and sanitary regulations should be made applicable to the shelter of migratory and seasonal labor, and adequate appropriations and personnel should be made available to the appropriate agencies to enforce these regulations. 7. Long-range measures that may prevent families from becoming migrants should be introduced both in agricul ture and in industry— in agriculture, by such means as preventing soil erosion and soil exhaustion, and helping farmers to m eet technological changes and difficulties of financing operations; in industry, by measures to offset technical and economic changes that result in com m uni ties being stranded because of permanent discontinuance of local industries. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Public Administration and Financing Readers of this report will be struck by the frequency with which recommendations suggest changes in the administrative and financial responsibilities of local. State, and Federal govern ments. The present division of responsibilities is based not on existing needs but largely on conditions of colonial origin and pioneer days, when isolation made government and commu nity services practicable only on a local basis. Towns, counties, and school districts as government units became the general pattern. Their existence was perpetuated and extended in Territorial and State governments. Later State legislation in creased the number of these units by permitting subdivision of counties and townships and incorporation of towns, villages, boroughs, and cities. Functions of public health, education, and relief were left for the most part with the local units. Size o f A dm in istrative Units A study by the Public Administration Service in 1931-32 showed that there were more than 175,000 governmental units for various purposes in the United States.25 Number o f units Counties (in 46 States) and parishes (in 1 State)............................................. “Towns” and townships (in 23 States)............................................................ Incorporated places........... ............................................................................. School districts............................................................................................... Other units............................................ ....................... . . ............................ 3 053 20 262 16 366 1 2 7 } 108 8 580 Some reduction in these numbers has occurred, especially through consolidation of school districts, but there are still more than 120,000 units for school administration. 26 T h e U n its o f Governm ent in the U nited States, by William Anderson, p. 1. Public Ad ministration Service Publication No. 42. Chicago, 1934. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 76 CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACY There would be nothing inherently wrong in this system if each unit were administratively and financially capable of providing adequate service in the several functions left to the local governments. A few simple facts about these units show how futile such an expectation must be. For example, the average area of counties is 334 square miles in Kentucky and 8,129 in Arizona. There are some counties with more popu lation than whole States or even a group of States; other coun ties have fewer inhabitants than some townships. More than four-fifths of the cities, villages, and boroughs of the United States had less than 2,500 population in 1930. Yet these places often had separate authority over public health, relief, educa tion, and so forth. 100 inhabitants.26 Hundreds of townships have fewer than Sh arin g o f F in a n cia l Responsibility T o the technical and administrative difficulties of con ducting complicated public services under such circumstances must be added the overwhelming difficulty of financial support. Beneficial and necessary services, appropriate to modern scientific knowledge and possibilities, require a large expansion of the field of public operations. But the traditional tax system, which places the major burden of local taxation on real estate, is obviously not adapted to carry any such load in a country where a large proportion of private incomes is derived from industrial activities that are not reached by realestate taxation. The difficulty is accentuated in areas where local income from all sources is inadequate to cover the nec essary services, especially as such areas commonly have a dis proportionately large child population. The adjustments re quired consist chiefly in methods for transferring the increased tax burden from real estate to other tax resources more »« Ibid., pp. 17, 20, 21. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AND FINANCING 77 directly con n ected with actual econ om ic incom e, and there fore from loca l to State and Federal tax systems. T h e recent N ation -w ide survey o f edu cation fou n d that w ellto -d o com m unities in several States cou ld provide $100 or m ore per ch ild as easily as som e local units in the same States cou ld p rovid e $1 per ch ild .27 Y et there ca n be n o such vast Chart 7 CHILDREN AND INCOME, RURAL AND URBAN Symbols represent 5 percent of the children under 16 and of the national income, respectively, in the United States. Distribution of children based on 1930 census; income distribution based on estimates for nonrelief families in 1935-36, in C o n s u m e r In co m e s in th e U n it e d S t a te s (National Resources Committee, 1938). difference in w hat needs to be spent per child if each is to get reasonable opportunities for education, econ om ic security, and health protection . T o raise the am ounts needed for such opportunities m any com m unities w ou ld have to tax themselves far to o heavily. In the fields o f health services and relief the needs o f the p oorer com m unities are greater than those o f other com m u n i ties, b u t their financial resources are less. In general, the resources o f rural areas are m uch less than those o f urban areas, as is show n in chart 7. 27 Advisory Committee on Education: R eport https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis o f the Com m ittee, p. 20. CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACY 78 T h e first substantial gain from State action in reducing inequalities in the availability o f p u b lic funds cam e b y State grants to local units in the field o f education. T h e necessity o f State participation in financing schools was recogn ized in Pennsylvania as early as 1834. T h ere has been increasing participation o f States in pu blic-h ealth and relief measures. By 1925 State aid to loca l units for these and other purposes was approxim ately 8 percent o f local revenues. In 1935 it had reached 12 percent.28 Federal funds transmitted through the States have h a d an increasing part in this State aid. T h e practice o f Federal grants to States began a p p roxi m ately 150 years ago, w hen land grants were m ade for com m on schools and for various educational institutions. T h e w isdom o f this p ractice in the light o f the econ om ic and social history o f the U n ited States is reflected in its later extension up to the present time. D u rin g the past 80 years expansion in Federal aid has in clu ded land-grant colleges, State forest service, agriculturalexperim ent stations and extension service, highways, v o ca tional edu cation and rehabilitation, rural sanitation, public-h ealth services. and T h e greatest extension occu rred dur ing the past decade as a result o f the depression. G eneral relief, w ork relief, social insurance, and p u b lic assistance to certain groups are aided b y F ederal grants to States. The percentage o f State revenues derived from F ederal grants has increased, though n ot so greatly as appears to be the general im pression.29 In addition, the Federal G overnm ent has ex pended large sums w ithin the States for such program s as W ork Projects Adm inistration, Civilian Conservation Corps, N ational Y o u th A dm inistration, and Farm Security A dm inistration. 28 Facing the T a x P roblem , p. 577. Twentieth Century Fund. New York, 1937. 29 The B ulletin o f the Treasury D epartm ent for August 1939 (p. 4) estimates that Federal grants to States in 1938 amounted to 14.1 percent of State tax revenues and Federal aid. Facing the T a x Problem (p. 576) gives this proportion for various previous years as follows: 1912, 0.9 percent; 1925, 10.9 percent; 1928, 7.8 percent; 1932, 12.5 percent. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AND FINANCING 79 T h e unequal capacities o f loca l and State governm ents to carry on their functions cou ld be dealt w ith in various ways. O n e w ay w ou ld be to rem ove certain o f these functions entirely from local or State responsibility. A n oth er w ay w ou ld be to aid these governm ents b y grants from Federal funds. T his C onference believes that it w ou ld be unsound to relieve g ov ernm ents on State and loca l levels from responsibility for such services as schooling, recreation, health, and m edical service. It is im portant, how ever, to assure a reasonable m inim um in these services and to rem ove inequalities so far as possible b y spreading the cost. T h e C onference therefore endorses a co n sistent and w ell-organized system o f grants b y States to loca li ties and b y the Federal G overnm ent to States, for the support and expansion o f certain services to children. Federal grants on a m atch ing basis d o n ot fully equalize either support or service. tried. V arious m ethods o f a pportioning costs have been It is clear that w hatever m ethods are used, m ore recogn ition must be given than at present to apportionm ent b y Federal and State governm ents on the basis o f the needs and resources o f the States and o f the localities w ithin the States. Professional Personnel a n d L a y Participation In other sections o f this report there are references to the need for qualified personnel to carry on the w ork and for an inform ed pu b lic to support and to give critical attention to the services rendered. C om petent services to children depend in the lon g run on tw o groups o f peop le: O n the one hand, the general p u b lic w h o m ake these services possible; on the other, those em p loy ed to render the services. M a n y services essential to the health, education, and w ell-being o f children have lon g since grow n b eyon d the point w here they can be supplied by parents and voluntary associations alone. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis L arge and in- CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACY 80 creasing am ounts o f p u b lic funds are devoted to them, im p or tant p u b lic policies are involved, and incom e and taxes o f citizens are affected. It is the direct con cern o f every person in the U n ited States that funds should be expended w ith the greatest benefit. T h e qu ality and efficiency o f the services and the w ell-being o f the people receiving them depend directly on the com peten ce o f the personnel em ployed. To the extent, therefore, to w hich the selection o f this personnel is invaded b y partisan politics or is carried on w ithout un rem itting attention to the m atter o f com petence, the funds o f the taxpayer w ill be wasted and those w h o should be served will suffer. T h e application o f m erit systems to the selection and reten tion o f p u b lic em ployees in these fields is therefore o f prim ary im portan ce in m aking d em ocra cy an efficient instrument for p u b lic service. A lth ou gh there has been en cou ragin g progress in the application o f the m erit principle in Federal and State governm ents and in some cities, large areas o f p u b lic service are still w ithout the safeguards o f this principle. It is o f the utm ost im portance that m erit systems be adopted in adm inistration o f p u b lic service in local, State, and Federal governm ents. T o accom plish this it is necessary that the gen eral p u b lic rem ain interested and b ecom e increasingly inform ed w ith respect to the m eaning and standards o f these services. T h e lay citizen becom es m ore effective and m ore im portant in p olicy m aking to the extent that the operation o f the serv ices themselves is entrusted to personnel selected for co m p e tence and training. T his C onference looks to a tim e w hen the b o d y o f p u b lic servants w ill be carefully selected and retained b y reason o f professional qualifications and w ill be backed b y a strengthened and inform ed p u b lic opinion. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AND FINANCING 81 The Conference makes the following recommendations: 1. The number of local administrative units o f govern ment for health, education, and welfare should be reduced, and units sufficiently large and appropriate for efficiency and economy in performing the functions of government should be organized. 2. Financial responsibility should be shared by govern ments at the various levels— local, State, and Federal— taking into account the needs in the respective localities and States and the resources of these governmental units. 3. Merit systems which will assure competent personnel to perform the services essential for children should be adopted in public administration in local, State, and Federal governments. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Government by the People Every recommendation in this report which involves public action is predicated on certain characteristics of the electorate. It is the American ideal that every adult citizen shall take intelligent part in the determination of public policy. Steady progress toward this end has been made throughout our history. However, before the ideal can achieve full reality, certain existing conditions and practices must be corrected. In the first place, limitations on suffrage through intimida tion, coercion, the levying o f poll taxes, and other undemo cratic practices must be removed. In the second place, those who are entitled to participate in the affairs of government through the ballot and otherwise must accept the responsi bility for the complete discharge of their civic obligations. In the third place, the exercise of voting privileges should rest upon knowledge of public affairs and of social and economic trends and conditions. Finally, there must be added to the universal informed exercise of the franchise a profound and continuing concern for the promotion of the general welfare and the maintenance and improvement of democratic insti tutions. Nothing less than this is a suitable goal for a democ racy; nothing less can see our democracy through the difficult problems which confront the world. The Conference makes the following recommendation: Undemocratic limitations on suffrage should be re moved, especially when they tend to discriminate against those in low-income groups or racial minorities. Partici pation in government and the exercise of civic responsi bility can then become the clear obligation as well as the privilege of citizenship. 82 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Call to Action This Conference is convinced that the recommendations submitted in this report are essential to the well-being of the children of the United States of America. Many can be put into effect in the near future, but the Conference has not limited itself to matters susceptible of immediate action. Time will be necessary to put some of the proposals into effect. This is a program for 10 years, and some of it for a longer period. But even immediate measures require a perspective and an orientation; the larger program should be revealed in taking next steps. The Conference believes that its proposals are well within the capacities of the American people and that the economic well-being of the country will be enhanced by them. What the American people wish to do they can do. “ Somewhere within these United States, within the past few years, was born a child who will be elected in 1980 to the most responsible office in the world, the Presidency of the United States,” said Homer Folks at the first session of this Conference. “ We cannot guess his name or whereabouts. He may come from any place and from any social or economic group. He may now be in the home of one of the soft-coal miners, or in the family of a sharecropper, or quite possibly in the home of one of the unemployed, or in a family migrating from the Dust Bowl, or he may be surrounded with every facility, convenience, and protection which money can buy. 83 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis CHILDREN IN A DEMOCRACY 84 “ If we could unroll the scroll of the future enough to read his name and whereabouts, how many things we would wish to have done for him, how carefully we would wish to guard his health, his surroundings, his education, his associates, his travels, his ambitions.” What is needful and useful in preparing a President for his exacting duties is true in lesser degree of any public servant and leader of men. In our democracy it is true also of every citizen who exercises the right of suffrage or carries his share of the common burden of doing the work of the world. What we might wish to do for that unknown child, the future Presi dent, we must be ready to do for every child, so that he may be ready to live a full life, satisfying to himself and useful to his community and Nation. This document is a call to action: to do now those things that can be done now and to plan those that must be left for the morrow. But whether today or tomorrow, action is possible only if we have faith in the goals to be reached. The White House Conference on Children in a Democracy holds these to be the convictions of the American people: That democracy can flourish only as citizens have faith in the integrity of their fellow men and capacity to cooperate with them in advancing the ends of personal and social living. That such faith and such capacity can best be established in childhood and within the family circle. Here the child should find affection which gives selfconfidence, community of interest which induces cooperation, ethical values which influence conduct. Secure family life is the foundation of individual hap piness and social well-being. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis CALL TO ACTION 85 That even in infancy, and increasingly in later years, the welfare of the child depends not alone upon the care provided within the family, but also upon the safeguards and services provided State, and Nation. by community, Recognizing the immediate necessity for providing against the material dangers of the moment, this Conference is im pressed also with the equal necessity for maintaining internal strength and confidence among the people of the strongest democracy in the world. If the American people, in a world showing many signs of break-down, can present a picture o f a Nation devoting thought and resources to building for the distant future, we shall strengthen by these very actions our* own faith in our democracy. __ — J R Holding these convictions and recognizing them as our common heritage, the Conference pledges its members and calls upon all other citizens to press forward in the next 10 years to the more complete realization of those goals for American childhood which have become increasingly welldefined from decade to decade and to which the foregoing pages have given expression. O 262205°— 40 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis -15 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