Page:American Journal of Sociology Volume 2.djvu/709

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
PUBLIC CHARITY AND PRIVATE PHILANTHROPY
693

too great danger, the child is cared for by public charity, which, in the matter of care for helpless children, is now usually exercised by placing them in good healthy homes (Familienpflege). As a rule a child is first placed in an institution which serves the purpose of a temporary home. Here the children are carefully observed, and every effort made, particularly in case of the older ones, to determine whether they are better adapted for care in an orphanage or in a private family (Anstalts- oder Familienpflegenn). The orphan board (Waisenverwaltung) has connections with a large number of respectable families, mostly in the country; to these the children are entrusted, certain fixed rates being paid for their keeping. When so placed a child is under the guardianship of an inspector, usually a local clergyman or teacher, who may, in case of necessity, return it to the orphanage. Here, as elsewhere, experience has taught that cases of total depravity are rare. Most of these children improve immediately when placed in new and healthy surroundings. Thus nearly all of the orphanage work has taken the form of family care (Familienpflege), which has given by far the most satisfactory results in the matter of development of character. The sick, the frail, and the feeble-minded, are placed in separate institutions, which afford such care and instruction as the nature of the malady may permit or demand. Institutions for the care and keeping of children while the mother is away at work are not maintained by the public relief. This department is left entirely to private charities, which are sometimes assisted by public appropriations.


V.

The relation of public relief to private charities has, so far as I can see, been even less carefully defined in Germany than in America. On this point also I am in perfect accord with Warner, who has correctly apprehended their respective provinces. Here again the difference lies not in the general principles recognized in the two countries, but in historic development and actual, existing conditions. The very thing which, in Germany,