It should be borne in mind, however, that under the district system there was severe criticism of the delay in making grants. The suggestion is offered that whenever a centralized system is desirable, a practical scheme of administration is to organize sub-committees by geographical sections while general control is retained by the central office.
By way of summary, it may be said that the district system was a natural development. It took shape when the army was in control and knew that only by the division of the city into sections could the vast problem be managed. When the social worker took hold the district system was ready to hand and was availed of to bring into working relation a quickly collected force of trained and untried investigators and advisers. When the relief work came more definitely under the control of the business man, who chafed under criticism, there was a sharp reversal of method. A trade experience that had proved the value of departmental division led naturally to a recasting of the relief work on a departmental basis.
III
CALLS FOR SPECIAL FORMS OF SERVICE
1. RELATIONS WITH AUXILIARY SOCIETIES
Upon one vital question of policy the experience of the San Francisco Rehabilitation Committee repeated the experience of the special relief committee of the Chicago fire. Upon no other point is the evidence of the relief work, following each of the fires, as clear as it is on the question here considered of the establishment of the right relation with local charitable agencies.
In the report of the special relief committee of the Chicago fire[128] the following paragraph occurs:
“In the earlier portion of its work the Committee relied entirely upon the certificates of the pastors of churches and authorized officers of organized benevolent associations, for the evidence that the applicant’s condition and needs had been duly investigated, and for a correct statement of the kind and amount of relief required. To facilitate such investigations, suitable blanks were prepared, containing appropriate inquiries regarding the applicant’s property, circumstances, losses, and present condition. Experience soon demonstrated that we could not rely with sufficient confidence upon this method of investigation as affording reliable evidence of the nature and amount of the applicant’s needs; and, subsequently, the course was adopted of sending all applications which were suitably recommended to the district in which the applicant resided, for the case to be personally investigated and reported upon in writing by one of the official visitors in the employ of the Society.”
[128] See Report of the Chicago Relief and Aid Society of Disbursements to Contributors, p. 197.
It appears from the review of the original plans of the Rehabilitation Committee, that the error made by the Chicago Committee of accepting recommendations in place of making investigations was avoided. The Rehabilitation Committee, as the reader knows,[129] had from the beginning its own staff of paid workers, whose reports and work it could control. But early in July, 1906, considerable pressure was brought upon the Committee to change its methods so that the regular relief societies of the city might upon presenting their cases, with recommendations, have these considered by the Rehabilitation Committee without their having to be subject to investigation by the section forces. Members of the Finance Committee of Relief and Red Cross Funds urged concessions, and concessions were finally made. On July 12, 1906, the United Irish Societies objected to the treatment that the Rehabilitation Committee had advised for some of the families recommended by them. Their representatives were present at a meeting of the Rehabilitation Committee and urged that they be granted the privilege of having their recommendations considered as though they came from the section committees. At that time the Rehabilitation Committee told the representatives that as a trustee of the funds its duty was to gain information about cases through the special channels of information it had provided, and that all reputable organizations would be notified to refer cases to it with recommendations; that it would follow these recommendations or not as it saw fit. The Rehabilitation Committee found that it could hold this position for but a few weeks, because of the influence brought to bear not directly but through members of the Finance Committee of Relief and Red Cross Funds. On July 28, 1906, therefore, a resolution was passed that any charitable organization approved by the Finance Committee might present directly to the Rehabilitation Committee the results of its investigations, with recommendations, and that these would be passed on directly without further investigation.