Chapter 24

TABLE 118.—FAMILY RELATIONS OF INMATES OF INGLESIDE MODEL CAMP

In this table the divorced, deserted, and separated persons are included among the single and widowed because they required the same treatment.

The transients at Ingleside who were single men and women merely waiting to hear from friends or of possible jobs, and a few families temporarily stranded, are for lack of full information omitted from the discussion that follows. The 28 mothers with young children, most of whom were at the camp a short time, have also been omitted because they were not representative of the classes for which Ingleside was maintained, and furthermore because the Associated Charities assumed responsibility for their treatment.

The 961 persons remaining fall into two general classes: families of aged adults, and detached people of both sexes. Since the problem of an old mother with an adult son or daughter is almost identical with that of an old married couple, they are studied together. These two general classes have been rearranged in the following table according as they applied or did not apply for relief to the Corporation before April 1, 1907, or to the Associated Charities[270]through which agency applications for relief on the part of Ingleside inmates were made after that date.

[270]SeePart V,p. 298ff.

TABLE 119.—INMATES OF INGLESIDE MODEL CAMP CLASSIFIED AS FAMILIES AND SINGLE AND WIDOWED MEN AND WOMEN AND AS APPLICANTS TO SAN FRANCISCO RELIEF AND RED CROSS FUNDS, APPLICANTS TO ASSOCIATED CHARITIES, AND NON-APPLICANTS

Of the 585 single and widowed non-applicants, 425 were men and 160 women. The 93 persons included under family cases are identical with the 93 mentioned inTable 118as aged couples or aged mothers each with an adult son or daughter.

The group of 46 families of 93 persons, 12 of whom only were under fifty years of age, will first be studied.

The treatment of aged couples, whether a husband and wife or an old mother with an elderly son or daughter, should differ from that of infirm single men and women because there are bonds of relationship to be conserved. So long as either partner shows any capacity for self-support it is a practical as well as a humane thing to try the experiment of re-establishing him or her. If in some or even in a majority of cases the experiment prove a failure, the risk is nevertheless one to be taken. The experiments in behalf of this group of 46 families had often to be made with very scant information as to the capacity of the applicants. In judging the results it must not be forgotten that all the institutions for the aged and infirm were full in the winter of 1906-07, and that a thorough investigation such as is usually made by a charity organization society before giving aid was then quite impossible.

1. Twenty-six of the families, comprising 53 adults, as shown byTable 119, applied to the Corporation for relief before April 1, 1907, and 20 of these received relief in addition to their home at Ingleside. Of the adults in these families, two-thirds were women of an average age of fifty-seven years, the other third, men of an average age of sixty-three years. More than half were permanently incapacitated by senility or by paralysis, lead-poisoning, blindness, deafness, severe hernia, the loss of a leg or an arm, or mental defect.

Of seven of the couples that received grants, the wife or husband died within a year after the fire, before the struggle to maintain themselves had more than begun. The following notes relate to six of the seven. A grant of $250 and a sewing machine was made to a paralyzed engineer and his wife. The wife had supported herself and her husband for several years by a little store which she re-established. After the husband died she continuedto do well until she fell and broke her thigh. She was then sent to a hospital and from there to the Relief Home. A peddler of seventy-four who seemed to have had some savings received $150 to buy a stock of optical goods. The wife, who kept a rooming house at first successfully but after his death less so, applied to the Associated Charities in 1908 for more aid. The visitor, who refused assistance because the woman still had money from the husband’s life insurance, made the note: “The woman is a fraud and a fortune teller, but ill and pathetic.” Two families of this group, although chronic charity cases before the disaster, were helped to buy small amounts of clothing and furniture and in one case a seventy-five dollar wooden leg. The surviving partners, as might be expected, are now in the Relief Home. Two able-bodied wives, when deprived of their husbands by death, became self-supporting. One was a nurse, the other a washer-woman about fifty years of age. One received $22 to furnish a room, and the other was given clothing. The following notes tell briefly the story of one more of the 26 families. Three women of three different generations proved too heavily handicapped with sickness. The mother, who died of shock soon after the earthquake, has not been considered as among those applying for relief. The daughter had become poisoned while working in a lithographic shop and later developed tuberculosis. She and the grandmother, a seamstress, still able-bodied, were moved to a locality where the older woman could presumably get work, and were given a stove and a little money for comforts. But when the young girl also died, the old woman gave up the struggle and went to the Relief Home. Thus, of these 14 persons specifically mentioned, seven died within a year after the fire, four went to the Relief Home, while one became partially and two entirely self-supporting.

Besides the two families already described who received charitable aid before the fire, there were two other such among these applicants. One, an old mother and son, had lost furniture and personal effects estimated as worth $400. They applied for rehabilitation and a sewing machine in August, 1906. As the son was unmarried, able-bodied, and under forty years of age, the grant was refused on the ground that he should support his mother.Some months later, from the officers at Ingleside, it was learned that the man was industrious and had good habits, but was unable to keep regular work on account of being feeble-minded. A grant of $75 and a sewing machine was therefore made. A year later the Associated Charities found the man out of work and the mother feeble, and decided that the Relief Home was the place for her. It seemed inevitable that the son should arrive there when his only asset, muscular strength, should be used up.

The second family had been in receipt of aid from several charities before the fire. It consisted of a deaf, partly paralyzed, and hard-drinking old carpenter and his ailing wife, both past sixty years of age. They claimed to have lost a thousand dollars’ worth of furniture and personal property but applied while at Ingleside for the small sum of $40 for special relief. Ten dollars was given. Six months afterward they applied to the Associated Charities. The man, who meanwhile had been earning $3.00 per day, had broken two ribs. The Associated Charities, therefore, paid their rent ($12) and in March, 1909, they were temporarily self-supporting. They were, however, the inevitably dependent family that if life were prolonged would find its way to the Relief Home.[271]

[271]Six months after the date when this was written they were in the Relief Home.

The effect on family life of the presence of drunken husbands is a monotonous tale, but it is cheering now and then to hear of a decent wife rescued from her fate. A drunken old peddler and his old wife recovering from illness were granted $100 for furniture and clothing. Before they left Ingleside the camp commander urged that the woman be sent to her relatives in Pennsylvania “to escape the brutality of her husband.” Upon the relatives agreeing to care for her, transportation and $50 were given to carry her to them. The peddler drifted to the Relief Home.

Of quite another sort were the remaining nine of the 20 families that received relief. Although some of their members arrived at the Relief Home they came by another road, along which they struggled so courageously as to win the respect of all who knew them. In this better class are an aged German sign painter and his still more aged and very feeble wife. Before the fire he had beenable to earn $20 a week, and although his eyesight was already failing, he asked the Corporation for tools, supplies, and a little rent. The visitor reported that there were three grown children,—a feeble-minded son, a crippled daughter who earned a bare living as a waitress, and a married son too poor to care for his parents. The feeble old mother was transferred to the Relief Home and $90 altogether was given the old man with which to re-establish himself. After a year, he too, overcome by his failing sight, submitted to be sent to stay with his wife in the Relief Home. When at the last moment he wept because he could not pay the rent in arrears, a benevolent society paid it in order that he might go conscience free.

Other families with an average advantage in age of at least ten years maintained themselves in spite of serious handicaps. A man who had many years before lost both legs, had prior to 1906 earned $45 per month as an elevator man. He asked for furniture and clothing. Although the wife was strong neither physically nor mentally, $150 was granted in care of the Associated Charities. Two and a half years later the wife was at work, the husband had just secured a permanent position as elevator man, and a little of the grant was left for emergencies. Another elderly couple, consisting of a blind husband and an able-bodied wife, who had earned together about $30 a month before the fire, received $150 for household relief and a news-stand. They went into business in a suburb and became self-supporting.

That kindly and influential friends are quite as useful as money to those in straits, is illustrated by the case of an old master mariner, disabled for many years, who was supported by his competent wife. Before the fire she kept a small notion store and was caretaker for a settlement club. On the recommendation of the settlement workers who knew her worth she received a grant of $115 and a refugee cottage which was erected on the grounds of a society for which she acted as janitress. She and her husband were then able to live comfortably in their cottage on her earnings of $25 per month.

The KitchenThe Dining RoomIngleside Model Camp

The Kitchen

The Dining Room

Ingleside Model Camp

A similar case is that of the family in which the Hebrew husband, although seventy-eight years old, had been able before the fire to earn a living for himself and his wife with a little cigar store.They were known as honest, industrious people to a society that recommended them for a grant of $150. Later, $77.50 worth of plumbing and repairs were added to their cottage. They promised to be self-supporting for some time. In case of need the Hebrew Board of Relief stood ready to make a monthly allowance so that they might never go to the Relief Home.

Other cases of which less is known were encouraging. A painter, his wife, and his wife’s sister, who received $50 for furniture, had not again applied for help. An old hunchback and his wife who received $80 for furniture and clothing, were given the use of land on the edge of the city by some friends, and for a while at least were made self-supporting by the proceeds of their chickens and their garden. Another family, exceptional in that both partners were under fifty years of age, received a grant of $250. The husband, a longshoreman, had had both arms broken, but two years after the fire the couple were again self-supporting. As they are exceptional also in having several young male relatives in the city, they are not likely to become dependent.

Another history is differentiated from the varied but generally pitiful struggles of old persons by its ending touched with romance. An old mother with a daughter nearing middle age lost furniture, clothing, piano, and paintings worth $1,000. They had earned a modest living, the mother by taking roomers, the daughter by teaching music. They were given a sewing machine and $300 with which to establish a rooming house. Within a year and a half the mother became so seriously demented as to prevent their keeping lodgers. They fell behind in the rent, the Associated Charities supplied food and after a severe struggle on the daughter’s part to keep her mother out of the insane asylum, the old woman was finally committed in the summer of 1908. Meanwhile a kindly lodger became interested in the younger woman, and after his references had been approved by the Associated Charities, the daughter married him.

A brief review of the circumstances and habits of five of the six families who applied for relief and were refused fully justifies the decision of the Rehabilitation Committee. The first was a woman of fifty whose husband, a man over eighty, had died at Ingleside in the autumn of 1906. She not only was fairly strongbut had grown children quite able to give her a home. The second was an old couple by no means incapacitated who had kept a store and been pretty well-to-do before the fire. They were given a cottage and $50 for furniture before coming to Ingleside, but were refused business rehabilitation on the ground that the $500 insurance they had received was sufficient to re-establish them. In 1908 the Associated Charities gave them a stove and had some plumbing done in their cottage, but they were found to be grasping and untrustworthy. Two other couples were of the hard-drinking, intermittently-working, often-sick type, to whom rehabilitation can never be given with any prospect of success. Of these, a comparatively young couple were given $50 for furniture and clothing and were provided with employment. In the following two years husband and wife had been twice to the Associated Charities for help, and had been in and out of the county hospital. When last seen they were “living with friends.” The other couple, the man a drunkard and the woman a fakir, had a charity record, reaching back to 1896, in which they were described as being too incompetent to support themselves. They were forcibly removed from a wretched shack to Ingleside in the winter of 1907 and are now in the Relief Home.

The last of this group was an old mother with an epileptic son of fifty, by occupation a cooper. They had lived on the verge of distress before the fire, and although the son afterward earned good wages for awhile cleaning bricks, it was not believed that he could long support his mother and himself. In the winter of 1907 both were obliged to go to the Relief Home.

2. The seven families at Ingleside who applied first to the Associated Charities for rehabilitation do not differ as a group in any way from the earlier applicants. Two are cases of old people neglected by their grown up children; two, of the chronically unfortunate and inevitably dependent class; and two couples, younger than those we have been considering, were forced to apply for help because the man in each family developed tuberculosis. One case only, foreigners of good birth and education, differs in the details of the struggle and in its solution. Both husband and wife were teachers who had scarcely made a living before the fire and who, being over sixty years of age, could notregain their clientele nor find new work. The Rehabilitation Committee through the Associated Charities sent them back to their native country where they will have a home with relatives.

If we turn from the picturesque, human aspect of the families who applied for rehabilitation or relief, to the financial, the brief summary is: (1) Twenty families of 41 persons, whose estimated total losses amounted to $10,000, asked for relief to the amount of $3,000 and were granted relief to the money value of $2,500. In addition they received shelter and food at Ingleside at a cost of $2,200. (2) After three years seven of the 41 individuals were dead, 10 were in charitable institutions, one was in an insane asylum, one was married, three were with relatives, and 19 were self-supporting.[272]Aside from the comfort afforded to each by the grants received, it may be said to have cost $132 apiece to make the 19 persons self-supporting. It must not be forgotten that while the effort was being made to gain self-support outside of the institution, the institution was spared the cost of maintaining each at a rate of not less than 50 cents a day.

[272]The data for all of the 20 families are not given in the preceding pages. The 19 persons listed as self-supporting, it should be borne in mind, were in several cases believed to be only temporarily independent of charitable aid.

3. The last group of the families of adults to be considered is the 13 families containing 26 persons that did not apply for specific relief other than institutional care. They differ from those that did apply chiefly in being a little more infirm and incompetent and in having no children or relatives, apparently, to fall back upon. It is probable that some of them did not apply for rehabilitation because Ingleside Camp and the Relief Home seemed to be the only natural or desirable relief. Information is available as to the subsequent fate of only 19 of the 26 persons. Of these, four were known to be dead three years after the disaster, eight were in the Relief Home, one was in another home, four were self-supporting, and two had moved to the country.

1. The 215 single and widowed men and women at Ingleside who asked for aid from the Rehabilitation Committee before April, 1907,[273]are roughly classified inTable 120.

[273]SeeTable 119,p. 336.

TABLE 120.—SINGLE AND WIDOWED INMATES OF INGLESIDE MODEL CAMP APPLYING TO THE SAN FRANCISCO RELIEF AND RED CROSS FUNDS FOR REHABILITATION, BY NATURE OF REHABILITATION APPLIED FOR

Of the 46 persons in this group who applied for business rehabilitation, 29 were men and 17 were women. Eighteen of the 29 men received aid to the amount of $1,389, the largest individual grant being $200 to an attorney, aged thirty-one, who asked only for law books. This man is one of the small group who, three years after the grant was made, were known to be self-supporting.

No action was taken by the Committee in six cases, either because the applicants could not be found at the addresses given, because they refused the aid offered, or because the applications were received too late.

Grants were refused in five cases. In this group is a so-called attorney, a man who had fraudulently lived by his wits for years. Immediately after the fire this plausible old fakir was cared for by a religious society which asked for special clothing for him because he was “an odd size.” He applied to the Rehabilitation Committee for $1,500 to rebuild a lodging house he claimed to have owned. The visitor found that he had not owned a house and lot before the fire, that the old woman relative whom he professed to have supported was another fraud, and that his only real claim on charity was that he was too fat to wear ready made clothes. In the summer of 1909 he was again heard of at a summer resort earning his living by assisting an evangelist in religious meetings.

Three years after the grants were made the condition of the 18 men who were aided was ascertained to be as follows: three were found to be self-supporting; for four no definite information was obtained but they were believed to be independent; eight were dependent, and three had died. The eight dependent cases, all elderly men, were with one exception being cared for at the Relief Home; one was in an insane asylum.

A young seaman who is recorded as having died after being aided, committed suicide. He had had a leg amputated, had been in the hospital for sometime after the fire, and then had gone to Ingleside to convalesce. The Relief Committee gave him an artificial leg, and he was in and out of the Relief Home several times trying unsuccessfully to find work. On his return from one of the attempts he killed himself. The other two who died were elderly men.

To put the case from the financial point of view, $1,389 was given to 18 men; $620 has made seven of them possibly self-supporting, and $769 was expended upon 11 who failed. Those who were not found at the address given may be self-supporting as they have not drifted back to the Rehabilitation Committee. A single fact is sufficient to explain the success of one group and the failure of the other. The seven successful ones averaged fifty years of age, while omitting the exceptional case of the young seaman 10 of the 11 averaged sixty-seven years. Again, the occupations of the unsuccessful are seen to be unskilled and common labor. Incompetence, physical or mental, added to age in most instances, brought these men to Ingleside.

Twelve of the 17 women who applied for business rehabilitation were given aid. One of these, a lodging-house keeper who expected to receive $2,500 in insurance, was granted only $75. When the insurance was received it amounted to but $700, and as she invested in a large rooming house, heavy debts were incurred. Though she was running behind she may not have failed. She blamed the Rehabilitation Committee for not having given aid sufficient to insure success. Two milliners, each about forty years of age, together received $699 and had not re-established themselves. One, however, had had typhoid fever after the fire, and never fully recovered. Both were doing a little casual work. Five otherswho were given grants amounting to $560 were dependent. None of these had given much promise of self-support but were given the full benefit of the doubt. One of them, later in the Relief Home, lost $100 in the fire, which she had painfully saved for proper burial. The Rehabilitation Committee replaced this money for funeral expenses.

One of the five women who were denied business rehabilitation was refused because she owned real estate which when sold would provide sufficient capital.

The records of application for household relief by single or widowed inmates present quite another aspect of the relief situation than that exhibited by the data regarding business rehabilitation. The 43 people in this group[274]asked for very little more than the two essentials—furniture and clothing. Clothing had been given in quantities immediately after the fire, and these applicants, aged and infirm people, re-applied months later when winter was coming on. The heavier part of their demand was, however, for furniture to start bachelor housekeeping. Before the fire San Francisco abounded in furnished lodgings at all prices; but afterward there were almost none to be had at prices within the means of those whose age and incapacity prevented them from earning more than minimum wages. Furniture for the shacks, cottages, and tenements was necessary, but because of the dearth of second-hand stuff, the prices of new pieces, even of the meanest sort, were very high. The average grant of $59 per person, therefore, was not too much with which to buy a bed and bedding, a table, chairs, and cooking utensils, and, in some cases, to pay the first month’s rent. A visitor of much experience, in commenting on such cases, said, “It is appalling to think that mere beds and tables may make the difference between pauperism and independence.” Grants were refused to three applicants; two of them drank to excess, and the third was in need of permanent care.

[274]SeeTable 120,p. 344.

When one considers that these applicants above sixty years of age were sewing women, charwomen and cleaners, cannery workers, peddlers, and laborers who must regain their patrons or find new work, the results are very encouraging. One-third onlywere in 1909 found to be dependent on charity; another third were living with relatives or had died or been lost to view; while the last third were presumably self-supporting.

The 27 persons who applied for transportation were rather more homogeneous than those of any other group. In 15 cases transportation was granted. These 15 individuals were maintained for months at Ingleside until assurance was obtained that they would have proper care if transported; and yet, the experiment was not always successful. For instance, an old nurse was sent to Chicago where her nephews and nieces, although poor, had offered her a home which was visited and approved by the Chicago Bureau of Charities. After some months in Chicago the exacting old woman became so burdensome that the relatives could not care for her. With the advice of the Bureau of Charities she was sent back to San Francisco and placed in the home for the aged. In a few cases careful plans came to nothing, because erratic old people would not consent to be transported.

The case of an old woman of 97 is very pathetic. She had formerly lived in San Francisco and had stored her furniture when she went away. She happened to be visiting in the city on April 18, 1906, in the district burned. The step-daughter to whom she went first abused her and then sent her to Ingleside. The poor old woman while waiting to be given transportation to join her husband in Utah fell ill and just after the coveted transportation was given “died of disappointment.” No judgment can be formed as to whether there was unnecessary delay on the part of the visitor of the Rehabilitation Committee but after the shock of the earthquake, “disappointment” can scarcely be regarded as the chief cause of death.

The war veterans, four of whom were transportation cases and not less than a dozen of whom were at Ingleside, gave trouble quite disproportionate to the hoped-for results. They were traveling paupers each of whom had either been discharged for bad conduct from some soldiers’ home or more probably had left because of restless and vicious habits. Two were given transportation to Washington, District of Columbia, where they belonged, but neither ever arrived. Two others were refused transportation because they belonged in a veterans’ home in California.

To summarize the 15 cases to whom about $1,000 was given in transportation and money, four in 1909 were still, in spite of what seems to have been reasonable precaution, dependent on the charity of San Francisco and one on the charity of Philadelphia. The burden of the other 10 was transferred to relatives or to communities to whom it rightly belonged and San Francisco was relieved from a possible future obligation greater than that represented by the $1,000 expended.

Transportation was not given in 12 cases. The principal reason for the refusal of transportation was the lack of assurance that the persons applying would not become charges on the communities to which they wished to go. Six are now in homes for the aged, one died shortly after applying, two may have returned to the soldiers’ homes where they belonged, and three are possibly self-supporting. Their circumstances and condition are shown by the following transcript from the records.

Grant Refused:Night clerk; age 61. Applied for transportation to San Diego. Recommendations not sufficient. Got job as watchman. In Relief Home.Watchman; age 43. Applied for transportation to Los Angeles. Physically incapacitated. In Relief Home.Hotel runner; age 47. Asked for transportation to family in Spokane. Able to work.Peddler and war veteran; age 80. Applied for transportation to brothers in New York with whom he had quarreled long ago. Had left Veterans’ Home in 1904. Got work.Ship joiner; age 75. New York relatives refused to receive him because of his vicious habits, but would pay for him in Relief Home, where he remained.Chiropodist and war veteran; age 83. Son in New York surprised that he had left Soldiers’ Home. Would receive him if fare was paid.French cook; age 68. Asked for transportation to brother in France, but brother did not reply to letters. Went to work.Longshoreman; age 57. Wished to go to Los Angeles. Had been in hospital for weeks, unable to care for himself. Died shortly afterward in camp.Teamster (Negro); age 65. Applied for transportation to wifein Washington, D. C. No reply from wife. In Relief Home for third time.Carpenter; age 57. Wished to go to Seattle to collect debt of $50. Was advised to write. In Relief Home.Grant Canceled:Car builder; age 69. Granted $100 and transportation to sister in Northern California. Went to Iowa instead. Check for $100 cancelled.No Action:Cigar clerk; age 69. Applied for transportation to sister in Kansas. Could not be found by visitor. Later, in Relief Home.

Grant Refused:

Night clerk; age 61. Applied for transportation to San Diego. Recommendations not sufficient. Got job as watchman. In Relief Home.

Watchman; age 43. Applied for transportation to Los Angeles. Physically incapacitated. In Relief Home.

Hotel runner; age 47. Asked for transportation to family in Spokane. Able to work.

Peddler and war veteran; age 80. Applied for transportation to brothers in New York with whom he had quarreled long ago. Had left Veterans’ Home in 1904. Got work.

Ship joiner; age 75. New York relatives refused to receive him because of his vicious habits, but would pay for him in Relief Home, where he remained.

Chiropodist and war veteran; age 83. Son in New York surprised that he had left Soldiers’ Home. Would receive him if fare was paid.

French cook; age 68. Asked for transportation to brother in France, but brother did not reply to letters. Went to work.

Longshoreman; age 57. Wished to go to Los Angeles. Had been in hospital for weeks, unable to care for himself. Died shortly afterward in camp.

Teamster (Negro); age 65. Applied for transportation to wifein Washington, D. C. No reply from wife. In Relief Home for third time.

Carpenter; age 57. Wished to go to Seattle to collect debt of $50. Was advised to write. In Relief Home.

Grant Canceled:

Car builder; age 69. Granted $100 and transportation to sister in Northern California. Went to Iowa instead. Check for $100 cancelled.

No Action:

Cigar clerk; age 69. Applied for transportation to sister in Kansas. Could not be found by visitor. Later, in Relief Home.

The 38 single or widowed inmates whose applications fall under the head of “Special Relief” were nearly all in need of special medical or surgical attention, or of convalescent care.

From the standpoint of restoration to self-support this group, as shown by the abstract given below, is discouraging, but it is doubtful if the Rehabilitation Committee in granting the special relief, expected the recipients to regain economic independence. Owing to the crowded condition of the hospitals in 1906 and 1907 it was necessary to avoid sending to them persons who could be provided for otherwise. The yet greater overcrowding in the institutions for the aged and infirm made it compulsory, until the Relief Home was completed, to give some outdoor relief to those who did not imperatively require institutional care.

Those still independent three years after the grant was made averaged twelve years younger than those then receiving relief. The financial showing is not so discouraging as the social. The 29 persons received grants amounting to $2,955, an average of $102 each. This sum would have paid for keep in an institution, if there had been room, for not more than seven months. The average time that elapsed before each became dependent is, in the known cases, considerably more than seven months. The money therefore was not wasted. Moreover, those objecting, as most of them did, to going to an institution, had the comfort of attempting self-support.

Grant Made:[275](a) Not Dependent (probably):Domestic servant; age 68. Granted $150. No information could be obtained in 1909.Domestic servant; age 35. Granted $75 for an operation. Self-supporting.Cook; age 66. Granted $50. No information could be obtained in 1909.Housewife; age 50. Granted $75 for washing machine. Ejected from Ingleside. Small amount for current expenses.Cannery clerk; age 61. Granted $20, and later $75, to go to hospital and then to the country. Now with friends.Plasterer; age 56. Granted $50. Later arrested and in jail three months.Peddler; age 54. Granted $60 and a free license. No information obtained in 1909.Carpenter; age 32. Tuberculous. Granted $300 to go a warmer climate. Now recovering.(b) Dependent:Cook; age 61. Living on savings before fire. Granted $100. Later assisted by A. C. In Relief Home.Seamstress; age 59. Granted $100. Assisted by private charity.Bookkeeper; age 65. Granted $100. In Home for the Aged.Janitress; age 50. Granted $50. Sent to hospital.Domestic servant; age 38. Granted $75. Partially self-supporting; in and out of Relief Home.Nurse; age 78. Granted $200. Went to niece. Assisted by several charities.Housewife; age 95. Granted $25 and later $125. In Home for the Aged.Rooming-house keeper; age 72. Granted $75. Went to hospital. Assisted by private charity.Nurse; age 65. Granted $100. In Relief Home.Cloak maker; age 65. Granted $100. Assisted by charity. In Relief Home.Housewife; age 81. Granted $140 in instalments. In Relief Home.Dressmaker; age 57. Granted $100 and sewing machines. In Relief Home.House worker; age 60. Granted $100 and truss. In Relief Home.Seamstress; age 65. Granted $125 and sewing machine. In Relief Home.Peddler; age 60. Granted $20. In Relief Home.(c) Dead:Seamstress; age 75. Granted $150 in instalments. Died September, 1907.Nurse; age 79. Granted $100 “till well enough to work.” Died April, 1908.Janitor; age 58. Granted $50 for stove and bedding. Died February, 1907.Lecturer on psychology; age 70. Granted $75 and transportation to San Diego. In Relief Home. Died 1908.Housewife; age 67. Granted $150. Went to relatives. Died 1907.Grant Refused:Seamstress; age 36. Because earning $12 per week.Nurse; age 64. In need of permanent care. Died in Relief Home June, 1909.Chambermaid; age 70. In need of permanent care.Children’s nurse; age 73. In need of permanent care. In Relief Home.Domestic servant; age 70. Asked for money to pursue invalid claim to property.No Action—Check Canceled:Housewife; age 55. Could not be found by visitor.Dressmaker; age 73. Granted $100 and sewing machine. Could not be found.Cannery worker; age 40. Granted $75. Could not be found by visitor. Assisted later by Associated Charities to go to the country.Maker of knitted articles; age 68. Granted $100 and sewing machine. Drank to excess. In Relief Home.

Grant Made:[275]

(a) Not Dependent (probably):

Domestic servant; age 68. Granted $150. No information could be obtained in 1909.

Domestic servant; age 35. Granted $75 for an operation. Self-supporting.

Cook; age 66. Granted $50. No information could be obtained in 1909.

Housewife; age 50. Granted $75 for washing machine. Ejected from Ingleside. Small amount for current expenses.

Cannery clerk; age 61. Granted $20, and later $75, to go to hospital and then to the country. Now with friends.

Plasterer; age 56. Granted $50. Later arrested and in jail three months.

Peddler; age 54. Granted $60 and a free license. No information obtained in 1909.

Carpenter; age 32. Tuberculous. Granted $300 to go a warmer climate. Now recovering.

(b) Dependent:

Cook; age 61. Living on savings before fire. Granted $100. Later assisted by A. C. In Relief Home.

Seamstress; age 59. Granted $100. Assisted by private charity.

Bookkeeper; age 65. Granted $100. In Home for the Aged.

Janitress; age 50. Granted $50. Sent to hospital.

Domestic servant; age 38. Granted $75. Partially self-supporting; in and out of Relief Home.

Nurse; age 78. Granted $200. Went to niece. Assisted by several charities.

Housewife; age 95. Granted $25 and later $125. In Home for the Aged.

Rooming-house keeper; age 72. Granted $75. Went to hospital. Assisted by private charity.

Nurse; age 65. Granted $100. In Relief Home.

Cloak maker; age 65. Granted $100. Assisted by charity. In Relief Home.

Housewife; age 81. Granted $140 in instalments. In Relief Home.

Dressmaker; age 57. Granted $100 and sewing machines. In Relief Home.

House worker; age 60. Granted $100 and truss. In Relief Home.

Seamstress; age 65. Granted $125 and sewing machine. In Relief Home.

Peddler; age 60. Granted $20. In Relief Home.

Seamstress; age 75. Granted $150 in instalments. Died September, 1907.

Nurse; age 79. Granted $100 “till well enough to work.” Died April, 1908.

Janitor; age 58. Granted $50 for stove and bedding. Died February, 1907.

Lecturer on psychology; age 70. Granted $75 and transportation to San Diego. In Relief Home. Died 1908.

Housewife; age 67. Granted $150. Went to relatives. Died 1907.

Grant Refused:

Seamstress; age 36. Because earning $12 per week.

Nurse; age 64. In need of permanent care. Died in Relief Home June, 1909.

Chambermaid; age 70. In need of permanent care.

Children’s nurse; age 73. In need of permanent care. In Relief Home.

Domestic servant; age 70. Asked for money to pursue invalid claim to property.

No Action—Check Canceled:

Housewife; age 55. Could not be found by visitor.

Dressmaker; age 73. Granted $100 and sewing machine. Could not be found.

Cannery worker; age 40. Granted $75. Could not be found by visitor. Assisted later by Associated Charities to go to the country.

Maker of knitted articles; age 68. Granted $100 and sewing machine. Drank to excess. In Relief Home.

[275]No information is available as to occupation, age, or present status of one of the 29 persons to whom grants were made.

The small group of 11 persons who applied for hospital care, were of the same general character. Illnesses of a serious nature required special treatment either at Ingleside or other institution. Two of the 11 were sent to an insane asylum,two died at Ingleside, and five were in homes for the infirm. Two became self-supporting.

There remains a heterogeneous group of applicants for general relief, most of whom asked for money for living expenses, or for such inexpensive things as false teeth, trusses, and spectacles. Of the 50 persons who applied for general relief, 20 were refused. The total amount paid out in grants to the remaining 30 was $1,735.70.

Three years after the grants were made 10 of these persons, five of whom received less than $25 each, were believed to be independent, 15 were in the Relief Home, one was dependent on other charity, and four were dead.

2. Between April, 1907, and April, 1909, 68 persons who had been at Ingleside Model Camp at some time, in addition to the 14 persons in the seven families already considered inTable 119and on page 342, applied to the Associated Charities.[276]Since these 68 persons did not apply to the Corporation during the first year after the fire they must either have gone from Ingleside to friends or must have expected to be self-supporting. More than half of them were over fifty years of age and nearly all were more or less incapacitated; in short, they do not seem to have differed from those who before the fire found their way to the almshouse. On April 18, 1909, 39 of these were in the Relief Home, four were in asylums or hospitals, four had left the city, and three were self-supporting. With regard to 18 persons of this group no information could be obtained.

[276]SeeTable 119,p. 336.

3. The most conspicuous thing about those who did not apply for rehabilitation, both men and women, is their high proportion of disabilities, a proportion even higher than that of the applicants. Of the 585 non-applicants among the single or widowed men and women,[277]no less than 330, 56 per cent, were infirm or crippled, or needed special care for some reason.Table 121shows the nature of their disabilities.

[277]SeeTable 119,p. 336.

TABLE 121.—DISABLED SINGLE AND WIDOWED INMATES OF INGLESIDE MODEL CAMP WHO DID NOT APPLY FOR REHABILITATION, BY SEX AND NATURE OF DISABILITY

Four-fifths of the 585 non-applicants were over fifty years of age. Nevertheless, they applied for no relief other than shelter for a longer or shorter time at Ingleside. Their neglect to make application for rehabilitation may be set down in a great measure to the want of initiative due to infirmity (more than one-seventh of the number have since died), and to the apathy that comes to the inevitable institution inmate. In 1909 one-third of this group were in the Relief Home or in some other charitable refuge. But the margin of over one-third of the remainder whose condition was known, who went to work or to friends and were not as yet dependent on charity, is surprisingly large.

Table 122shows what became of the non-applicants as far as the facts are known.

Back to Index Next