CHAPTER XVI

[72]See Charles E. Gibbons, "A Rural Slum Community." The American Child. February, 1922. pg. 343.

[73]"Juvenile Delinquency in Rural New York." Kate Holladay Claghorn. U. S. Dept. of Labor, Children's Bureau. Publication No. 32. Washington. 1918.

[74]"Social Responsibilities of the Rural Community," p. 129. Cornell Extension Bulletin 39. Rural Community Conference Cornell Farmers' Week. 1919.

Local self-government is a well-established tradition in the United States, but as far as the rural community is concerned it is more tradition than fact, for outside of New England the rural community has no legal or political status. In New England the townships were originally created as community units, for they were modelled after the European village community. The meeting house determined the site of the village where the farmers and craftsmen resided, and the boundaries of the township were coincident with the limits of their lands. The origin of the New England township has been well described by John Fiske in a famous chapter on this subject:[75]

"When people from England first came to dwell in the Wilderness of Massachusetts Bay, they settled in groups upon small irregular-shaped patches of land, which soon came to be known as townships. There were several reasons why they settled thus in small groups, instead of scattering about over the country and carving out broad estates for themselves. In the first place, their principal reason for coming to New England was their dissatisfaction with the way in which church affairs were managed in the old country. They wished to bring about a reform in the church, in such wise that members of a congregation should have more voice than formerly in the church-government, and that the minister of each congregation should be more independent than formerly of the bishop and of the civil government.... Such a group of people, arriving on the coast of Massachusetts,would naturally select some convenient locality, where they might build their houses near together and all go to the same church. This migration, therefore, was a movement, not of individuals or of separate families, but of church congregations, and it continued to be so as the settlers made their way inland and westward...."In the second place, the soil of New England was not favorable to the cultivation of great quantities of staple articles, such as rice or tobacco, so that there was nothing to tempt people to undertake extensive plantations. Most of the people lived on small farms, each family raising but little more than enough food for its own support; and the small size of the farms made it possible to have a good many in a compact neighborhood. It appeared also that towns could be more easily defended against the Indians than scattered plantations;..."Thus the early settlers of New England came to live in townships. A township would consist of about as many farms as could be disposed within convenient distance from the meeting-house, where all the inhabitants, young and old, gathered every Sunday, coming on horseback or afoot.... Around the meeting-house and common the dwellings gradually clustered into a village, and after a while the tavern, store and town-house made their appearance."

"In the second place, the soil of New England was not favorable to the cultivation of great quantities of staple articles, such as rice or tobacco, so that there was nothing to tempt people to undertake extensive plantations. Most of the people lived on small farms, each family raising but little more than enough food for its own support; and the small size of the farms made it possible to have a good many in a compact neighborhood. It appeared also that towns could be more easily defended against the Indians than scattered plantations;...

"Thus the early settlers of New England came to live in townships. A township would consist of about as many farms as could be disposed within convenient distance from the meeting-house, where all the inhabitants, young and old, gathered every Sunday, coming on horseback or afoot.... Around the meeting-house and common the dwellings gradually clustered into a village, and after a while the tavern, store and town-house made their appearance."

When the Mormons settled Utah they established a very similar form of community government centering around the church. Elsewhere, with rare exceptions, throughout the North and West the township is the primary unit of local government, save for school administration, but it is by no means identical with a community. When the lands west of the Alleghanies were surveyed for settlement they were laid off in blocks six miles square, which were known as congressional townships, for Congress gave each township a square mile of land the proceeds of which should form a permanent school fund. In discussing the development of the township in Illinois, Dr. Albert Shaw writes:

"To give effect to this liberal provision, the state enacteda law making the township a body corporate and politic for school purposes and authorizing the inhabitants to elect school officers and maintain free schools. Here, then, was a rudiment of local government. As New England township life grew up around the church, so western localism finds its nucleus in the school system. What more natural than that the county election district should be made to coincide with the school township, with a school-house for the voting place? or that justices of the peace, constables and road supervisors and overseers of the poor, should have their jurisdiction determined by the same township lines?"[76]

Thus in many of the North-central States the township came to be the local unit of government for certain minor purposes, though in other states it is little more than an election district, and in none of them is there preserved the old town meeting which gave the New England township its fundamental democracy.

Owing to the large plantations and the economic and social conditions prevailing throughout the South, it has had practically no units of government smaller than the county, other than incorporated villages.

Until very recently our conception of society has been mostly in terms of political units, largely on account of the lack of any local unit which had social significance to rural people. In recent years, however, students of rural government have become aware of the artificiality and the anti-social character of the township unit. There may be two rival villages within a township, each competing for trade and the support of its associations, and striving for the political domination of the township, while some of the farmers in a far corner of the township may trade in a village in the next township. Or a village may be on atownship line, which must be observed in all matters of government although there is no real division of interests between its people.

Outside of New England villages were located at points of geographical advantage, or along through roads or railroads, primarily as business centers. There was no particular relation between the village and the farming area surrounding it. But as the village grew it often desired modern improvements such as water systems, pavements, street lights, etc., for which the farmers were unwilling to be taxed and which were thus prevented as long as the village was controlled by the township. This has led to most of the larger villages becoming incorporated, so that they may administer their own local government and tax themselves for such improvements as they desire. This separation of the village from the township has been inevitable where the farmers take no pride or interest in it, and has often been necessitated by their parsimony or conservatism. This is well illustrated by an incident related by Professor Herbert B. Adams:

"In my native town, Amherst, Mass., the villagers struggled for years in town-meeting to secure some system of sewerage for 'the center,' but the 'ends of the town' always voted 'no'. On one occasion, in order to allay suspicion of extravagance, a leading villager moved that, whatever system of sewerage be adopted, the surface water and rainfall be allowed to take their natural course down-hill in the ordinary gutters. The farmers sniffed danger in this wily proposition and voted an overwhelming 'No.' Accordingly by the local law of Amherst, water had to run uphill until the next town-meeting! Such is the power of Democracy."[77]

This separate incorporation of the village has been a large factor in making a distinction between villagers and farmers and preventing their recognition of their community interests. Not infrequently, however, it will be found that some of the more progressive villages are not incorporated and that they have the loyalty of the farmers. Numerous examples of unincorporated villages might be cited to show that where a spirit of pride in local village institutions has been developed among the farmers of the territory tributary to it, that village improvements not only are not impeded, but the community is much strengthened. This is more likely to be true, however, where the township boundary and the natural community area are practically the same.

On the other hand, the progress of a rural community, i.e., a village and the territory tributary to it, often is prevented if it cannot command a majority of the votes in a township. In a nearby village is a town hall which might be used as a community house and be a social center for the whole community. But the borders of the township belong to other communities and do not come to the township center, and these people on the edge of the township very naturally take the position that if the village and neighboring people wish to use the town hall, let them rent it of the town, but why should the whole township be taxed for advantages which only half of it can enjoy. The same line of argument arises with regard to the location of schools, roads, libraries, and the districts for public health nurses. Unless the whole township can be equally well served, a community which forms but part of the township is unable to secure these advantages unless it can command a majority of the votes, or except as the village incorporates, and then it loses thesupport of the taxes from the farms of the community which share the benefits.

As long as farm life was on the neighborhood basis, its interests largely centering in the district school and the country church, its roads maintained by the labor of its citizens under a local road supervisor, and trips to the village were made only once or twice a week for mail and supplies, farmers did not feel the need for a unit of local government other than the township. But when the church, the grange and the lodge are in the village, when they desire consolidated schools, libraries, and community houses, which are most convenient to all at the village center, and when they desire the improvement of local roads so that they will best connect with state and county roads, then the interests of the farmers and the villagers unite them in these common enterprises, and the community comes into conflict with the rest of the township if the township is composed of more than one community.

On the other hand, it must be recognized that for many purposes the community, or even the township, is too small a unit to secure the greatest efficiency in administration of public agencies, and so there has been a distinct tendency toward the centralization of many functions of local government in county officials. Thus the county superintendent of schools is assuming more and more control over the local school system, the county supervision of roads is increasing, and we have shown (p. 145) the desirability of a county health administration, the need for county juvenile courts (p. 188), county boards for the administration of welfare work (p. 191), and a county library system. The county tends to become a rural municipality very similar in function and organization to the city, and the logical outcome seems to be theemployment of a county manager under a commission or county council, which has already become possible in Maryland and California.[78]That this centralization makes possible a greater efficiency in administration can hardly be doubted, but that it tends to destroy the initiative and responsibility of the local community is equally apparent. With an over-centralization of administration, whether in the county or the state, the local community loses the very ties which have bound it together. The adjustment of the desires for efficiency and for local democracy is one of the unsolved problems of government. Experience shows clearly that the local community or township is too small a unit to secure efficient administration; but it is also evident that without some degree of local responsibility and control, centralized administration tends to become bureaucratic and the people are deprived of that participation in government which is essential for the life of a democracy.

Thus the need for the local self-government of rural communities has become apparent to rural leaders. It is interesting to note that this is becoming appreciated in the South, where on account of social and economic conditions local government has been almost entirely lacking in the past, but where new conditions give rise to new desires which cannot be realized except through some means whereby a locality can be free to work out its own salvation. This point of view has been vigorously expressed by Dr. Clarence Poe, editor of the Progressive Farmer and a recognized leader of rural life in the South:

"The chief task of the man who would help develop a rich and puissant rural civilization here in the South—the chief taskperhaps of the man who would make an agricultural State like North Carolina the great commonwealth it ought to be—is to develop the rural community."..."Consider the fact that the country community is the only social unit known to our civilization that is without definite boundaries and without machinery for self-expression and development—without form, and void, as was chaos before creation."..."But for the country community there is no organic means of expression whatever. There is, of course, that shadowy and futile geographical division known as the Township—but it is laid off utterly without regard to human consideration, and serves no purpose save as a means of defining voting boundaries and limiting the spheres of constables and sheriff's deputies—a mere ghostly phantom of a social entity that we need not consider at all."[79]

"Consider the fact that the country community is the only social unit known to our civilization that is without definite boundaries and without machinery for self-expression and development—without form, and void, as was chaos before creation."...

"But for the country community there is no organic means of expression whatever. There is, of course, that shadowy and futile geographical division known as the Township—but it is laid off utterly without regard to human consideration, and serves no purpose save as a means of defining voting boundaries and limiting the spheres of constables and sheriff's deputies—a mere ghostly phantom of a social entity that we need not consider at all."[79]

And he then goes on to show the advantages of the New England township.

Community School Districts.—The most significant beginning toward the creation of self-government for the rural community is in the laws which have been passed by several states permitting redistricting for the establishment of community high schools or consolidated schools, irrespective of township or county boundaries and according to the desire of the prospective patrons of the schools. Thus in 1919 Nebraska passed a state rural school redistricting law under which every county has a redistricting committee which determines what seem to be the natural boundaries of the district, which are then subject to petitions from the people for their alteration, and the whole plan is then submitted to a vote of the county."The law does not explicitly state that the proposed districts must correspond to a natural community in the social sense; it only says that they must be very much larger than the old ones, approximately twenty-five square miles. The inevitable result, however, of opening the question and of freeing community choice from old political boundaries is to settle on new areas approaching social units with self-conscious community ties."[80]Kansas and Illinois have somewhat similar legislation and a community unit is proposed by the Committee of 21 which has recently conducted a survey of the rural school situation in the State of New York.

Community House Districts.—Wisconsin has passed an act whereby the people of any local area may vote to erect and maintain a community house and may establish the boundaries of the area in which the citizens shall have the right to tax themselves for this purpose, and to elect trustees of the house, in much the same manner as community school districts are established. It seems probable that when a natural social area has thus been determined it will probably be the same for both school and community house, and that it might be the best unit for the support of such community agencies as a public library, or a public-health nurse, and thus a real community government might gradually arise and might ultimately displace the arbitrary township government, although the township might be retained for its original purpose of land registration.

Rural Community Incorporation.—The most advanced step in giving the rural community self-government is An Act to Provide for the Incorporation of RuralCommunities, passed by the legislature of North Carolina in 1919.[81]This act gives authority for the incorporation of rural communities including definite school districts, which may or may not include hamlets or village centers, but which must be at least two miles from any town or city of five thousand or more inhabitants. It gives such incorporated rural communities the general powers and privileges of an incorporated village, except that they cannot lose their identity as a part of the school and road systems of the county. Taxes may be levied for various public purposes, but they must be voted at an annual meeting at which a majority of the registered voters must be present, or be submitted to an election, and the amount of taxes and bonds are limited. Although about a dozen communities have incorporated under this act, but few of them seem to be actively functioning, due to various local causes. The act itself, however, is well conceived and is worthy of study by those interested in better rural government.

Another method of accomplishing the same end is by a special act of incorporation for a particular community, as was passed by the Legislature of New Jersey for Plainsboro Township in 1919.

Concerning the organization of this community, Hon. Alva Agee, State Secretary of Agriculture, writes:

"Every voter within its boundaries signed a petition to the legislature for the creation of a new township embracing the territory belonging to the community, and this was granted. The community then met, made a declaration of its purposes and adopted a constitution providing for control of all township and community affairs. It is a return to direct government by the people, and places responsibility upon every individual. It is theold New England town-meeting made effective. Patient study of every detail was given by members of the community."[82]

The declaration of purposes and constitution[83]are so unique that they should be studied by all interested in community government.

"A DECLARATION OF PURPOSES"We, the residents of Plainsboro Township, New Jersey, declare our purpose to accept all the duties of American citizenship.We are forming an association to secure all the benefits of community life, and affirm the right of our community to each one's best effort.We support all individual rights just as far as their use does not harm our fellows.We agree that the public good is superior to any private gain obtained at the expense of community welfare.We recognize and acknowledge the gracious influences of practical Christianity in community life.We ask that our homes be guarded by right social conditions throughout our community.We declare the duty of the community to provide good schools, means for community recreation, safe sanitary conditions, improved highways, and encouragement to thrift and home-ownership.We purpose to make the neatness and attractiveness of our homes and farms assets of distinct value to the township.We agree to do our share in the creation of public sentiment in support of all measures in the public interest.We agree to put aside all partisan and sectarian relations when dealing with community matters.We state our conviction that the best rewards from this organized effort lie before each one in a deepened interest in othersand in an increased ability to coöperate the one with the other for the good of all.We, the citizens of Plainsboro Township, incorporated by act of the Legislature of the State of New Jersey, approved April 1, 1919, and accepted by us on May 6, 1919, subscribe to this declaration."

"A DECLARATION OF PURPOSES

"We, the residents of Plainsboro Township, New Jersey, declare our purpose to accept all the duties of American citizenship.

We are forming an association to secure all the benefits of community life, and affirm the right of our community to each one's best effort.

We support all individual rights just as far as their use does not harm our fellows.

We agree that the public good is superior to any private gain obtained at the expense of community welfare.

We recognize and acknowledge the gracious influences of practical Christianity in community life.

We ask that our homes be guarded by right social conditions throughout our community.

We declare the duty of the community to provide good schools, means for community recreation, safe sanitary conditions, improved highways, and encouragement to thrift and home-ownership.

We purpose to make the neatness and attractiveness of our homes and farms assets of distinct value to the township.

We agree to do our share in the creation of public sentiment in support of all measures in the public interest.

We agree to put aside all partisan and sectarian relations when dealing with community matters.

We state our conviction that the best rewards from this organized effort lie before each one in a deepened interest in othersand in an increased ability to coöperate the one with the other for the good of all.

We, the citizens of Plainsboro Township, incorporated by act of the Legislature of the State of New Jersey, approved April 1, 1919, and accepted by us on May 6, 1919, subscribe to this declaration."

If such a Declaration of Purposes were adopted by every rural community, and were taught the children as a civic oath of allegiance, would it not have more immediate effect on practical patriotism than even the Declaration of Independence, and what new meaning would be given to local government? Here is an example of rural civic spirit which, if it could become general throughout the rural communities of the United States, would remold the political and social organization of the whole country; for it provides both the mechanism and the spirit which are essential for making democracy a reality rather than an ideal.

Community Government and Democracy.—The local community is indispensable as the primary political unit for the maintenance of true democracy, both because it is small enough that there can be personal relations between its members, in which a real consensus of opinion can be formed, and also because only in it can the masses of mankind have any personal experience or participation in government. Unless the individual has a social consciousness of the community in which he lives, he can have but a feeble and hazy realization of larger social groups. Unless the community through its individuals is self-conscious, it cannot take its rightful place in the larger community of which it forms a part. If democracy does not obtain in the local community, the voice of such a community in the affairs of the county orstate will be that of its self-chosen leaders. It is difficult to conceive how any real democracy can be secured in State or Nation where it does not obtain in their constituent communities. It is entirely possible to have a government democratic in form and theory, but actually a political or economic feudalism, supported by local chieftains who represent not the people, but themselves or some business or other special interests. The very life of true democracy is in the participation of individuals in the government of the local group and in the organization of the locality groups, so that there may be a fair discussion and expression by those who are bound together by common interests through some form of self-government for the rural community.

[75]"Civil Government in the United States," pp. 17, 18. Boston, 1890.

[76]"Local Government in Illinois," p. 10. Johns Hopkins Univ. Studies in History and Political Science. Vol. I, No. 3, 1883.

[77]Editor's note, p. 51. "Penn. Boroughs," by Wm. F. Holcomb. Johns Hopkins Univ. Stud. in History and Pol. Sc. Vol. IV, No. 4, 1886.

[78]See E. H. Ryder, "Proposed Modifications and Recent Tendencies in Rural Government and Legislation," p. 112, Proc. 3d Natl. Country Life Conference.

[79]"Why Not Local Self-Government for Rural Communities," pp. 4-48. North Carolina Club Year Book, 1917-1918. "County Government and County Affairs in North Carolina." The University of North Carolina Record. No. 159. Oct., 1918. Chapel Hill, N. C.

[80]H. Paul Douglas. "Recent Legislation Facilitating Rural Community Organization," p. 124, Proc. 3d Natl. Country Life Conference.

[81]Public Laws of 1919, Reprinted as Appendix A, p. 116, of A. W. Hayes, "Rural Community Organization." Chicago, 1921.

[82]"A Community Organization." National Stockman and Farmer. July 26, 1919.

[83]For the constitution see Appendix A, page 247.

From one standpoint the whole progress of civilization is but a process of social organization, the establishment of those relationships which best promote the largest measure of human welfare. In the previous chapters we have noted the various aspects and problems of rural life which have necessitated the community as a unit for social organization. As a result of the growing conviction that the conditions of rural life can be made satisfying only through the collective efforts of definite communities, there has arisen a widespread movement for the better organization of community interests and activities, which has come to be known as community organization. Although this movement is being encouraged by many agencies, its greatest significance and importance arises from the fact that, for the most part, community organization of many diverse types is springing up in rural communities throughout the country as a means of meeting their local needs. This spontaneity of the movement is the best evidence that changing conditions have brought about a real need for some better machinery for community development.

In order to understand community organization so that we may intelligently encourage its development, it will be well to consider (1) the underlying causes, (2) the process of organization, and (3) the forms of organization.

1.Causes.—Usually the immediate cause of attempting community organization is the common desire to meet a need which cannot well be realized except through the united effort of the whole community. Improved roads are needed, a library or playground is desired, a Liberty Loan must be raised, a Fourth of July celebration or a pageant is to be undertaken, a band or baseball team needs financial support and patronage to prevent its disbanding, hard times or a fire make unusual aid necessary to certain families, an influenza epidemic compels a united effort for the care of the sick. In all such cases a citizens' committee is usually organized which represents various organizations and interests so that the support of all the elements in the community may be enlisted. When any common need is of such a magnitude or of such a nature that it is not within the field of any one organization or agency, then some form of at least temporary community organization is necessary. When some of these needs, such as a community house or a public health nurse, require permanent maintenance, and the coöperation of various organizations is essential for the success of the enterprise, then some permanent form of community organization becomes desirable. If a community organization is to be permanent and is to really function, there must be work for it to do which cannot or will not be done by existing agencies.

A second cause for community organization arises from the increasing complexity of human relationships, even in a rural community. We have observed that in recent years there has been a rapid increase in the number of associations each of which is devoted to some one special interest. The life of simpler or more primitive communities is a unit with regard to all phases of their life, religion, government, and social affairs. Such was the township ofcolonial New England and many a community in the pioneer stage. But in modern times a multiplicity of voluntary associations have sprung up and have spread from one community to another. In many cases the members of such organizations become more loyal to them than to the community; organizations become self-centered and divisive rather than being devoted to the community good. Religion, government, economic life, and education have become more or less separate spheres of life, each having a code of its own, whereas human problems involve all of these aspects of life and cannot be successfully solved while there is conflict of standards between religion, business, government, and social life. Not infrequently more than one organization undertakes the same or similar work, or the demands of one clash with those of another, and social confusion arises. When this occurs in a large city between organizations which are supported by the wealthy or by different groups, each may go as far as its resources will permit; but in the rural community where organizations must be of the people and supported by all of them, such a situation cannot be tolerated for both funds and leadership are limited.

Organizations arise to meet recognized human needs, but no one organization can meet all the needs of the whole community. Nor do all organizations appeal to all people. Men associate according to their special individual interests, some are more interested in religion and business, others in social life or athletics, or what not. As the organizations representing these interests become more and more specialized, each individual belongs to several organizations, whose interests sometimes conflict and members of a community are arrayed against each other. Thus an individual is sometimes involved in a divided loyalty between two groups, and finds himself with a conflict ofpurposes which lessens that personal unity which is essential for character and personal peace. The character of the individual is developed to the extent that he is able to resolve this conflict of his interests in one dominant purpose. So the welfare of the community can be secured only by a unity of purpose among its organizations in their loyalty to the common good. This tendency to form associations for special interests is shown in the following diagram:

FOR A SATISFYINGLIFE EVERY MANNEEDS:These needsare met byASSOCIATIONS AND ORGANIZATIONSREPRESENTING SPECIAL INTERESTSOF THE COMMUNITY, such as

1. ECONOMIC PROSPERITY—An Adequate IncomeCoöperative Marketing Assns.Coöperative Buying Assns.Commercial ClubsFarm Loan Assns.2. HEALTH—Physical FitnessPublic health nursesLocal health officerLocal hospitals3. EDUCATION—The Ability to LearnSchoolsParent-Teacher's Assns.Farm and Home BureauBoys' and Girls' ClubsPublic Library and MuseumCommunity Fairs4. SOCIABILITY AND RECREATION—The Joy of Playing TogetherLodgesWomen's clubs; men's clubsScouts; Camp Fire GirlsAthletic Clubs and Assns.Moving pictures and theatresPublic playground & gymnasium5. ARTISTIC ENJOYMENT—Appreciation of Beauty in Nature, Music,Art and LiteratureVillage Improvement SocietiesCommunity ChorusesBands and Orchestras6. RELIGIOUS LIFE—The Common Quest of the Highest IdealsChurches and church federationsY. M. C. A. and Y. W. C. A.Young People's Societies7. FAMILY WELFARE—Love of FamilyRed Cross—Home ServiceChild Welfare Bureaus and ChildStudy Clubs8. A PROGRESSIVE COMMUNITY—A Desire for Opportunity for All—i.e., DemocracySome form of a Community organization,bringing together all the above.

On the other hand we must recognize man's gregarious tendency, his desire for the support of public opinion, his craving of a feeling of "togetherness." The elation which comes to a people engaged in war or in meeting any common disaster comes chiefly from the satisfaction they experience in being united in a common cause and enjoying the sanction of their fellows without division among them. The individualistic philosophy of the more sophisticated may enable them to find satisfaction in more or less socially segregated groups under ordinary conditions, but when they face calamity, when the most fundamental and deepest issues of life are involved, then they enjoy association with those who surround them—they become "neighbors."

This desire of men to associate in groups which represent their special interests, and their equal desire to been rapportwith all their fellows with whom their life is associated in community life, is one of the paradoxes into which many of our basic human problems resolve, and furnishes one of the primary reasons for some form of community organization which will unify the increasing complexity of associations.

A third underlying motive for community organization, which is just coming to receive recognition, is the need of defending the interests of the local community against the domination of national or state organizations, of maintaining a necessary degree of local autonomy. All organizations which become associated in state or national federations inevitably develop a central administration whichtends to become more or less of a hierarchy or bureaucracy. The national organization seeks to achieve its special objects and to emphasize their supreme importance. It tries to secure efficiency of the local groups through standardization, and very naturally encourages their loyalty to the state or national aims and purposes. This tendency is more or less inevitable and is an inherent weakness of all large organizations which do not constantly place their emphasis on strengthening their local units and encouraging devotion to community service. But in many cases the larger organization has lost a true perspective of its relationship to its local units and of their primary duty to their local communities. The most flagrant instance of this principle is in the domination of local government by national political parties, whose policies have nothing whatever to do with local administration, but who maintain their "machines" so that an efficient organization is available for mobilizing the vote in state and national elections. The resulting reaction has given rise to citizen's tickets, commission government and city managers, and in the more progressive smaller communities a growing tendency to vote for the best man irrespective of party. Wherever a community votes independently of national party lines on local affairs, there will be found healthy local government. For the same general reasons we have observed the growth of the community church movement (p. 127) as a protest against sectarian rivalries, the new emphasis of the master of the national grange (p. 172) on the community responsibilities of the grange as more important than its legislative activities, and the effort to prevent an over-centralization of school administration through the creation of community school districts under local control. A striking example of the reaction of local communities in self-defense against the demandsfor support from many organizations was the rapid spread of the "War Chest" movement among our cities during the war as a means of raising funds for various national organizations carrying on war work. Subsequently the same idea has given rise to the organization of "Community Chests" or "Community Funds" for financing various community and national welfare agencies, so as to ensure adequate support for those which are necessary, but to discourage a multiplicity of competing organizations, and to furnish a mechanism whereby the community may exercise some definite policy with regard to its social work.

Such are some of the fundamental causes which have given rise to various experiments in community organization. They commenced about a decade ago, but increased slowly prior to the war. The war brought about a new realization of the community, as it was necessary to organize war activities, "war drives," etc., on a community basis. Under the National Council of Defense were organized State and County Councils of Defense and finally President Wilson issued a letter encouraging the organization of local Community Councils,[85]to bring together all organizations and interests of the community not only for war purposes but with a view to their future usefulness in times of peace. In this letter, President Wilson said:

"Your State, in extending the national defense organization by the creation of community councils, is in my opinion making an advance of vital significance. It will, I believe, result when thoroughly carried out in welding the Nation together as no nation of great size has been welded before. It will build up from the bottom an understanding and sympathy and unity of purpose and effort which will no doubt have an immediate anddecisive effect upon our great undertaking. You will find it, I think, not so much a new task as a unification of existing efforts, a fusion of energies now too much scattered and at times somewhat confused into one harmonious and effective power. It is only by extending your organization to small communities that every citizen of the State can be reached and touched with the inspiration of the common cause."

The organization of community councils was actively pushed by the National and State Councils of Defense, and thousands of them were organized. This was in the summer of 1918, but owing to the early declaration of the Armistice they had but little opportunity to become thoroughly established. As they had been created primarily for war purposes, most of them ceased to function with the cessation of hostilities, but the idea had taken root and the experience of common effort in war activities had brought about a new sense of the value of some sort of community organization.

2.The Process of Community Organization.—As corollaries of the motives for community organization which we have just discussed, there are certain fairly obvious principles concerning the process of organization which deserve emphasis.

The first essential is to determine whether there are unsatisfied desires which cannot be met except by community action and whether they are sufficiently desired to command the united support of the community. Only as individuals and associations have common desires which cannot be satisfied without their united activity can community organization be effected. The mere logical desirability of coördination of effort, however rational it may appear, is too abstract an objective to inspire enduring devotion. The allaying of antagonisms between special interests makes no appeal to any of them until they are unable to achieve theirends without joint action. Therefore, the primary consideration in community organization is to determine what is the most important unmet need of the community which requires united action for its satisfaction, and to enlist all possible elements in the common enterprise.

A community must be thoroughly convinced of the need of some definite form of community organization before it can succeed. Sudden enthusiasm due to the power of a persuasive speaker or a community meeting may result in the formation of a community organization, but unless a considerable proportion of the people representing various interests are firmly convinced of the need and are willing to pool their interests in community activities, such an organization will be like many a convert of a revival meeting, it will soon "backslide." To secure the recognition of the need for concerted action by all elements of the community will usually require time and education, and is a process which cannot be forced too rapidly—all education or learning involves time.

Even when an outstanding need is apparent it may not always be possible to gain the support of a sufficient portion of the community to justify an immediate effort for its achievement. It may be necessary to first arouse good feeling and community spirit by some activity which, though relatively less important, will command more general interest and participation, and may pave the way for other enterprises. The first and essential step in community organization is to get the community to act together, for only through collective activity is community spirit and loyalty developed. It is for this reason that Old Home Weeks, family reunions, athletic or play festivals, baseball teams, picnics, pageants, dramatics, community fairs, community Chautauquas, holiday celebrations, and kindred events are often the best means for creating bettercommunity spirit.[86]It should be remembered that the objective of community organization is notanorganization, but the active coöperation of all the people and organizations of the community for the common welfare. The essential is common ideals and loyalties; the mechanism whereby these may be achieved is incidental.

Until genuine local leadership is available, community organization will be impossible. It is true that often where the need for community activity is sufficiently great that the very necessity develops new leadership. Herein lies the value of beginning the process of community organization by some enterprise which enlists the enthusiastic support of the whole community, for in such activities new leadership is often developed.

Any form of community organization which is to be permanent and effective must represent the actual life of the community, which is largely dominated by existing organizations. Most individuals are loyal to certain of these organizations and these loyalties are the social realities which must be recognized in any attempt to unite them in larger aims. Unless most of the leading organizations of a community can be affiliated for community progress, any so-called community organization will be but another organization. The League of Nations hardly represents the world community as long as the United States, Germany and Russia are not affiliated with it, nor would our federal government be representative of our national life if it wereresponsible only to the direct vote of the people and did not give recognition to the states as states. It is for this reason that community organization will proceed most efficiently where it is initiated by the joint effort of several of its leading associations, the churches, the grange, the farm and home bureau, the Red Cross, the business men's association, etc., for without their support a divided loyalty will persist.

For the same reason, a community organization cannot be under the auspices of any one existing organization as a chamber of commerce or farm bureau. Both of these and others are community organizations, but they are for specific purposes. Proponents of both of these have advocated making them community-wide and all-embracing in their functions, but it needs but little reflection to show the impossibility of such a plan. To cite but one objection. The rural church is the most deeply-rooted and in many ways the most powerful of rural institutions. It can coöperate with these other organizations for community purposes, but neither of them can enter into the religious field. The same is true of lodges, schools, health organizations, government, etc. Community organizations, such as the Chamber of Commerce or Commercial Club, the Grange and the Farm Bureau for agriculture and homemaking, the Red Cross for its activities, Church Federations, and others should all be encouraged where needed, but although each of these has certain community functions, no one of them can do or can direct the work of another. The community organization must bring them together so as to best coördinate their work for the good of the community, not through the power of an organic federation, but through the influence of conference, good will and devotion to the common weal.

3.The Community Council.—Community organizationsare, as yet, in an experimental stage and their formal constitutions or by-laws are of many different types.[87]The Community Council, as suggested by the National Council of Defense, has been adopted in many communities with various modifications to meet local conditions. A community council consists of one representative from each general organization which affiliates with it and of a variable number of members-at-large elected by the annual community meeting. All citizens are entitled to vote for the members-at-large. The usual officers may be elected by the community meeting, or, preferably, be chosen by the council itself. Thus the council represents both the existing organizations and the community as a whole. The council does not attempt any control over existing organizations, but merely provides a means for their voluntary coöperation and is an agency for promoting community activities. In many cases where there are a large number of organizations, and it is surprising how many are found in many average-sized rural communities, the council will be too large to be an effective working body. Furthermore, the members who represent various organizations may not always be the best persons to carry on the particular enterprises which the council desires to promote. The council may, under such circumstances, devote itself to the consideration of policies and enterprises, and may create committees of citizens who are best qualified and most interested in particular projects to have charge of their execution. Thus if the council decides to get back of a movement for a playground, a public health nurse, and a band, committees would be appointed to take charge of organizing each one of these enterprises. Thesecommittees should be selected so as to represent the various organizations most directly concerned with or interested in the particular project as far as possible, but they should be chosen primarily for their ability to produce results. Committees should be appointed only for those projects which the council decides to undertake, although one or two committees may be appointed merely to investigate suggested projects and to report their findings for further consideration. Where the council is large, and it is not practicable to have it meet more than once a quarter, it may be well to have its work carried on in the interims by an executive committee consisting of the officers and the chairmen of the committees.

There can be no one best type of community organization adapted to the widely varying conditions of all sorts and sizes of rural communities; each community must have a form of organization adapted to its needs. The important thing is not the creation of another new organization in the community, but to afford the means for the better team play of those which already exist. The mechanism must therefore depend upon the character and stage of development of the community and will be modified from time to time as its experience, or that of similar community organizations, warrants.

Finally let us remember that community organization is not an end in itself, but that it is merely a means whereby conditions in the community may be made such that every individual in it may have the best possible chance to develop his personality and to enjoy the fellowship of service in the common good. The aim of all social organization is personality, but personality is achieved and can find its own satisfaction only through fellowship. The ideal community but furnishes the social environment in which the human spirit realizes its highest values.

Back to Index Next