Wayne W. Parrish: Letter to Harry Hopkins

Document Text

November 11, 1934

My dear Mr. Hopkins:

This is my first report to you on the survey of New York and metropolitan New Jersey. It is necessarily fragmentary and inconclusive since I have spent time only in Harlem, East Harlem and Queens. Any previous notions on relief were dispelled by getting into the field. Thus there are no preconceptions in these reports.

Certain definite conclusions have appeared which have held true in the sections visited. These represent changes over the past year as compared with the two years before.

Relief rolls are still increasing. No private jobs are in sight. From Mr. Hodson on down to case workers and investigators, there was unanimity on this point. Relief workers report a complete lack of faith in the vast majority of clients that private jobs are coming back. My talks with clients brought the same reaction.

Secondly, the psychology of relief has gone through the whole population within the past year. Relief is regarded as permanent by both clients and relief workers. Clients are assuming that the government has a responsibility to provide. The stigma of relief has almost disappeared except among white collar groups.

Thirdly, after all manner of skeptical questioning on my part, the conclusion is inescapable that there is growing unrest. This is not yet expressed in any large measure through existing organizations, but supervisors and investigators are almost all agreed that the last year has brought a great many clients to a frame of mind where they will follow a leader. Clients are more critical, more complaining, more ready to react. All workers seem to sense the feeling that something is going to happen, that things can’t go on, and all insist they did not have this feeling a year ago. Only one—Mr. Hodson—would venture to be specific. He said confidentially that he didn’t see how we could go on for more than a year more without being forced to bring in a new social order—unless the trend began back towards private jobs.

Jobs is the cry everywhere, and I can’t over-emphasize this point. All agree that this is the one solution, and with no jobs in private business, they must be created by the government. There is no stigma attached to work relief jobs, but there is a growing hatred of home relief. Neither clients nor relief workers understand why jobs can’t be created.

All report that mental deterioration has increased in the past year. An evolutionary process, except for the lowest classes, and they are better off than ever before. Clothes present the most serious need at present, with 25% of clients in critical need and 75% in need. Household equipment is worse because of lack of money for maintenance.

There is a surprisingly uniform belief—at least to me—among supervisors and case workers that they feel the government has a definite responsibility and obligation to provide a minimum subsistence level for every person, regardless of jobs. If private jobs bring in income below this level, then the government should supplement. This feeling has also gained amazing tenacity among clients, who are definitely more dependent on the government.

As for young people, one Queens administrator supplied the best term. He said they were bored with relief. They want something to do. An influx recently of young boys and men, in late ’teens and early twenties, was reported in both Harlem and Queens. They did not apply for relief because they need food, but because it seemed to be a matter of form. Some relief workers considered this the most pernicious phase of relief. Young men out of school since 1929 have never had a contact with private industry—they live in a world of government subsidy.

There is a growing feeling of resentment among clients of the better class at not having an opportunity of getting somewhere in life; this feeling has been slow to develop, but has grown in the last year as the word “emergency” disappeared out of the relief picture. Men of 40 and 50 years of age are realizing very definitely that they are out for good and this results in a sense of futility. But there are growing complaints of the inadequacy of relief, a growing awareness of the problem. There is no question that President Roosevelt has lost some popularity. The next idol is likely to be someone who has a promise and plans for jobs.

The above has consisted of summaries. To take up specific topics, the matter of relief roils is pretty definite. In Queens the administrator for the borough said she saw some signs of leveling off, but if there is a tendency in that direction it is only in its earliest stages. Mr. Hodson reported a drop in the rolls recently, but said he was certain that this was accounted for by involuntary closings on the part of investigators who have been busy checking frauds. Both Harlem and East Harlem reported drops due to closings for fraud. New applications have continued at the usual rates. In one large precinct in Queens where I spent some time among white collar clients and investigators, there are more cases than ever before.

As for jobs, there are very few closings because clients have gone back to work. Investigators are checking with former employers but find many firms out of business. A fair proportion of former employers are willing to take back their people “if business picks up” but are not hopeful. Some business men are amazed when an investigator calls and says that it must be impossible that their former employees are in need. “Why he must have saved while he was working.” Some employers are resentful of calls of investigators. These contacts with employers have no-t given investigators any confidence that jobs will come back. Occupational directors in Harlem and East Harlem report calls for jobs but they are almost all in the lowest types of work and at very low pay so low that the relief bureau supplements the incomes. In Queens the administrator of one precinct said “I don’t think we should subsidize private industry by supplementing low wage scales. I don’t think the government should lend itself to exploitation by industry’s low pay.” There was considerable feeling in Queens that clients are not to be blamed for turning down offers of work where the pay is below subsistence levels established by the government. On the other hand, in East Harlem, two Jewish investigators, young men recently out of college, were distinctly resentful of the Italian clients for refusing any kind of jobs. They felt that these people aren’t trying to get jobs, that they don’t want to work and are only interested in getting relief checks. In both upper Manhattan and in Queens the Italians are considered much better off under relief and are more adept at chiseling. Racial feeling undoubtedly enters into appraisals of case workers. I heard numerous complaints that the Italians knew more about relief than the relief workers. “We are treated like messenger boys.” “Relief is just like the milkman and the postman.” “Relief is worth protecting and it is inconceivable to them that the government would stop it.” “They have made home relief a business and spend as much energy getting relief as they would in working.” Odd jobs appear to be plentiful among the lowest classes and it is difficult to check up on them. Hence the lowest classes prefer home relief because it gives them a chance to make a few dollars on the side. Those who really want to work are antagonistic to home relief.

Every worker in relief has definite ideas on the percentage of clients who want to work. In Queens the average is 80% to 85%, with the percentage as high as 95% to 99% among white collar people. Among Negroes and Italians the percentage drops to as low as 50%, but I discount this because of racial prejudice. I should say that the average is easily 80%, although this does not take into account the increasing number of unemployables.

As for health, the lowest classes are better off. I am referring to the minority of clients who were always in the poverty classification and who never had permanent homes or jobs. Now they have medical care and go to clinics, and some take advantage of educational facilities which they never had before. Also, a complete system of diets has been instituted, and while many of them skimp on food to use the money for other things, all are agreed that the health situation is not bad. Above this level there is a variety of opinion. In some parts of Harlem as many as nine out of ten clients hold clinic cards. The majority claim to have something ailing, even among the single liege clients. In one case load of 82 singles, 75% have clinic cards. There is no way of determining the real health problem, but white collar people are using clinic and free medical facilities to good advantage. Most investigators consider the health problem “serious”, but not one of them is able to compare health with pre-depression days because they have never been connected with medical institutions. It is probably a safe conclusion, however, that health conditions are worse among the better class of relief clients because of their inability to use private facilities they formerly enjoyed. Among those who do not want to work, the usual excuse is health. Case workers know that often this is an alibi. Mentally the havoc wrecked; among skilled and white collar people cannot be estimated, but it is serious. Many skilled men will never be useful again because of this interlude of worry.

So far the bulk of trouble has been caused by Communists. Unemployed Councils are active in sections of the city that are congested and where lower classes live. There has been an increase in strength in Harlem, for the Negroes are more receptive. Probably the biggest single cause of this increased strength is the actual effectiveness of the councils. They make complaints regularly to bureaus, and more than often they get action. For every successful complaint, they can get new recruits. This does not mean subservience on the part of bureaus, but simply because a fair proportion of complaints turn out to be justified. Usually the councils are orderly, and in white collar sections they have gotten no following at all. But they cause an enormous amount of trouble in the bureaus by demanding immediate action for their members.

Hodson’s complaint is that they (Communists) are always seeking the dramatic and never want to sit down and work things out. He is having trouble with fifteen ringleaders within his own organization. These, he said, are causing much of the trouble that reaches the newspapers. In Queens the borough administrator said the Unemployed Councils are definitely gaining strength in Jamaica and Flushing. In Harlem the district supervisor said the clients used to laugh at the radicals, but that this has changed to receptiveness. “They react more readily now to radical leadership. They are still confused on issues, but the radicals tell them they can get more by joining, so they do.” Mrs. Mason, Harlem administrator, said the councils have more strength than before. In East Harlem, the Italians are content to stay away from organization for fear of disturbing the status quo of relief. But the administrator there said she felt like she was “sitting on a volcano” and expected things to begin happening. But more important than the councils, it seems, is the attitude and morale of the vast majority who have grown up under the American tradition of opportunity. And in this group there is unanimous opinion that there is growing discontent with relief as now administered and that the cry for jobs is bound to grow. My talks with clients, ranging from Italians and Negroes to white collar people in Queens, revealed nothing definite in their minds except a growing feeling that they couldn’t go on as they have. In Harlem the Negro is likely to reply “revolution” if asked what would happen if the government withdrew relief. But this is old talk. The feeling is prevalent among case workers and investigators that a vast majority of people on relief for two years or more are reaching “the cracking point” and have got to have jobs or go to pieces. The security of a minimum subsistence on relief is not enough, and many of the clients actually applied for relief with the mistaken notion that it meant jobs. And they all look to the government for those jobs. They feel that the government promised them jobs and that jobs are coming to them.

One complaint of relief workers was in the publicity on FERA from Washington. They said this publicity misleads clients and has caused an untold number of dashed hopes for jobs. The workers keep promising that something will come, but nothing comes. It is this “promise without action” that is causing a growing resentment.

In reference to criticism often made that people are getting relief that don’t need it, I can say that as far as I have gone the percentage of frauds is very low. Only a very small percentage are getting away with anything. Most of the chiseling is on a small scale and the people who do it use the money for essential maintenance. As for that minority that wouldn’t work anyway and that has always been poverty-stricken, it becomes a matter of policy. Should the government be responsible for a minimum standard of living? The majority of case workers believe so. As for administration, it has been amazingly efficient considering the obstacles—this is the view of an outsider—and the personnel of investigators has been surprisingly good. The investigators I talked with are not only conscientious but are active in tracing down frauds, and I say this knowing that they would make a good appearance to an investigator from above.

Clients have no ideas about what the government should do except that it should provide jobs. Among the supervisors and administrators, they are at a loss to predict what is to come and have only one suggestion to solve the problem. That is jobs. They do appeal, however, for more experts and better supervision an personnel as a means of keeping relief rolls down to the needy. Subsistence homesteading and farming is considered out of the question by these people for New York relief families.

Comment of Mr. Hodson: “Unless there is a trend toward recovery within the next year, the situation will be very bad. An increase of industrial employment would aid greatly; if this doesn’t come, and come pretty quickly, there is trouble ahead. A new social order is inevitable then—socialization. In general the people are worse off. Can’t expect them to be content indefinitely.”

Comment of Mr. Corsi: “No improvement in New York. Situation very bad and continually worse. No new jobs except very infrequently. Morale of the people is bad.”

I quote these comments because I found them to be substantially correct as I went down the line. The most definite conclusion I found is a complete change to dependence on the government. Few want relief or are contented with it. They want to get back on their feet via jobs. Discontent is still an individual matter for the majority, but has reached the stage where it can take more specific form. This report has been rambling, but I hope succeeding ones will be more coherent. I have the honor to remain,

Yours very sincerely

Wayne W. Parrish

 

---

Source: Franklin D. Roosevelt Presidential Library and Museum, Hopkins Papers, Box 66.