Whenever a home can be kept in such ways for half orphan children, there will not infrequently result rather more of parental affection and moral training and the other elements of the home that has been broken by death, than when they are cared for outside the family, whether in institutions or in foster homes. This is a point, how ever, upon which generalization must be made with caution. A father whose daily task gives little or no opportunity for personal contact with his child may find it a duty to intrust it to foster-parents, or may find that only by boarding it in an institution for children can he give it the education and the physical care to which it is entitled. The guiding principle is that an able-bodied man cannot consistently with self-respect accept charita ble aid in the support of his children, unless under very exceptional circumstances, and then only in the expec tation of cancelling whatever obligations he may have incurred.
What is true of the widower is equally true of the husband who, through the desertion of the mother of his children, is left doubly responsible for their care. Fortu nately such cases are rare. The act of abandonment by the mother, although no more reprehensible than desertion by the father, indicates so unnatural a disposition that one is readily reconciled to a belief that the children will fare better in the hands of strangers. The husband's brutal ity may indeed often all but justify flight from a bare in stinct of self-preservation ; yet all experience shows that even in the most extreme cases of this kind a neglected or abused wife will escape only with her children, or after some permanent provision for their safety and care has been made. Reluctance to resort either to legal remedies or to any other outside protection is the rule, and this attitude is repeatedly maintained in the face of the most earnest entreaties on the part of neighbors and friends to institute legal measures for punishment and protection.
IX. In the central place of all charitable literature stands the widow and her fatherless children ; from the earliest times her need has been recognized to be imperative and unique. Others may be brought to dependence by un toward misfortune ; old age and infirmity have aroused a degree of sympathy akin to that felt for helpless children ; but for the widow, upon whom through the death of her husband has devolved, in addition to the duties which she was already discharging, the necessity of becoming the family wage-earner, through the performance, it may be, of tasks to which she is physically unfitted — a change resulting inevitably in a lowering of standards, in the giv ing up of a home, in parting with valued possessions, or in the giving up of cherished plans for her children ; for the widow and the fatherless there has always been pity if not charity ; there has always been recognized a right to special consideration, even if there has often been lacking that encouragement which would have been best for her and for her children.
After all deductions are made, it will remain true that widows are most often legitimately entitled to relief; and yet it may be as well to be sure that the deductions are made. Let it be borne in mind, first, that it is one
of the fundamental duties of the male heads of families to make some provision for the care of the family in case of death. This can be done through life insurance, through membership in some well-managed benefit society, or through systematic savings. It can hardly be expected that the average wage-earner will lay aside a sum suffi cient to provide for a long period for his family in case of his own death ; but it is precisely the period of readjust ment, lasting, it may be, but a few weeks or months, in which the need is greatest, and an available sum in cash, even if it be but a few hundred dollars, may easily pre vent any recourse whatever to charitable aid. Again, a widow may have children old enough to contribute to the family income, or there may be near kindred whose finan cial aid is not to be classed with that of strangers.
There are those, again, and perhaps these are the larger number, who do find themselves able to manage without the aid of their own children or their kindred. These are the women who have been independent before marriage and find themselves in position to resume the occupations through which they have earned their living, and those who have such a degree of energy and adaptability to circumstances that they put themselves into relation with the life of the community, offering some service for which there is a demand, and obtaining sufficient remuneration to provide either at home or at board for themselves and for those who are dependent upon them.
A charitable worker in one of the large cities has ex pressed to the writer the belief that any able-bodied woman of average natural ability can manage to support herself and her children if there is enough insurance to provide for the necessities of the family for a few weeks, or if she is aided to tide over this period of readjust ment to her new conditions. The occupations to which such women as this worker has in mind would turn are those of laundress, seamstress, office cleaner, housekeeper, and perhaps in more exceptional cases, newsdealer, sales woman, etc. This estimate is probably too sweeping, or at least, if true that the average mother can and does accomplish the result, it cannot be denied that it is done only at the risk of her own health, and too often with real deprivation on the part of the children. It would be better for the mothers, for the children, and for society to curb, rather than to encourage, the ambition to be self supporting when this means that the income is to be earned by the efforts of the mother of a family of small children. Occupation which separates the mother from her children for the entire working day, and for six days in the week, is certainly unsuitable. It is rare, indeed, that any plan can be devised for providing a satisfactory substitute for a mother's direct personal care and over sight.