DBQ on Progressives

[The] Hull-House [social settlement] had instigated [a political campaign] against a powerful alderman who

has held office for more than twenty years in the nineteenth ward, and who, although notoriously corrupt, is

still firmly intrenched among his constituents....

We soon discovered that approximately one out of every five voters in the nineteenth ward at that time held a

5

job dependent upon the good will of the alderman. There were no civil service rules to interfere, and the

unskilled voter swept the street and dug the sewer, as secure in his position as the more sophisticated voter

who tended a bridge or occupied an office chair in the city hall....

Another result of the campaign was an expectation on the part of our new political friends that Hull-House

would perform like offices for them, and there resulted endless confusion and misunderstanding because in

10

many cases we could not even attempt to do what the alderman constantly did with a right good will. When

he protected a law breaker from the legal consequences of his act, his kindness appeared, not only to himself

but to all beholders, like the deed of a powerful and kindly statesman. When Hull-House on the other hand

insisted that a law must be enforced, it could but appear like the persecution of the offender. We were

certainly not anxious for consistency nor for individual achievement, but in a desire to foster a higher

15

political morality and not to lower our standards, we constantly clashed with the existing political code. 

The great corporations which we have grown to speak of rather loosely as trusts are the creatures of the State,
and the State not only has the right to control them, but it is in duty bound to control them wherever the need
of such control is shown. There is clearly need of supervision—need to possess the power of regulation of
these great corporations through the representatives of the public—wherever, as in our own country at the
present time, business corporations become so very powerful alike for beneficent work and for work that is
not always beneficent. It is idle to say that there is no need for such supervision. There is, and a sufficient
warrant for it is to be found in any one of the admitted evils appertaining to them. 

Why is it not just and proper to treat these juvenile offenders, as we deal with the neglected children, as a

wise and merciful father handles his own child whose errors are not discovered by the authorities? Why is it

not the duty of the state, instead of asking merely whether a boy or a girl has committed a specific offense, to

find out what he is, physically, mentally, morally, and then if it learns that he is treading the path that leads to

5

criminality, to take him in charge, not so much to punish as to reform, not to degrade but to uplift, not to

crush but to develop, not to make him a criminal but a worthy citizen.

And it is this thought—the thought that the child who has begun to go wrong, who is incorrigible, who has

broken a law or an ordinance, is to be taken in hand by the state, not as an enemy but as a protector, as the

ultimate guardian . . . ; it is this principle, which . . . was first fully and clearly declared, in the Act under

10

which the Juvenile Court of Cook County, Illinois, was opened in Chicago on July 1, 1899. 

When, with your assistance, California’s government shall be composed only of those who recognize one

sovereign and master, the people, then is presented to us the question of, How best can we arm the people to

protect themselves hereafter?... This means for accomplishing other reforms has been designated the

“Initiative and the referendum,” and the precautionary measure by which a recalcitrant official can be

5

removed is designated the “Recall.” And while I do not by any means believe the initiative, the referendum,

and the recall are the panacea for all our political ills, yet they do give to the electorate the power of action

when desired, and they do place in the hands of the people the means by which they may protect themselves.

. . . The opponents of direct legislation and the recall, however they may phrase their opposition, in reality

believe the people cannot be trusted. On the other hand, those of us who espouse these measures do so

10

because of our deep-rooted belief in popular government, and not only in the right of the people to govern,

but in their ability to govern. 

Dear Mr. President:
The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, through its Board of Directors,
respectfully protests against the policy of your Administration in segregating the colored employees in the
Departments at Washington. It realizes that this new and radical departure has been recommended, and is
now being defended, on the ground that by giving certain bureaus or sections wholly to colored employees
they are thereby rendered safer in possession of their offices and are less likely to be ousted or discriminated
against. We believe this reasoning to be fallacious. It is based on a failure to appreciate the deeper
significance of the new policy; to understand how far reaching the effects of such a drawing of caste lines by
the Federal Government may be, and how humiliating it is to the men thus stigmatized. 

Every means known to scientific administration is being introduced in the police department and systematic

methods are being installed to take away every vestige of waste in man-power, so that each officer may do his

part and apply his energies in fields where they are the most needed. The past record of each beat in each

precinct is being classified and compared so that commanding officers may know just where to place

5

patrolmen to do the most good; a systematization of the work in the Detective Bureau is being arranged so as

to bring the man-power of this Bureau to the highest state of efficiency....

. . . The taxpayers who employ the police force want an orderly city and they look not only to the general

administration of the police department to see that the laws are enforced and order maintained, but to the

commander of each precinct and the men on each beat, to see that there is a minimum of disorder and as few

10

crimes, offenses and cases of violence as possible in the areas over which they preside. 

Image of "Wet" or "Dry" Anti-Saloon poster