USA > Connecticut > History of Connecticut, Volume II > Part 25
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47
(Courtesy Conn. State Lib.)
ROCKY NECK BEACH STATE PARK VIEWS
836
HISTORY OF CONNECTICUT
in 1919, when it took over Long Lane School for delinquent girls in 1921, and by the contribution of $500,000 for the erection of a new school for the deaf and dumb in West Hartford in 1922. In an admin- istrative reorganization to meet these additional responsibilities, the State Board of Charities was renamed the Department of Public Wel- fare in 1921. The State Department of Health, which had replaced the State Board of Health in 1917, added a Department of Child Welfare in 1921 as a new concern for children developed.106 Prudent economy, if not parsimony, continued to be the watchword in the fiscal administra- tion of the institutions. By the end of the decade, practically all were overcrowded. The condition at the Mansfield Training School, for example, was so bad as to suggest the desirability of another institution for the mentally defective.107
The state was even more cautious in introducing an adequate and satisfactory method of caring for the indigent. Although the system of almshouses was neither efficient nor economical and in spite of the diffi- culties of outdoor relief, the Assembly steadfastly refused to eliminate the outworn system. County homes had been established to care for those children who would otherwise go to almshouses in the expecta- tion that these children could be placed with families. This proved unsatisfactory since once children entered the county homes, they sel- dom left, and the result was that the homes continued to increase in size. A proposal, at the end of the decade, to allow towns within a county to unite for the purpose of maintaining joint institutions failed to receive the support of the Assembly and Connecticut faced the de- pression with an outworn system of poor relief.108 Connecticut indicated the degree of its reluctance to assume the financial burden for those committed to institutions by arranging for the attachment of the estate of an afflicted person and to the extent that this did not cover costs to insist that these be assessed against the persons or estates of relatives as far removed as a grandfather or a grandchild.109
Private social agencies developed to breach the gap between ade- quate governmental programs and the needs of sick and defective. Over 100 such national agencies had sprung up by 1930, according to the report of the Department of Public Welfare in Connecticut, which was responsible for licensing solicitations by such groups. In the opinion of
837
THE BUSINESS MAN'S COMMUNITY
the Welfare Commissioner, most of these did not need the support re- quested. Of those applying for licenses in Connecticut, 24 were granted and an unspecified number refused. The Commissioner implied that other solicitations were made by fraudulent and unethical agencies and that prominent Connecticut citizens were carelessly lending their names to "organizations whose objects seem charitable but which are being promoted by unethical money-raisers whose chief object is the creation of jobs for themselves and others."11ยบ Even the investigations and cor- rections of conditions recorded by the Commissioner as accomplish- ments, however, documented the need for citizens' awareness and inter- est. For example, the department conferred with the management of a mental institution about the use of leather arm and foot straps to constantly restrain bed patients and reported that an attempt was then being made to have these patients dressed and about the wards each day. Again the abuse of inmates of a mental hospital by attendants was in- vestigated and resulted in the discharge of certain employees. The practice of confining 80 men in a small cage in a county jail was re- ported discontinued upon the Department's recommendation. The practice of two large general hospitals of dismissing dying patients in order to reduce the death rates on their records was investigated by the Department but "the division of authority between the superintendent and the chief of medical staff makes the fixing of responsibility diffi- cult." As the Commissioner stated "abuses that are found to exist are quietly corrected with a view of strengthening the management of the institution, at the same time protecting the unfortunate inmate."111 The citizens' groups claimed a role in broadening state services in the next decade as attention focused on urgent needs.
NOTES-CHAPTER XXXI
1 Mitchell, "Social Legislation in Connecticut," pp. 71-79; "Statement of Vote," 1920-28, 1920, 1922, 1924, 1926, 1928; Register and Manual, 1919-29.
2 The most complete account of Roraback's political career is contained in his obituary in the Hartford Courant, May 19, 1937. See, also, Bulkley S. Griffin, "Roraback of Connecticut," New Republic, Vol. 65, Nov. 26, 1930, pp. 41-43; Allen B. MacMurphy, "Revolt in Connecticut," The Nation, Vol. 131, Sept. 10, 1930, pp. 263-64; Seitz, "Connecticut, A Nation in Miniature," The Nation, Vol. 116, Apr. 18, 1923, p. 462; George Clapp, "The Kaiser of Connecticut," American Mercury, Vol. 29, June, 1933, p. 230; Raymond Baldwin, Let's Go into Politics (New York, 1932), pp. 48-49; Mitchell, "Social Legislation in Connecticut," p. 179.
838
HISTORY OF CONNECTICUT
3 Ibid., pp. 83-108, 121-28; Seitz, "Connecticut, A Nation in Miniature," The Nation, Vol. 116, Apr. 18, 1923, p. 462; Griffin, "Roraback of Connecticut," New Republic, Vol. 65, Nov. 26, 1930, pp. 41-43; MacMurphy, "Revolt in Connecticut," The Nation, Vol. 131, Sept. 10, 1930, pp. 263-64.
4 Ibid., Mitchell, "Social Legislation in Connecticut," pp. 88-89.
5 Griffin, "Roraback of Connecticut," New Republic, Vol. 65, Nov. 26, 1930, p. 41; Mitchell, "Social Legislation in Connecticut," pp. 92-95; Duane Lockard, New Eng- land State Politics (Princeton, N. J., 1959), p. 248.
6 Wilbur Cross, Connecticut Yankee, An Autobiography (New Haven, Connecticut, 1943), p. 270; Message of the Governor, 1927 (Hartford, 1927), pp. 5-8, 1929 (Hartford, 1929), pp. 3-5.
7 Inaugural Messages of the Governors, 1923, 1925, 1927, and 1929; Special Message of Governor Trumbull, 1927; Bancroft, Connecticut State Finances, 1862-1927, pp. 64-74. 8 "Government in Business," Connecticut Industry, Vol. IV, March 26, 1941, p. 5, quoted in Mitchell, "Social Legislation in Connecticut," pp. 86-87.
9 Annual Report of the President, Connecticut Chamber of Commerce (Hartford, 1923), p. 1, quoted in Mitchell, "Social Legislation in Connecticut," p. 160. 10 Ibid., p. 162.
11 Connecticut Industry, Vol. IV, Han. 26, 1941, cited in Mitchell, "Social Legislation in Connecticut," p. 171.
12 Ibid., pp. 86-105, 161-72.
13 Bancroft, Connecticut State Finances, 1862-1927, pp. 52, 56, 108.
14 Ibid., pp. 70, 87, and Appendix, pp. 8-9; Report of the Comptroller (Hartford, 1930), p. 20.
15 Mitchell, "Social Legislation in Connecticut," pp. 99-101.
16 Ibid., p. 100; Report of the Comptroller, 1930, p. 21.
17 Report of the Department of Labor on the Conditions of Wage Earners in the State, 1924 (Hartford, 1924), p. 5, and 1926 (Hartford, 1926), p. 5.
18 Ibid., 1928, pp. 12-13.
19 Ibid., pp. 3, 15.
20 Fifteenth Census of the United States, Manufactures, 1929, Vol. III, p. 89.
21 Report of the Bureau of Labor, 1922 (Hartford, 1922), p. 6, 1924 (Hartford, 1924), p. 12, 1926 (Hartford, 1926), pp. 7-11, 1928 (Hartford, 1928), p. 12, 1930 (Hartford, 1930), p. 16.
22 Fifteenth Census of the United States, Manufactures, 1929, Vol. III, pp. 92-93; Report of the Department of Labor on Wages, etc., 1926, pp. 5-6, 1928, pp. 14-15.
23 Fifteenth Census, Manufactures, 1929, Vol. III, pp. 90-91.
24 Mitchell, "Social Legislation in Connecticut," p. 53; Report of the Commission of Public Utilities, 1926 (Hartford, 1926), pp. 3-11.
25 Report of the Bureau of Labor on the Conditions of the Wage Earners, 1928, pp. 18-19, 1926, pp. 7-15; Fifteenth Census, Manufactures, Vol. III, p. 93; Mitchell, "Social Legislation in Connecticut," p. 55.
26 Ibid., Fifteenth Census, Manufactures, 1929, Vol. III, p. 17.
27 Ibid., pp. 93-95.
28 Report of the Highway Commissioner, 1922 (Hartford, 1922), p. 15, 1923 (Hartford, 1923), pp. 13-14; 1924 (Hartford, 1924), p. 11; "The Connecticut Transportation Survey; Digest of the Report of a Survey of Transportation on the State Highway System of Connecticut," Public Roads, A Journal of Highway Research, Vol. VII, No. 6, August, 1926, p. 109; "The Narrative Report of the Connecticut State High- way Planning Survey," (Conn. State Highway Dept. in cooperation with the U. S. Public Roads Administration), (mimeographed), (1942), pp. 98-103; Public Roads
839
THE BUSINESS MAN'S COMMUNITY
Administration, "Highway Statistics; Summary to 1945," (Washington, 1947), pp. 44-46, 63.
29 Ibid., p. 19, "The Connecticut Transportation Survey," Public Roads, Vol. VII, No. 6, Aug. 1926, pp. 109, 115.
30 Report of the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles (Hartford, 1930), p. 8; J. Gordon Mackay, "Connecticut Transportation Survey," Public Roads, Vol. 5, No. 1, March, 1924, p. 1; "The Connecticut Transportation System," Public Roads, Vol. 17, No. 6, p. 4115; "Highway Statistics," p. 19; Report of the Highway Commissioner, 1920 (Hartford, 1920), p. 15; Report of the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles, 1922 (Hart- ford, 1922), pp. 15-16; ibid., 1928, p. 9; Public Acts, 1921, P. 3350.
31 "Highway Statistics," p. 44.
32 Bridgeport Post, June 1, 1935.
33 Report of the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles, 1922, pp. 12-14; Report of the Highway Commissioner, 1922 (Hartford, 1922), pp. 16-21; ibid., 1930 (Hartford, 1930), p. 11; Public Acts, 1925, p. 4098; ibid., 1929, p. 4637.
34 "The Narrative Report of the Connecticut State Highway Planning Survey," p. 103.
35 Report of the Public Utilities Commissioner, 1924 (Hartford, 1924), p. 6; Report of the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles, 1930 (Hartford, 1930), pp. 9-11; ibid., 1928, p. 9.
36 Mackay, "Connecticut Transportation Survey," pp. 4-17.
37 Report of the Public Utilities Commission (Hartford, 1923), pp. 5-6.
38 Report of the Joint Standing Committee on Railroads, Connecticut General Assembly (Hartford, 1923), pp. 1231-39; Report of the Joint New England Committee to the Governors of the New England States, Rehabilitation by Cooperation, a Railroad Policy for New England (Cambridge, Mass., 1923), pp. 250-51.
39 Ibid.
40 In the period 1902-1913, the New Haven acquired control of the New England Rail- way, the Boston & Maine Railroad (which at the time controlled the Maine Central Railroad), and of the New York, Ontario, & Western; and partial control of the Rutland Railway. An agreement with the New York Central provided that the New Haven would share equally in the profits and losses of the Boston and Albany road. In addition to owning nearly all of the street and interurban railways in Rhode Island and Connecticut, the New Haven owned in Massachusetts the Worcester, Springfield, and Berkshire Street Railway systems and in New York a rapid transit line and two street railways. Also, three steamship lines were owned and were the Merchants & Miners Transportation Company, the Eastern Steamship Company, and the Hartford and New York Transportation Company. See ibid., pp. 53-54.
41 Ibid., pp. 57-73.
42 Ibid., pp. 22-52.
43 Ibid., pp. 208-34.
44 Report of the New England Transportation Committee to the Governors of the New England States (no place of publication, 1931), p. 56.
45 Ibid., pp. 52-56, 92-93.
46 Report on Conditions of Wage Earners in the State (Hartford, 1920), pp. 18-19.
47 Report of the Bureau of Labor, 1922 (Hartford, 1922), pp. 48-53; ibid., 1925 (Hartford, 1925), pp. 52-56; ibid., 1926 (Hartford, 1926), pp. 49-53; ibid., 1929 (Hartford, 1929), PP. 51-54; ibid., 1931 (Hartford, 1931), p. 67; Mitchell, "Social Legislation in Con- necticut," pp. 224-31.
48 Ibid., pp. 138-50, 174, 222.
49 John Sinclair Ewing, "The History of Bigelow-Sanford Carpet Company, 1914-52," (Unpublished doctoral thesis, Harvard University, 1953), pp. 40-42; Report of the
840
HISTORY OF CONNECTICUT
Department of Factory Inspection, 1922-31, passim; Report of the Industrial In- vestigator (Hartford, 1931), pp. 25-27; Fifteenth Census of the United States, Manu- factures, 1929, III, pp. 90-91.
50 Mitchell, "Social Legislation in Connecticut," pp. 248-50.
51 Ibid., pp. 311-13; Report of the Department of Factory Inspection (Hartford, 1922), p. 10; Public Acts, 1921 (Hartford, 1921), pp. 3168, 3190; Public Acts, 1923 (Hartford, 1923), p. 3684; Public Acts, 1925 (Hartford, 1925), pp. 3930, 3932, 3933, 3997, 4071.
52 Report of the Bureau of Labor on the Conditions of Wage Earners, 1924 (Hartford, 1924), pp. 23-27; ibid., 1925 (Hartford, 1925), pp. 68-71; Koenig, Immigrant Settle- ments, pp. 17-27; Mitchell, "Social Legislation in Connecticut," p. 67.
53 Ibid., pp. 246-47.
54 Ibid., p. 216.
55 Reports of the Department of Factory Inspection, 1922-30 (Hartford, 1922-30), passim.
56 Report of the Department of Labor on the Conditions of the Wage Earner, 1924, pp. 5-39.
57 Report of the Board of Agriculture, 1920 (Hartford, 1920), pp. 17-18; ibid., 1929 (Hart- ford, 1921), p. 19; ibid., 1925 (Hartford, 1925), p. 164; Zumwalt, "Taxation, and Other Factors Affecting Private Forestry in Connecticut," p. 11.
58 For the year ending June 30, 1930, the total value of dairy products was 22 million; of tobacco, 13; of poultry, 12; of fruit, three; of vegetables, 3.5; and of potatoes, 3.4 millions. Fifteenth Census of the United States, Agriculture, Vol. II, Pt. 1 (Washing- ton, 1932), pp. 224-38; Report of the Commissioner of Agriculture, 1927 (Hartford, 1927), p. 7; ibid., 1930 (Hartford, 1930), pp. 19-26.
59 Fifteenth Census of the United States, Population, Vol. III, Pt. 1, p. 343; ibid., Agri- culture, Vol. II, Pt. 1, p. 224; Report of the Connecticut State Board of Agriculture, 1920 (Hartford, 1920), p. 49; Report of the Department of Agriculture, 1926 (Hart- ford, 1926), pp. 7-8; Report of the Commissioner of Agriculture, 1929 (Hartford, 1929), p. 19; ibid., 1931 (Hartford, 1931), pp. 7-8.
60 Ibid., 1926 (Hartford, 1926), p. 56; ibid., 1927 (Hartford, 1927), p. 5; ibid., 1929 (Hart- ford, 1929), pp. 13-18; ibid., 1931 (Hartford, 1931), pp. 19-25; Fifteenth Census, Agri- culture, Vol. II, pp. 23-95.
61 Ibid., Manufactures, Vol. III, pp. 15, 89, 249.
62 Reports of the Bank Commissioners, 1921-29, passim.
63 Report of the Tax Commissioner, 1929 and 1930 (Hartford, 1930).
64 See above.
65 Reports of the Bank Commissioners, 1923-29, passim.
66 Report of the Bureau of Labor on the Conditions of Wage Earners, 1929 (Hartford, 1929), pp. 27-28, 67-68; ibid., 1931 (Hartford, 1931), pp. 34-36.
67 Fifteenth Census of the United States, Unemployment, Vol. I (Washington, 1931), pp. 191-94.
68 Report of the Bureau of Labor, 1931 (Hartford, 1931), p. 5.
69 Ewing, "History of the Bigelow-Sanford Carpet Company," p. 99.
70 Report of the Industrial Investigator for 1929-30 (Hartford, 1930).
71 Report of the Connecticut Unemployment Commission, December, 1932 (No place of publ., n. d.), p. 7.
72 Ibid., p. 171.
73 Cross, Connecticut Yankee, p. 220; Mitchell, "Social Legislation in Connecticut," pp. 334-40; The Nation, Vol. 131, July 2, 1930, pp. 2-3; Allen B. MacMurphy, "Revolt in Connecticut," The Nation, Vol. 131, Sept. 10, 1930, p. 263; Griffin, "Roraback of Connecticut," pp. 41-42.
74 Cross, Connecticut Yankee, pp. 220-26; Eugene A. Davidson, "A Cross for Connecticut
841
THE BUSINESS MAN'S COMMUNITY
Bossism; Portrait of a Professor Turned Politician," Outlook and Independent, Vol. 157, Jan. 14, 1931, pp. 62-64.
75 Ibid., p. 64; Cross, Connecticut Yankee, pp. 224-26.
76 Ibid.
77 See above.
78 Anti-Saloon League Yearbook, 1917 (Westerville, Ohio, no date), pp. 90-91; ibid., 1920, pp. 14, 166; Ernest A. Grant, "The Traffic before the Eighteenth Amendment," The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 163, Sept., 1932, p. 5; General Statutes, 1918.
79 Constantine Panunzio, "The Foreign Born and Prohibition," The Annals, Vol. 163, Sept., 1932, p. 154.
80 Irving Fisher, The Noble Experiment (New York, 1930), p. 224; Peter Odegar, Pressure Politics, the Story of the Anti-Saloon League (New York, 1928, p. 31; Ernest Gordon, The Wrecking of the Eighteenth Amendment (Francestown, New Hampshire, 1943), p. 1; Osterweis, New Haven, pp. 410-11.
81 Proceedings of the Convention called in accordance with the Proclamation of the Governor of the State of Connecticut, July, 1933, pp. 12-29; Mitchell, "Social Legisla- tion in Connecticut," p. 281; Inaugural Address of Charles A. Templeton (Hartford, Conn., 1923), pp. 7-8.
82 Ibid.
83 Ibid .; Message of the Governor, 1921 (Hartford, 1922), p. 18; ibid. (Hartford, 1925), P. 5.
84 Ibid., 1921, p. 18.
85 Public Acts, 1921, p. 3277; Anti-Saloon League Yearbook, 1920, p. 167; ibid., 1923, p. 109; William G. Brown, "State Cooperation on Enforcement," The Annals, Vol. 163, Sept., 1932, pp. 7-8; Fisher, The Noble Experiment, pp. 227-28.
86 Anti-Saloon League Yearbook, 1924, p. 85.
87 Ibid.
88 Ibid., 1923, p. 108; ibid., 1924, pp. 25-6, 85-6; ibid., 1925, p. 80; ibid., 1926, p. 76; Re- port of the State Police Department, 1921-22 (Hartford, 1922), p. 25; ibid., 1922-23 (Hartford, 1925), p. 6; ibid., 1923-24, p. 65; ibid., 1926-27 (Hartford, 1929), p. 76; Report on the Enforcement of the Prohibition Laws of the United States, National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement, Jan. 1931.
89 "The Prohibition Situation," Department of Research and Education, Federal Council of Churches of Christ in America, Research Bulletin No. 5; Frederick W. Brown, "Prohibition and Mental Hygiene, Effects on Mental Health, Specific Disorders," The Annals, Vol. 163, Sept., 1932, pp. 61-88; Haven Emerson, "Prohibition and Morbid- ity," in ibid., pp. 52-60; Anti-Saloon League Yearbook, 1923, pp. 108-9; ibid., 1924, pp. 85-6; Gordon, The Wrecking of the Eighteenth Amendment, p. 1. 90 Fisher, The Noble Experiment, p. 226.
91 Report on the Enforcement of the Prohibition Laws, National Commission on Law Observance; Anti-Saloon League Yearbook, 1929, pp. 16, 92; ibid., 1931, p. 49; J. H. Barnett, "College Seniors and the Liquor Problem," The Annals, Vol. 163, Sept. 1932, pp. 130-46; Public Acts, 1929, p. 4644.
92 Proceedings of the Convention Called in Accordance with the Proclamation of the Governor of the State of Connecticut, July, 1933, pp. 2-29.
93 Preston William Slosson, The Great Crusade and After, 1914-1928, A History of Ameri- can Life, Vol. 12, pp. 157-60; Osborn, "Political Progress," in Osborn, ed., History of Connecticut, II, p. 40; Carrie Chapman Catt and Nettie Rogers Schuler, Women Suffrage and Politics (New York, 1926), pp. 391-401.
94 Women were admitted to Wesleyan in 1872, to Hartford Theological Seminary in
842
HISTORY OF CONNECTICUT
1889, to Storrs in 1893, and to the Yale Graduate School in 1892. Phoebe A. Hanaford was named Chaplain of the House and Senate in 1870 and Mary Hall was admitted to the bar in 1882. See Osborn, "Political Progress," in Osborn, ed., History of Con- necticut, II, pp. 36-40; Ida H. Harper, History of the Woman Suffrage Movement (New York, 1922) V, pp. 68-70, VI, pp. 72-73; Jackson, Baldwin, pp. 171-72.
95 Ibid .; Report on the Conditions of the Wage Earner in the State, 1929 (Hartford, 1929), pp. 40-42, 62.
96 Ibid., pp. 40-43.
97 Ibid., p. 40; ibid., 1931, p. 46.
98 Mitchell, "Social Legislation in Connecticut," p. 202.
99 Public Acts, 1919, p. 2844; ibid., 1925, PP. 3930, 3932, 3933, 3997.
101 Historical Files, Planned Parenthood League of Connecticut, New Haven; Hartford Courant, Feb. 12, 1923.
102 Ibid., Historical Files, Planned Parenthood League of Connecticut, New Haven.
103 Report on the Condition of the Wage Earner in the State, 1925 (Hartford, 1925), pp. 75-8; ibid., 1929, pp. 83-5; ibid., 1926 (Hartford, 1926), pp. 55-58.
104 Report of the State Board of Fisheries and Game, 1926 (Hartford, 1926), pp. 7-8; ibid., 1928 (Hartford, 1928), p. 11; ibid., 1930, p. 39; Report of the Park and Forest Com- mission, 1930 (Hartford, 1930), pp. 22-32; Report on Forests and Wildlife, 1930 (Hartford, 1930), pp. 7-11.
105 Report on the Condition of the Wage Earner, 1929 (Hartford, 1929), p. 24.
106 Capen, "The History of Connecticut Institutions," pp. 427-29, 440-51.
107 Report of the State Department of Public Welfare, 1931 (Hartford, 1931), pp. 9-13.
108 Ibid., p. 14; Capen, "History of Connecticut Institutions," pp. 430-39.
109 Ibid., p. 444.
110 Report of the Department of Welfare, 1931, pp. 16-18.
Chapter XXXII The New Deal in Connecticut
D URING the first fifteen months of the depression, the respon- sibility for providing relief continued to remain with the towns. Despite the mounting problems, made more severe by the growing numbers of the unemployed and the mobile and transient nature of the population, the towns chose to maintain their historic independence.1 "Nothing would have been gained ... ," it was held, "by a departure from a principle deep-rooted in habits of past genera- tions."2 Connecticut shared the hope of the rest of the country that the depression was temporary and relied upon the usual agencies to provide relief. New Haven registered its unemployed in the Fall of 1930, Water- bury established a Mutual Aid Unemployment Fund to which em- ployees contributed a share of their wages to care for the unemployed, and other cities and towns increased their expenditures for direct re- lief. The amount expended for outdoor relief had increased from $878,430 in 1929 to $1,272,220 by 1930, 70 percent of which was spent by the 26 most urban towns.3 By the end of the year, there were 36 communities which had established special commissions for the relief of the unemployed.4
"A crisis justified unusual action," asserted Cross in his inaugural address and he called for Connecticut to depart "from the traditional functions of government" and to provide the monies and the authority necessary to alleviate the distress. He asked for the work of the Commit- tee on Unemployment, an emergency appropriation for the Depart- ment of Parks and Forests "to provide further winter work for the un- employed,"-funds for a comprehensive building program to begin at once, and $31,000,000 for the Highway Department to be used for the
844
HISTORY OF CONNECTICUT
building of the Merritt Boulevard in Fairfield and for the improvement of the rural roads. Under a suspension of the rules, the Assembly voted an emergency appropriation of $10,000 for a study of the employment situation and $100,000 for the parks and forests. In addition, it appro- priated $3,000,000 for the improvement of the rural roads, $1,000,000 to forward the work on the "Merritt Boulevard," and authorized the use of a treasury surplus of about $8,000,000 for a public buildings pro- gram. It refused to vote $100,000 for continuing the work in the parks and forests during the next winter on the grounds that such action would have a bad psychological effect upon the State because of the in- ference that "in the opinion of the Legislature the industrial depres- sion might last another year."" The Connecticut Unemployment Com- mission was the successor to the Connecticut State Emergency Committee on Unemployment and was appointed by Governor Trum- bull in consultation with Cross in December, 1930 to study the unem- ployment in the state.6
An effort was made to spread available work to tide laborers over and, hopefully, to enable industry to hold its labor supply until full production was resumed. The Manufacturers' Association of Hartford reported in 1931 that 81 factories employing 36,250 persons had 8,873 persons on the payroll in excess of their production demands. As stocks were inevitably built up in this process and had to be disposed of below market prices, the realities of the depression bore in on the conscious- ness of Connecticut industry. The plan, no doubt, was of benefit to individuals in the early months of the depression, but it did not increase the total amount of work, and frequently the work was spread to the extent that it was necessary for laborers to seek relief to supplement their reduced wage." The depressed industrial condition of the state was a reality, not an illusion. The Hartford Courant quoted the Depart- ment of Commerce to the effect that the value of the total product of the state in 1932 was only slightly more than 70 percent of its value in 1929. More than 1000 firms went into bankruptcy in 1932 with liabil- ities of more than twice their assets. New businesses, with a capitaliza- tion of $50,000,000 offset the loss to some extent, and some industries avoided liquidation through loans from the Reconstruction Finance Corporation. The bankruptcies cut deeply into the confidence of the
845
THE NEW DEAL IN CONNECTICUT
state and any hope that industry was experiencing only a temporary slump was dispelled.8
The continued failures of banks further emphasized the severity of the depression, and the closing of the savings accounts emphasized
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.