Thank you for visiting SNEWPapers!
Sign up free
Letter to Editor
October 29, 1885
Wichita Daily Eagle
Wichita, Sedgwick County, Kansas
What is this article about?
In an 1885 letter to the Eagle, John Kelly from Goddard supports Sedgwick County's proposition to issue $10,000 bonds for a poor farm, arguing it will economically benefit taxpayers by providing efficient care for the poor, utilizing inmate labor, and increasing in value over time.
Clipping
OCR Quality
95%
Excellent
Full Text
A COUNTY FARM.
GODDARD, Oct. 24, 1885.
To the Editor of the Eagle
I observe in the call made by our commissioners for an election that they also submit a proposition to vote $10,000 bonds for the purchase of a "Poor Farm" for the county. This is another step in the right direction, and every tax payer in the county should most heartily support the measure.
I know it is argued by some that you can hire the board of the poor cheaper than the county can keep them. If this is true, why not do away entirely with house-keeping and all hands go to the hotels and boarding houses.
But every intelligent person knows full well that it is not true, unless when the number of inmates is very small, which is not at all likely in a great county. and city like ours. I make this proposition for the consideration of tax payers. That ten thousand dollars expended judiciously in one hundred and sixty acres of land located near the geographical center of the county with comfortable building. necessary implements. stock &c. With a No. 1. superintendent, who is both honorable and just, will not only keep the poor comfortable and well, but in a few years be a source of revenue to the county.
Then at our usual rate of increase in values, at the end of ten years the farm is worth at least double what it cost.
It should, and doubtless will be, the best improved farm in the county. from the fact that scarcely one in ten that is allowed to stay there, but what can do some light work in gardens, orchard, vineyard, milking, churning, etc., etc., all producing wealth, if managed properly. Then the county is keeping her family at home when she can see to them that are worthy, and expose those who are not.
There is not a tax payer in the county who has carefully looked through our county building just finished, but who can say with a clear conscience to the commissioners and county officials, "Well done." And you will remember the howl set up against that proposition, and in consequence, its defeat. But now Sedgewick county can show the best, cheapest, most convenient and comfortable court house in the state
The same will hold good in this county poor farm It is a matter of necessity that the county must have or suffer loss from year to year, until more money is paid out for board of poor than the farm will cost. Then you have nothing to show for your outlay but an empty treasury.
JOHN KELLY.
GODDARD, Oct. 24, 1885.
To the Editor of the Eagle
I observe in the call made by our commissioners for an election that they also submit a proposition to vote $10,000 bonds for the purchase of a "Poor Farm" for the county. This is another step in the right direction, and every tax payer in the county should most heartily support the measure.
I know it is argued by some that you can hire the board of the poor cheaper than the county can keep them. If this is true, why not do away entirely with house-keeping and all hands go to the hotels and boarding houses.
But every intelligent person knows full well that it is not true, unless when the number of inmates is very small, which is not at all likely in a great county. and city like ours. I make this proposition for the consideration of tax payers. That ten thousand dollars expended judiciously in one hundred and sixty acres of land located near the geographical center of the county with comfortable building. necessary implements. stock &c. With a No. 1. superintendent, who is both honorable and just, will not only keep the poor comfortable and well, but in a few years be a source of revenue to the county.
Then at our usual rate of increase in values, at the end of ten years the farm is worth at least double what it cost.
It should, and doubtless will be, the best improved farm in the county. from the fact that scarcely one in ten that is allowed to stay there, but what can do some light work in gardens, orchard, vineyard, milking, churning, etc., etc., all producing wealth, if managed properly. Then the county is keeping her family at home when she can see to them that are worthy, and expose those who are not.
There is not a tax payer in the county who has carefully looked through our county building just finished, but who can say with a clear conscience to the commissioners and county officials, "Well done." And you will remember the howl set up against that proposition, and in consequence, its defeat. But now Sedgewick county can show the best, cheapest, most convenient and comfortable court house in the state
The same will hold good in this county poor farm It is a matter of necessity that the county must have or suffer loss from year to year, until more money is paid out for board of poor than the farm will cost. Then you have nothing to show for your outlay but an empty treasury.
JOHN KELLY.
What sub-type of article is it?
Persuasive
Informative
Ethical Moral
What themes does it cover?
Social Issues
Economic Policy
What keywords are associated?
Poor Farm
County Bonds
Tax Payers
Sedgwick County
Inmate Labor
Economic Benefits
What entities or persons were involved?
John Kelly
To The Editor Of The Eagle
Letter to Editor Details
Author
John Kelly
Recipient
To The Editor Of The Eagle
Main Argument
the county should issue $10,000 bonds to purchase a poor farm, as it will be more economical than boarding the poor elsewhere, provide comfortable care, generate revenue through labor and appreciation, and distinguish worthy from unworthy recipients.
Notable Details
Compares Poor Boarding To Sending Everyone To Hotels
Projects Farm Value Doubling In Ten Years
References Successful County Courthouse Despite Initial Opposition