Library Collections: Document: Full Text

In 1893, Fernald (p. 220) stated that capital expenditures per bed should be no more than $400. By 1916, Byers (p. 227) asserted flatly: "The state that expends more than $300.00 per bed for the buildings and equipment of a colony from one to three hundred inmates, spends too much."

Stripping the retardate's environment of amenities and comforts so as to cut costs was accompanied by tortuous rationalizations: "As a rule, mental defectives are descended from the poorer classes, and for generations their people have lived in homes having few conveniences, To expect them to be content in a great city institution with its up-to-date furnishings and equipment, and its strict routine, is unreasonable. They find little comfort in steam heat and polished floors; and the glare of electric lights too often adds to their restlessness. It is useless to hope that they will ever be happy as it is possible for them to be if we do not gratify their love for open spaces or provide for them the opportunity to live the simple out-of-door life under circumstances which will enable them not only to keep busy but to enjoy the fruits of their labor" (Mastin, 1916, p. 245). A statement uncomfortably close to suggesting warehousing of retardates was attributed to Fernald by Kirkbride (1916, p. 253): "It is obvious that if large numbers of the feeble-minded are to be cared for the cost of housing them must be reduced to a point where it cannot be criticize by the business man and the tax-payer." "The ornamental or decorative features of the old-time institution will have to go, if this is to be accomplished." "We have only begun to utilize the beautiful, well-proportioned commerical type of buildings, such as the General Electric Co., the Bridgeport Arms Co., etc. are building."

In the early days, costs at Elwyn in Pennsylvania had been $350; by about 1890, they were down to about $175 (Kerlin, 1890), and to $152 in 1893 (see Appendix 1) . Wilbur estimated that average maintenance costs were about $200 in 1888 (p. 108). Powell (1897, p. 296) thought that cost could be reduced to about $150 or even $125. Almost in desperation, Cornell (1915, p. 334) exclaimed: "Until we get the per capita cost of the high grade feeble-minded down less than $100 per year there will be objection to their segregation on the ground of expense."

Although attempts to become self-supporting failed, the relative true expenditures hit a low during the indictment period, not to be equalled even during the depth of the depression (see Appendix 1) . As costs went down (at least in relation to the value of the dollar), admissions went up. Successively larger institutions were rationalized as being of ideal size, and as size grew, the rationalizers moved on from one rationale to the next. "One thousand inmates should, in my opinion, be the maximum number under one management" (Fish, 1892, p. 163). Knowing what was to come, we shudder as a small voice of caution is brushed aside: "Mr. Garret has referred to the fact that, in the establishment of an institution for a thousand of the feeble-minded, the identity of the individual child may be lost sight of. I think there is possibly some ground for that fear; but in our institution, which is planned to care for a thousand eventually, we do not find any lack of the same personal care and interest on the part of caretakers and attendants. Their enthusiasm and interest are just as great as in the beginning of the work. I do not anticipate any evil results in extension of the work on the line suggested" (Fish, 1892, p. 349).

H.M. Green (1884) and Wilmarth (1900) suggested that institutions not exceed 1,000. Murdoch (1909) expressed the hope that his institution would remain at 1,340, but by 1913 he had capitulated, calling for 2,000-3,000. R. A. Green (1927) called an institution for 1,000-1,500 "ideal." Sprattling (1903, p. 261) was planning an insti- -sic- for 1,800. Hart (1896, p. 488) of Minnesota said: "Our buildings are excellent; but they sadly need enlargement. We could have, I think, 2,000. The demand is convincing and unanswerable." "I do not believe that the size of an institution should be so limited. It seems to me that two or three thousand can be cared for in one institution when the possibilities of grading and grouping are so great. Why should we not have towns of them? If the superintendent is an organizer, it is a benefit to the state to take care of three thousand in one institution. I would not put any limit to the number that a man can properly handle" (Smith, 1913, pp. 39-40). Finally, the cork was pulled together: Polk (Pa.), which had been built to relieve crowding at Elwyn, and which had had 1,200 residents in 1906 (Murdoch, 1906), had grown to 2,300 residents, 84 percent overcrowding, and a waiting list of 500 by 1928 (Watkins, 1928); Columbus (Ohio) had 2,430, with construction underway for 240 more, and funds appropriated for yet another 700. Superintendent Emerick threw up his hands; much like Fernald (1893), he said, in his presidential address to what is now the American Association on Mental Deficiency: "It seems easier to get the legislature to appropriate funds for more buildings, for the institutions we already have, than it does to get new institutions, but as the institution at Columbus is now so large that the Superintendent cannot keep in touch with the inmates, it might just as well have a population of 10,000 as 3,000" (Emerich, l917b, p. 74; see also Emerick, 1917a).