V.

SAVINGS AND EXPENDITURE.

The question of the savings of Seventh Ward domestics would naturally be discussed here. Table XII shows the facts upon this point. It is based upon the records of those who have been personally interviewed. In this table the “societies” referred to are either sick benefit, death benefit, or insurance societies, which are all very popular with the colored people. Their tendency to use this method of saving rather than to deposit in the bank is shown in many ways. They frequently express their distrust of banks and banking. One girl sums up her philosophy by saying, “I save in my pocket. I'm a very poor spender, but I bank a little too, only the banks are so shaky I'm afraid of them. A friend of mine lost 600 in the Keystone and I lost 100 and came near putting in 50.00 just the day before the bank broke. Yes, I'm afraid of banks.” A waiter working on Spruce near Broad says, “I've quit banking. I lost 300 in the Keystone.” This distrust of banks is traced by excellently qualified judges as far back as the Freedman's Bank trouble, and it seems probable that that first wave of distrust has been followed by a second one, and that to the Philadelphia colored people the failure of the Keystone stands for the same thing nearer home.

Table XII shows proportion of colored domestics who are saving and who, therefore, not only are not a burden to the community, but are adding something to the sum total of its power. It shows also the methods of saving employed.

It will be noticed that the men do more banking in proportion than the women do, and less saving “at home” or by means of the benefit societies. Three men use the bank where one woman does, while three women save at home to one man who does. It is also noticeable that the percentages of those who do not save at all are about equal in both columns of Table XII.

TABLE XII.

SAVINGS OF COLORED DOMESTICS IN PHILADELPHIA.

(By Sex and by Method of Saving.)

In contrast with this 15 per cent which saves nothing, may be mentioned a few cases which seem particularly noteworthy as examples of unusual thrift:

1. The case of a young chore-man twenty years old, who said, “No, he wasn't saving any thing to speak of.” And it would have passed at that, had not his employer said, “Why, Henry, you know you bring me 2.00 every month to save for you.” And it came out that from the 14.00 he earned monthly he was regularly sending 5.00 each month to his aged mother and saving 2.00. The month before his report was taken he had sent 10.00 to his mother because she had had a destructive fire at home and needed new articles.

2. The case of a man cook thirty-one years old, who has been in his present situation over seven years, and earns 8.00 weekly. From this amount he has supported his family and built a home which he now owns. He also has a good bank account which, he says, his wife doesn't know about. He's “going to surprise her with it when he gets a good bit; or, if he dies she will have something to keep her.” This man also has membership in two benefit societies.

3. The case of a young woman twenty-nine years of age, who receives 4.00 a week for cooking. She sends 10.00 a month to her mother who is a consumptive invalid and also “puts by” 2.00 every month.

4. A chambermaid, a widow fifty-three years old, who says, “I've got a little home in Virginia I bought and paid for myself.” She earns 3.00 a week. She also has a bank account and belongs to a sick benefit society.

5. The case of a young woman of twenty-two years who “banks half she earns every week.” She earns 3.50 weekly and saves 91.00 a year from her total yearly earnings, 182.00.

6. The case of a butler earning 35.00 a month, who owns five lots in Richmond, two more in New Jersey and one in Essington.

7. Another butler forty years old, who has been twenty-three years in the same family. He is paid 40.00 a month. He owns a Maryland stock farm which his uncle manages for him, several lots of land in south Philadelphia, has a term policy on which he pays 93.00 yearly and has membership in a sick benefit which insures him 10.00 a week in case of illness.

Perhaps the most popular way of saving among the colored servants of Philadelphia is now by means of the “society.” Of all those reporting on savings 48.4 per cent of the men and 52.7 per cent of the women are saving in these societies. Whether this per cent of patronage of societies by domestic servants is greater or less than that for the whole community, very nearly two-thirds of all the women who save at all do so through one or more societies while the greater part of the other one-third do their saving at home, “in their pockets.”

These societies, when they are bona fide insurance companies, often furnish fair investments to their contributors. A policy drawing a fee of 1.30 monthly when paid up entitles its holder to 10.00 a week in case of sickness. A policy drawing eighty cents a month entitles its holder to 5.00 a week sick benefit. These represent the sick benefit rates paid by two of the best and most reliable societies. The great value of such companies to such individuals as are subject to frequent illness and have no home for a refuge is clear at a glance. But it often happens that colored people who have iron constitutions will go into these societies and contribute year after year, reaping no benefit because they are never ill, and loath to stop paying their fees and begin to deposit in the bank for fear they should be ill. The fact that this sort of membership in sick benefits is a very bad investment was pointed out to a certain waiter on Pine street who had paid 30.00 a year for ten years into his two societies, but had never drawn a cent from either because he had never been sick. The fact that, had he banked his money he would have had now in hand the sum of 300, could not be denied, but this certainty was not sufficient to stifle the feeling that if he dropped the societies he “would lose all he had put in” and the question arising, “suppose I should be sick?” which was not to be satisfactorily answered by statements of probabilities. The same thing, grown to greater proportions, is seen in the case of one quite aged butler, who for sixteen years has held policies in seven societies and has never drawn, except when his wife died. Many instances might be cited of domestics who have belonged to two or more societies for six years or more and have never drawn though their policies were paid up. Several instances were encountered of domestics who were saving in societies and also in the bank, and who when they were sick drew all their money out of the bank and “never thought of the society” and so did not draw at all, but exhausted their bank accounts and were then, presumably, helped by friends. One woman, who had been insured in one society for seventeen years and also held a sick benefit, exhausted her whole bank account and only drew on the society for two weeks (although she was ill some months) because she “didn't think of it” till she had spent all the money she had in the bank. All which goes to show how difficult it is for a people long unused to any financial responsibility to adjust their minds to it and how easy a matter it is for unscrupulous persons or societies to take advantage of their simplicity.

Assistance Given by Domestic Servants.—In connection with wages and savings may be considered the matter of assistance to dependents. Many colored domestics in Philadelphia either wholly support or very materially help toward the support of parents or other members of the family. Even, in many cases, taking entire care of more distant relatives, outside the immediate home circle.

The answers to Question 21 of the schedule (“Who besides yourself is supported by your wages?”) were separated into four grades : (1) those wholly supporting one or both parents; (2), those helping parents; (3), those wholly supporting others than parents ; (4), those helping, but not wholly supporting, others than parents.

In this matter, the men generally do less proportionately than the women. Of 187 men reporting on this point, 13, that is 7 per cent, are of the first class, who furnish from their earnings the whole support of one or both parents ; 40 (or 21.4 per cent) are of the second class, and are helping one or both parents; 25 (or 13.4 per cent), are of the third class, and are supporting some other member of the family, generally some younger brother or sister ; while 16 (or 8.6 per cent) are of the fourth class, and are helping, though not wholly supporting, some other member of the family; 8 (or 4.3 per cent) are doing more than one of these things; e. g., one young fellow of twenty years who earns only 3.00 a week, is responsible for the support of his father's entire family, seven in number, as the father drinks and can not be depended upon. One waiter, twenty-eight years old, receives 20.00 a month and is helping his own father and mother and both his wife's parents also. His wife too is earning, so what it practically amounts to is that the two young people are between them taking care of the four old people. The facts gathered in the Seventh Ward show 50.3 per cent of the men in domestic service are contributing toward the support of parents or others while 49.7 per cent have no one but themselves to look out for. These facts and similar ones for colored women domestics are here tabulated, 187 men in all reported on this subject and 420 women.

Table XIII presents approximately the actual condition in regard to responsibilities assumed for the help or support of parents and others. Whether the following table, which will show the proportion of wages thus given, is equally reliable, is an open question. It is difficult to estimate at a moment's notice what one spends or gives for any one object. To determine with any degree of accuracy the amount one spends in a year for clothing is not always an easy thing to do. So the answers given must involve a large amount of involuntary misstatement. The following table, therefore, may be taken with allowances. It gives the result of many averages thus hastily struck by the domestics interviewed, and shows the number and percentage of colored servants who regularly give one-half, more than one-half or less than one-half their wages toward the support of those dependent on them.

TABLE XIII.

NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF COLORED DOMESTIC SERVANTS IN PHILADELPHIA HAVING PARENTS OR OTHERS DEPENDENT ON THEM.

(607 Cases.)

TABLE XIV.

NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE OF COLORED DOMESTIC SERVANTS OF PHILADELPHIA SUPPORTING OTHERS, BY SEX AND PROPORTION OF WAGES GIVEN.

Many who do help their parents and others report that they “can not estimate how much it takes.” Fifteen, however, who give no estimate as to proportion of wages given, say very plainly that it “takes all I make,” or, it “takes everything but eno’ to clothe me.” One married man of forty is supporting his “sister's little girl,” who, he says, is “like an adopted child to us. Her father and mother are living but they have three or four besides her to support.” This man earns thirty dollars a month, on which he supports his own family and his sister's little girl, and is also saving in the bank and has a one-dollar fee in a sick benefit society.

One young “waiter-man,” earning twenty-five dollars a month, is “making a home for his mother” and helping three sisters besides. But none of these cases appear in Table XIV, since none of them could give any kind of an estimate of the proportion of earnings given. That considerable was given in each of these cases, however, is obvious, and many similar instances might be cited. It is almost invariably true of bell boys and errand boys and girls that they take their entire earnings home to their parents to swell the general store. One young bell boy said that he “took all he earned home to his mother except twenty-five cents he kept himself and she saved that for him.”

Summary.—A large part of the earnings of the colored domestics of the ward are thus seen to go towards the support of parents and dependents. This generosity towards their own will be attested, it is believed, by everyone who has had any considerable knowledge of the colored people. When one remembers that the same thing is noticeably true of the Jews, the thought naturally occurs that it is perhaps an instinct of self-preservation, which reveals itself among oppressed races.

Again, that with a majority of Negroes, some part of their earnings are steadily “put by for a nest egg” —to use one of their own quaint expressions—will doubtless be similarly attested. There is of course much extravagance among Negroes. Much is doubtless spent for amusement, much certainly goes for finery. These outlays are comparatively large with some among the colored domestics of Philadelphia, although the facts which came to the knowledge of the investigator during these nine months in Philadelphia seemed to indicate that, speaking broadly, the colored domestics of that city are a thrifty class of people.