The Battle For Christmas Part 5

Still, the distinction between presents and charity was new, and it should not be surprising that it required a good deal of reinforcement. During the middle decades of the nineteenth century, the press, the economic elite, and even those who were most deeply concerned with helping the poor, all pressed the notion that organized charities provided the most appropriate means of a.s.sisting the poor.

Horace Greeley, for example, reminded his New York Tribune New York Tribune readers in 1843 that "enough was expended on this festival uselessly ... which would, if rightfully appropriated, have set in operation the means of ultimately banis.h.i.+ng Pauperism and its attendant miseries from the land." readers in 1843 that "enough was expended on this festival uselessly ... which would, if rightfully appropriated, have set in operation the means of ultimately banis.h.i.+ng Pauperism and its attendant miseries from the land."7 Rightfully appropriated Rightfully appropriated was the operative phrase here: Money should be offered to the poor through organized charities rather than through what was now being universally attacked with a dismissive phrase: "indiscriminate giving." Greeley was especially critical of what had become the dominant form of face-to-face charity-begging on the streets. One was the operative phrase here: Money should be offered to the poor through organized charities rather than through what was now being universally attacked with a dismissive phrase: "indiscriminate giving." Greeley was especially critical of what had become the dominant form of face-to-face charity-begging on the streets. One Tribune Tribune Christmas editorial opened with the blunt heading " Christmas editorial opened with the blunt heading "DO NOT GIVE TO STREET BEGGARS," and went on to dismiss that practice in no uncertain terms: "Whenever you see one of these City pests approaching, b.u.t.ton up both pockets...."8 Another editorial (this one from a depression year) explained that "the evil of street-begging" would inevitably increase as a result of the hardness of the times. "Impostors will abound more than ever," for example. But b.u.t.toning up one's pockets was psychologically difficult: "he who rejects a pet.i.tion for the needs of a night's lodging or a meal may have his own warm rest disturbed by the reasonable apprehension that fearful exposure and distress have resulted from his prudence." Another editorial (this one from a depression year) explained that "the evil of street-begging" would inevitably increase as a result of the hardness of the times. "Impostors will abound more than ever," for example. But b.u.t.toning up one's pockets was psychologically difficult: "he who rejects a pet.i.tion for the needs of a night's lodging or a meal may have his own warm rest disturbed by the reasonable apprehension that fearful exposure and distress have resulted from his prudence."9 On this occasion the Tribune Tribune handed out meal tickets instead of cash to beggars. But making contributions to organized charity offered a more effective solution. It would obviate the need for face-to-face encounters along with the danger of fraud, and it would be far more efficient. The handed out meal tickets instead of cash to beggars. But making contributions to organized charity offered a more effective solution. It would obviate the need for face-to-face encounters along with the danger of fraud, and it would be far more efficient. The Tribune Tribune pleaded with its readers to send their donations to one of the charity organizations, because "that way of helping the poor" might not be perfect, but "it is more effectual and humane than any other yet adopted." pleaded with its readers to send their donations to one of the charity organizations, because "that way of helping the poor" might not be perfect, but "it is more effectual and humane than any other yet adopted."10 Or, as the same paper put it in still another Christmas editorial: "Let us give not merely as cases of dest.i.tution may present themselves, but through the regularly organized channels for the dispensation of social charity wherewith our own and most other cities are blessed...." Or, as the same paper put it in still another Christmas editorial: "Let us give not merely as cases of dest.i.tution may present themselves, but through the regularly organized channels for the dispensation of social charity wherewith our own and most other cities are blessed...."11 If the middle-cla.s.s press criticized "indiscriminate giving," it also generally attacked another alternative to private charities: governmental support for the poor through programs of public a.s.sistance or public works. Many workingmen themselves called for just such programs, especially during years of severe depression-the kind of devastating depression that regularly shook the new capitalist economy. When the times were hard, many employers simply laid their workers off-and there was no unemployment insurance to see them through. In one depression year, 1854, a large group of unemployed New York workers held a meeting on Christmas Day, forming themselves as the "Mechanics' and Working-men's Aid a.s.sociation." The a.s.sembled workers pa.s.sed a resolution that demanded that tenants "shall not be turned out of their homes by avaricious landlords" and called for what amounted to a rent strike by appointing a "vigilant committee" to oversee the response. The city had made a special $10,000 appropriation for the poor, and the workers demanded that some of those funds be given directly to the a.s.sociation itself. One speaker denounced the munic.i.p.al soup kitchens as "haughty and contemptuous" (and added that they served watery soup). Another speaker called for public-works programs instead of soup kitchens. A third demanded that the city itself subsidize up to 50 percent of rent payments for the unemployed.12 The newly established New York Times New York Times responded to the situation by acknowledging that "these were hard times" and expressing special sympathy for the fact that "men are poor this winter who were never poor before." (This was as much as to say that such men were more worthy of sympathy than those who had always been poor.) In pa.s.sing, the responded to the situation by acknowledging that "these were hard times" and expressing special sympathy for the fact that "men are poor this winter who were never poor before." (This was as much as to say that such men were more worthy of sympathy than those who had always been poor.) In pa.s.sing, the Times Times even proposed paternalist gestures on the part of those employers who could afford it: "retaining their workmen, though they are not profitable." But the editorial reserved the bulk of its s.p.a.ce to stress the superiority of giving through such established inst.i.tutions as the churches and the newly formed Children's Aid Society. This was presented in the name of simple efficiency. Money contributed to such organizations "will 'find' where the misery is." Such inst.i.tutions have well-established "channels" and employ "effectual and discriminating" techniques; they have at their disposal well-tooled "machinery" to make sure that each individual dollar "reaches tomorrow the very family that is famis.h.i.+ng to-day for lack of it." Implicitly, the paper argued that any contribution not mediated by those organizations was nothing but a form of indiscriminate giving. "If a man has money, and does not know how he can make the most of it, let him step into the offices of any of those excellent inst.i.tutions, in whose hands, if you place a dollar, you do what, individually, you could not make five dollars do." even proposed paternalist gestures on the part of those employers who could afford it: "retaining their workmen, though they are not profitable." But the editorial reserved the bulk of its s.p.a.ce to stress the superiority of giving through such established inst.i.tutions as the churches and the newly formed Children's Aid Society. This was presented in the name of simple efficiency. Money contributed to such organizations "will 'find' where the misery is." Such inst.i.tutions have well-established "channels" and employ "effectual and discriminating" techniques; they have at their disposal well-tooled "machinery" to make sure that each individual dollar "reaches tomorrow the very family that is famis.h.i.+ng to-day for lack of it." Implicitly, the paper argued that any contribution not mediated by those organizations was nothing but a form of indiscriminate giving. "If a man has money, and does not know how he can make the most of it, let him step into the offices of any of those excellent inst.i.tutions, in whose hands, if you place a dollar, you do what, individually, you could not make five dollars do."13 A decade later, the same newspaper actually argued that this kind of charity was little more than a continuation of the long-standing tradition of Christmas generosity on the part of the British gentry and n.o.bility. In the previous century, the argument went, "[n]o hungry faces were allowed to be seen around the barons hall, or the monk's open doors, or the citizens gate." That tradition was being maintained into the present with hardly a hitch: "Modern times have continued this pleasant custom of benefaction. Yesterday, we doubt not, the faces of thousands of the poor were made happy with the good fare provided by the generosity of the charitable.... The bounty of others ... heaped the tables of the outcast with good things." But in fact it was only to the work of charitable inst.i.tutions that the paper was referring-to "the missions, the industrial schools, the lodging-houses for homeless boys and girls, [and] the almshouses and asylums and refuges." And the editorial concluded by giving its readers the now-standard advice: Those good-hearted individuals "who fear to do as much injury as good by their indiscriminate charities, should seek out the great public almoners, our benevolent societies, who have reduced charity almost to a science, and probably seldom err on the side of too much generosity."14 As matters grew worse during the following decades, and workers responded by attempting to unionize, the press became even more insistent that private benevolence was far superior to either indiscriminate giving or public a.s.sistance. At Christmas in 1893 several local unions were out on strike. But the New York Times New York Times responded with a warning that it acknowledged might seem "strange" to its readers: "Strange as it may sound, there is danger of overdoing the charitable relief business, or at least of misdoing it, if it is not put under concentrated, intelligent, and judicious direction." responded with a warning that it acknowledged might seem "strange" to its readers: "Strange as it may sound, there is danger of overdoing the charitable relief business, or at least of misdoing it, if it is not put under concentrated, intelligent, and judicious direction."

But there is need of great discretion in organizing and directing agencies for the relief of the poor in times like these. More than ever is it important that this work should be done intelligently and judiciously. Lavish and indiscriminate giving to applicants, however vouched for, will result in waste.... Worst of all, it will encourage and embolden beggary and attract worthless vagrants from all quarters.

The editorial decried the use of public moneys to ease the situation, insisting that "organized arrangements for distributing this superfluity among the needy through private benevolence are much better than efforts to use public authority and public funds for the relief of the poor or the unemployed."15 What the editorial did not mention, though it would have been clear to any reader who also followed the labor columns of the same paper, was that not one of the established charitable organizations was willing to provide a.s.sistance to workers who were out on strike. What the editorial did not mention, though it would have been clear to any reader who also followed the labor columns of the same paper, was that not one of the established charitable organizations was willing to provide a.s.sistance to workers who were out on strike.16 CHARLES L LORING B BRACE, NEWSBOYS, AND THE C CHILDREN'S A AID S SOCIETY As late as the early 1850s, the major charitable inst.i.tutions in cities like New York were of two sorts: either munic.i.p.al agencies (such as the almshouse and the workhouse for adults, and the city nursery for children) or arms of the city's churches, which established "missions" to the urban poor (there were seventy-six of these missions operating in 1865). These inst.i.tutions did not disappear, but during the 1850s they were supplemented by a new set of private philanthropic organizations dedicated exclusively to serving impoverished groups. At the same time, several church missions became quasi-autonomous operations. One of the first and most famous of these was the Five Points Mission, founded in 1852 by the Ladies' Home Missionary Society, a Methodist group, and located in one of the city's most blighted and dangerous areas (the Five Points was the site of a notorious gang war in 1857). Together with a similar agency, the Five Points House of Industry, founded in 1853, these missions offered charitable relief to neighborhood families and provided children with cla.s.ses that taught them industrial or domestic skills.17 Increasingly, these organizations came to focus their energies on a single group within the neighborhood they served: impoverished children impoverished children. And very soon, organizations began to emerge that were devoted exclusively to children. The most effective (and aggressive) of these agencies-and probably, within a decade or two, the single largest and best-known charitable organization in the United States-was the Children's Aid Society, established in 1853 under the guiding influence of the young reformer Charles Loring Brace.

Brace came to the C.A.S. from the Five Points Mission, where he had worked in 1852, during the year that followed his visit to Germany. It was the end point of an eight-year period that Brace spent in seeking a clear vocation for himself. Born in 1826 in Litchfield, Connecticut, of old New England stock (his father later became princ.i.p.al of the Hartford Female Seminary, where Catharine and Harriet Beecher served as teachers), Brace graduated from Yale in 1846 and returned there a year later to study theology. Ambitious to make his way in a more cosmopolitan setting, he also studied at the Union Theological Seminary in New York. But he began to harbor sympathies for abolitionists and other reformers (including the European radicals who were leading the revolutionary movements of 1848). Late in 1849 Brace visited New York's munic.i.p.al facilities on Blackwells Island, where he preached to the poor in the almshouse and met with prisoners and ill prost.i.tutes. It was like a conversion experience: "I never had my whole nature so stirred up within me," he reported, "as at what met my eyes in those hospital wards."18 Early the next year Brace embarked on the European visit that brought him to Berlin in November, ostensibly to continue his theological studies. (It was in Berlin, a month after his arrival, that he witnessed the German Christmas celebration he would later write about.) But his sympathy for the oppressed was very much alive, and while touring Hungary in the spring of 1851 he was actually imprisoned for a month on charges of aiding the Hungarian nationalist revolutionaries led by Lajos Kossuth. Brace returned to New York after being released (through the efforts of the U.S. minister) and wrote a book about his experiences. But now he had finally determined what he wished to do with his life: He would dedicate himself to working for the poor. In that way he would be able to combine his religious commitment and training with his progressive secular politics. In 1852 Brace began working for the recently founded Five Points Mission but left the next year in order to establish the Children's Aid Society, the inst.i.tution with which he remained a.s.sociated for the remaining thirty-three years of his life. As the executive secretary of the C.A.S., Brace was an early representative of an emerging social type in American history (and also a new group in the history of Christmas patronage)-the salaried managerial cla.s.s.

As a matter of pragmatic principle, the Children's Aid Society devoted its work exclusively to young people. Brace had come to the firm conclusion that targeting adults was virtually useless-"like pouring water through a sieve," as he once put it. All too often, adults wasted charitable relief on alcohol or worse. Moreover, whatever a.s.sistance they received (and on this point Brace's ideas resemble that of many modern conservatives) only created a sense of dependency that further ensured their ongoing pauperization. Brace was persuaded that the only "hopeful field" was among "the young." If one worked exclusively with children, he believed, "crime might possibly be checked in its very beginnings, and the seed of future good character and order and virtue be widely sown."19 Brace carried this principle very far. He decided not only that adults could not be part of the solution to the problem of poverty but also that they const.i.tuted the immediate source of the problem. It was, ironically, the family life of New York's poor population that was destroying the character of its children. Brace had long been deeply aware, as Home-Life in Germany Home-Life in Germany revealed, of the power of family life to mold the character of children, for better or for worse. (Indeed, he was so sensitive to the family's influence that, as we have seen, he even felt that middle-cla.s.s American families were failing to offer the genial, nurturing environment necessary to develop healthy adults.) But the families of the poor were worse than inadequate-they were, as Brace put it, actual "poison" for their own children. revealed, of the power of family life to mold the character of children, for better or for worse. (Indeed, he was so sensitive to the family's influence that, as we have seen, he even felt that middle-cla.s.s American families were failing to offer the genial, nurturing environment necessary to develop healthy adults.) But the families of the poor were worse than inadequate-they were, as Brace put it, actual "poison" for their own children.

Brace argued that this was true of mothers as well as fathers. In making such an argument he was confronting the heart of the reigning domestic ideology-the belief that all mothers could be counted on, by their very natures, to nurture their children through thick and thin. Brace was prepared to attack this belief almost head-on. At Christmas, 1855, he published in several New York newspapers a plea for charity that consisted of several little "Scenes for Christmas." One of these scenes pictured a proud and respectable young mother who had been reduced to poverty by a combination of hard times and her husband's drinking. That was a familiar nineteenth-century scenario. But Brace went further. He argued that the young mother had lost her self-respect; she had even lost "the last thing a woman of her former [respectable] habits loses-the pride in neat appearance." (And he added: "If she could but see it, it is just such dowdiness which sends the husband to the dram-shop instead of home.") Brace concluded that it would be of little avail to offer a.s.sistance to this pathetic woman: "The husband will probably die a drunkard; [and] the young wife, who had left comfort and home for his poverty, will either kill herself or perish of a broken-heart." But then there were the children: "There is the hope. Who will aid us in doing something for them?"

Brace used such accounts to make a radical argument: It was not enough to help help the children-they actually had to be separated, permanently so, from their parents. In another of his 1855 "Christmas Scenes" (this one t.i.tled "The Cold Home"), Brace contrasted a pair of "tidy, sweet children" with their chilly mother and her "cheerless" house. He had tried to persuade the mother to let the girls attend an industrial school (offering to provide them with clothing if they would do so), and he promised "that the boy should find a home if he would come to our office." Brace was adamant: "[T] hough for her pure young children too much could hardly be done, in such a woman [herself] there is hardly any confidence to be put." And he confidently generalized from this woman's case: "In nine cases out of ten, it is probable, some cursed vice has thus reduced her, and that, if her children be not separated from her, she will drag them down, too." the children-they actually had to be separated, permanently so, from their parents. In another of his 1855 "Christmas Scenes" (this one t.i.tled "The Cold Home"), Brace contrasted a pair of "tidy, sweet children" with their chilly mother and her "cheerless" house. He had tried to persuade the mother to let the girls attend an industrial school (offering to provide them with clothing if they would do so), and he promised "that the boy should find a home if he would come to our office." Brace was adamant: "[T] hough for her pure young children too much could hardly be done, in such a woman [herself] there is hardly any confidence to be put." And he confidently generalized from this woman's case: "In nine cases out of ten, it is probable, some cursed vice has thus reduced her, and that, if her children be not separated from her, she will drag them down, too."20

Charles Loring Brace. This woodcut was taken from a picture made late in Brace's life. (Courtesy of the Fine Arts Library, Harvard College Library) (Courtesy of the Fine Arts Library, Harvard College Library) So Brace devised a new scheme. It involved persuading parents to send their children to the Children's Aid Society (or persuading the children themselves to go there)-in order to s.h.i.+p them out of the city altogether, to new homes in the American West, in villages with stable families, ample opportunities for employment, and the kind of individualistic ethos that would offer the boys fertile soil to develop their compet.i.tive tendencies into socially productive channels. ("Manless land for landless men" was a slogan of the movement.) In its first four decades the "placing out" scheme-it would later be dubbed the "orphan train" program-managed to transport some 90,000 boys to new homes and lives in the West.21 And it helped bring international renown to Charles Loring Brace. And it helped bring international renown to Charles Loring Brace.

In opting for this strategy, Brace had come to embrace the qualities of compet.i.tiveness and self-reliance that he sensed in many of New York's poor children, children who had been thrown on their own devices. He saw such behavior as a sign of potential ambition that, healthfully channeled, could transform bad habits into productive ones. Even in Home-Life in Germany Home-Life in Germany, Brace had acknowledged that self-reliance was a virtue (in America "a boy is an independent, self-reliant man ..., when he is [still] in leading-strings in Germany"). But in that book he had seen self-reliance only as a "compensation" (and a partial one, at that) for the absence of strong family ties between American children and their parents. Now, as secretary of the Children's Aid Society, Brace paid more attention to encouraging self-reliance than to fostering family ties. Knowing that many of New York's poor children could be enticed with relative ease to leave home, Brace put to practical use what he had previously lamented as the weakness of family ties among American youths. He reported in just those terms the mood among a group of boys leaving New York for the West in 1855: "All seemed as careless at leaving home forever, as if they were on ... [an] excursion to Hoboken." Life in the labor-starved, Protestant-dominated West, he argued, would be likely to transform a "rough, thieving New York vagrant" into an "honest, hardworking Western pioneer."22 According to the historian Paul Boyer, Brace did not systematically track the later careers of the orphan-train riders: He "showed little interest in determining whether the boys he sent West actually became settled members of their communities; it was enough that they were 'being absorbed into that active, busy population.'" According to the historian Paul Boyer, Brace did not systematically track the later careers of the orphan-train riders: He "showed little interest in determining whether the boys he sent West actually became settled members of their communities; it was enough that they were 'being absorbed into that active, busy population.'"23 But it would be a mistake to think that this complex man had turned into a simple apologist for the spirit of free enterprise. Despite his enduring admiration for the independent human spirit, Charles Loring Brace never lost the deep distrust of nineteenth-century capitalism that informed Home-Life in Germany Home-Life in Germany. At the very height of the Gilded Age, in 1882, he published a work of theology that attempted to trace the changing role of Christianity in human history. In that book, Gesta Christi Gesta Christi, Brace noted tentatively that the New Testament itself was permeated by a "certain tone" that was, "if not of'communism/at least in favor of greater distribution of wealth than would suit modern ideas." Jesus and the apostles "almost denounce the rich," he wrote, and "their sympathies are strongly with the working cla.s.ses; they urge continually the diffusion of property, in whatever way would benefit the world." At another point in the same book Brace insisted that there was "in many of the aspirations and aims of communism, a certain marked sympathy or harmony with the ideals of Christianity." But he was also quick to add that "[n]othing, however, in Christ's teachings tends towards any forcible interfering with rights of property, or encourages dependence on others." As that final clause suggests, Jesus might be a socialist, but Brace would not relinquish the idea that he was also a man of self-reliance! Here as clearly as anywhere in his writings may be found a clue to the coherent philosophy that Brace never quite managed to articulate.24 BUT IT WAS not philosophy that earned Brace the respect of the philanthropic community, in any case. It was his practical organizational skills which did that, and his ability to deal effectively with poor children themselves. Those interpersonal skills came increasingly to the fore over the years. From the beginning, the Children's Aid Society did not restrict itself to sending children West, and by the 1860s it was becoming clear that the supply of street children in New York far exceeded the demand for their labor on the farm. not philosophy that earned Brace the respect of the philanthropic community, in any case. It was his practical organizational skills which did that, and his ability to deal effectively with poor children themselves. Those interpersonal skills came increasingly to the fore over the years. From the beginning, the Children's Aid Society did not restrict itself to sending children West, and by the 1860s it was becoming clear that the supply of street children in New York far exceeded the demand for their labor on the farm.25 So the C.A.S. came increasingly to focus its efforts on the industrial schools and lodging houses it had established in the city. The first and most successful of these local establishments-the one that captured the attention of the public, and became Braces personal pride and joy-was a lodging house designated specifically for a single subset of poor children: the city's newsboys. So the C.A.S. came increasingly to focus its efforts on the industrial schools and lodging houses it had established in the city. The first and most successful of these local establishments-the one that captured the attention of the public, and became Braces personal pride and joy-was a lodging house designated specifically for a single subset of poor children: the city's newsboys.

We have encountered newsboys before, during the 1840s, shortly after they came into existence as a result of the development of an urban "penny press" (see Chapter 3 Chapter 3). Often homeless, they eked out their subsistence by hawking afternoon newspapers and "extra" editions on the streets of the city. By the 1850s newsboys const.i.tuted a familiar and sometimes aggressive segment of the urban population, and they were notorious for their streetwise impertinence and for the racket they made at their beloved theater. Charles Loring Brace referred to them as "a fighting, gambling set." Consisting largely of immigrant Irish Catholics, the newsboys seem to have spoken in an argot of their own, and they were usually known only by nicknames-"Pickle Nose," "Fat Jack," Mickety," "Round Hearts," "No-Nothing Mike," "O'Neill the Great," "Wandering Jew," even (in one case) "Horace Greeley."26 The Newsboys' Lodging House that Brace set up in 1854 provided many of these boys with a stable household. By 1867 the Children's Aid Society was operating five such lodging houses in poor districts of New York, one of which was located at the corner of West Twenty-fourth Street and Eighth Avenue, just at the edge of the former Chelsea estate owned by Clement Clarke Moore!27 The newsboys became a source of special pleasure for Charles Loring Brace. Working with them became for him a secular version of the ministry to which he had originally intended to devote himself. From time to time Brace even delivered brief sermons to his charges, nonsectarian sermons that avoided any effort to lure the always-suspicious "newsies" away from their Catholic heritage. (He delivered one of these sermons at Christmas, emphasizing Jesus' humble birth and upbringing "among common laboring people" and the fact that his own chosen ministry was to "the great ma.s.ses of mankind-the poor laboring people-just such as you are, boys." And in another sermon Brace called Jesus "the working-man's friend.") The newsboys became a source of special pleasure for Charles Loring Brace. Working with them became for him a secular version of the ministry to which he had originally intended to devote himself. From time to time Brace even delivered brief sermons to his charges, nonsectarian sermons that avoided any effort to lure the always-suspicious "newsies" away from their Catholic heritage. (He delivered one of these sermons at Christmas, emphasizing Jesus' humble birth and upbringing "among common laboring people" and the fact that his own chosen ministry was to "the great ma.s.ses of mankind-the poor laboring people-just such as you are, boys." And in another sermon Brace called Jesus "the working-man's friend.")28 Guided by what was probably a combination of private admiration and pragmatic tactics, Brace dealt with these newsboys without sentimentality, without pretending that they embodied purity or selflessness. He came to relish what he saw as the independence, compet.i.tiveness, and signs of ambition ambition that characterized the culture of newsboys, even the aggressive edge they displayed, and he worked to encourage those attributes. Whatever else they were, newsboys were by definition not beggars-they that characterized the culture of newsboys, even the aggressive edge they displayed, and he worked to encourage those attributes. Whatever else they were, newsboys were by definition not beggars-they worked worked for their own support. The most successful among them earned as much as $3 a day and sometimes even more. for their own support. The most successful among them earned as much as $3 a day and sometimes even more.29 (The aspiring young author Horatio Alger spent several months in residence at the original Newsboys' Lodging House, and he based several of his novels on that experience.) (The aspiring young author Horatio Alger spent several months in residence at the original Newsboys' Lodging House, and he based several of his novels on that experience.) Brace retained, at the same time, his earlier sense that the newsboys needed to grow up in an environment that was genial and cheerful, and he tried with considerable success to make every Newsboys' Lodging House into just such an environment. Brace was skillful in dealing with newsboys on their own terms, and he made sure he hired a flexible and well-trained staff. Indeed Brace, along with many others, admired the newsboys' independent spirit, their solidarity, and their internal code of honor. As one scholar has put it, "Newsboys inhabited a twilight realm somewhere between desperate poverty and democratic manhood."30 Brace knew better than to patronize the newsies, and he even took pleasure in watching them ridicule any visiting speakers who did. The lodging houses were characterized, as Paul Boyer has put it, by "the prevailing high spirits, the street slang, and the boisterous shouts of tough little gamins totally unin-timidated by the surroundings of a benevolent inst.i.tution." Brace knew better than to patronize the newsies, and he even took pleasure in watching them ridicule any visiting speakers who did. The lodging houses were characterized, as Paul Boyer has put it, by "the prevailing high spirits, the street slang, and the boisterous shouts of tough little gamins totally unin-timidated by the surroundings of a benevolent inst.i.tution."31 Such geniality satisfied Brace's own deep craving for the unforced social warmth he had first encountered in Germany at Christmastime. Such geniality satisfied Brace's own deep craving for the unforced social warmth he had first encountered in Germany at Christmastime.

SO IT MAY be no coincidence that the high point of the year at every Newsboys' Lodging House was the annual Christmas dinner. Those dinners became a regular inst.i.tution during the last four decades of the nineteenth century and were reported with relish in the press. (Between 1870 or so and the early 1900s, the annual dinners at the original Lodging House were regularly arranged and paid for by a wealthy New York businessman named William Fliess. Other prominent New Yorkers often agreed to host dinners at the other lodging houses. Theodore Roosevelt did so, for example, every year from 1870 to 1873, and on at least one of those occasions the future president presented a $25 cash prize to a newsboy who had submitted the best essay in a writing compet.i.tion.) be no coincidence that the high point of the year at every Newsboys' Lodging House was the annual Christmas dinner. Those dinners became a regular inst.i.tution during the last four decades of the nineteenth century and were reported with relish in the press. (Between 1870 or so and the early 1900s, the annual dinners at the original Lodging House were regularly arranged and paid for by a wealthy New York businessman named William Fliess. Other prominent New Yorkers often agreed to host dinners at the other lodging houses. Theodore Roosevelt did so, for example, every year from 1870 to 1873, and on at least one of those occasions the future president presented a $25 cash prize to a newsboy who had submitted the best essay in a writing compet.i.tion.)32 Year after year, New Yorkers read about the gusto and speed with which the newsboys consumed the food placed before them. As one report put it, "Dyspeptics who cannot enjoy the eating of a good Christmas dinner ought to make it a point to go to the Newsboys' Lodging House ... at 7 o'clock in the evening of Christmas Day and see the newsboys eat." Such accounts sometimes recorded exactly how much the boys consumed-in one year, when 450 boys were fed, it amounted to "670 pounds of turkey, 200 pounds of ham, 3 barrels of potatoes, 3 barrels of turnips, 200 loaves of bread, and 350 pies." The reporter calculated this with mock precision as coming to "one-twenty-fifth of their own weight."33 (Only once, in 1888, have I found an acknowledgment that something more serious may also have been at stake for the boys: Their "stomachs [were] small with chronic hunger.") The Christmas dinners were often described in military terms, as in 1888, when the story was headed " (Only once, in 1888, have I found an acknowledgment that something more serious may also have been at stake for the boys: Their "stomachs [were] small with chronic hunger.") The Christmas dinners were often described in military terms, as in 1888, when the story was headed "NEWSBOYS WILL BE FED. They Battle with a Dinner and Win a Great Victory." Or in 1890: "THE NEWSBOYS' ANNUAL TRIUMPH OVER TURKEY AND PIE." "THE NEWSBOYS' ANNUAL TRIUMPH OVER TURKEY AND PIE."

The press accounts took equal delight in reporting the newsboys' raucous behavior on such occasions-their expertise in "cutting such capers ... as only street arabs know." But these high jinks seem never to have gotten out of hand, in part because of the skill with which the lodging-house staff arranged matters, including even the placement of the tables: [C]are is taken to have every seat at every table accessible [to adults], so that in case any newsboy becomes intoxicated by the lavish display of viands, and forgets how he should behave while at a banquet, he may be reached before he has filled the eyes of more than two of his neighbors with pie. The wisdom of this provision has been shown time and time again.34 All in all, such scenes can be seen as the inventive fulfillment, in a very different set of circ.u.mstances, of the very Christmas fantasy that Charles Loring Brace had first described in Home-Life in Germany Home-Life in Germany-a scene of genuine, spontaneous cheer in which people did not "seem to be enjoying themselves, because it is a 'duty to be cheerful,'" but simply "because they cannot help it."

THE P PATIENT P POOR.

The Children's Aid Society was a great success by nineteenth-century standards. By the end of the century, sister organizations had been established in Boston, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Was.h.i.+ngton, Cleveland, Chicago, St. Louis, and San Francisco.35 And other charitable inst.i.tutions, too, began to direct much of their attention to the children of the poor. And other charitable inst.i.tutions, too, began to direct much of their attention to the children of the poor.

Pleas for giving charity to poor children reached their height during the Christmas season, and they seem to have made for an effective fund-raising technique.36 The effectiveness was no accident. Almost certainly it stemmed from a powerful convergence of older and newer holiday traditions: those older traditions in which Christmas was the major occasion in the year for offering gifts to the poor and those more recent traditions in which Christmas was the major occasion for giving gifts to children. Impoverished children embodied simultaneously the core of both rituals. Little wonder, then, that those children became the object of such attention in mid-nineteenth-century American cities. The effectiveness was no accident. Almost certainly it stemmed from a powerful convergence of older and newer holiday traditions: those older traditions in which Christmas was the major occasion in the year for offering gifts to the poor and those more recent traditions in which Christmas was the major occasion for giving gifts to children. Impoverished children embodied simultaneously the core of both rituals. Little wonder, then, that those children became the object of such attention in mid-nineteenth-century American cities.

What people may actually have expected of those children was problematic. Charles Loring Brace was among the few who seem to have been able to accept the rough-edged behavior of the "street arabs" with something that approached unadulterated admiration. Others persisted in trying to see them in a more romantic light.

As it happens, newsboys themselves were a source of fascination for middle-cla.s.s Americans in the decades after 1850. There seemed to be something almost exotic about them. It was as if people were intrigued by their own uncertainty about whether newsboys were lost Victorian children waiting to be redeemed or just young hoodlums in the making. A fair number of books about newsboys appeared in the 1850s and 1860s. One of these, Ragged d.i.c.k Ragged d.i.c.k (1867), was written by Horatio Alger, who based the novel on his own observations in the original Newsboys' Lodging House. (1867), was written by Horatio Alger, who based the novel on his own observations in the original Newsboys' Lodging House.37 The t.i.tle character of this book is s.p.u.n.ky and ambitious, but he is also polite. The t.i.tle character of this book is s.p.u.n.ky and ambitious, but he is also polite.

In none of these books, however, is the confusion as clear as it is in Elizabeth Oakes Smiths novel The Newsboy The Newsboy (1854). Published in the same year that Brace opened the first Newsboys' Lodging House, this otherwise forgettable book offers an extraordinary example of authorial ambivalence. The hero of (1854). Published in the same year that Brace opened the first Newsboys' Lodging House, this otherwise forgettable book offers an extraordinary example of authorial ambivalence. The hero of The Newsboy The Newsboy starts out as an uncouth homeless urchin who knows nothing about his parents. When he is asked who his mother is, he responds almost like little Topsy, the incorrigible slave girl in starts out as an uncouth homeless urchin who knows nothing about his parents. When he is asked who his mother is, he responds almost like little Topsy, the incorrigible slave girl in Uncle Tom's Cabin Uncle Tom's Cabin, a book that had been published only two years earlier. The newsboy replies, "Got none." ("Well, your Dad, then?" "Got none." "Whew! Who owns you?" "n.o.body.")38 And the young newsboy uses rough language, too. On one occasion he responds to the solicitous question of a stranger by yelling, "'What in h-1 is that to you?'" (This response is virtually identical to that which Charles Loring Brace had received from the English laborer he had similarly accosted on the street.) And the young newsboy uses rough language, too. On one occasion he responds to the solicitous question of a stranger by yelling, "'What in h-1 is that to you?'" (This response is virtually identical to that which Charles Loring Brace had received from the English laborer he had similarly accosted on the street.) But in the course of the novel, without any training or support, this boy turns out to be a saintly child. He refuses to try alcohol or tobacco ("'It's agin my nater,'" he explains); he disdains to complain about his condition; and he befriends and supports-emotionally as well as financially-a variety of other outcasts, even becoming a surrogate parent to an adult woman. At one point the author is actually able to refer to her childish hero as "a miracle of goodness," an instinctively perfect little boy.39 And at the end of the book he proves his worth by voluntarily sacrificing any prospect of marrying the wealthy girl he loves. If this newsboy begins the novel as a male version of Stowe's Topsy, he ends it as a male version of another young character from And at the end of the book he proves his worth by voluntarily sacrificing any prospect of marrying the wealthy girl he loves. If this newsboy begins the novel as a male version of Stowe's Topsy, he ends it as a male version of another young character from Uncle Tom's Cabin Uncle Tom's Cabin-little Eva. Such a child hardly resembled the kind of real-life newsboy that Charles Loring Brace had to deal with.

It was with sentimental fantasies such as that of Elizabeth Oakes Smith that charitable agencies had to contend, but also to exploit, during the second half of the nineteenth century. And on no occasion did those fantasies become more pervasive than at Christmas. The original model for such fantasies was another fictional character, d.i.c.kens's Tiny Tim. This boy is a cripple, but spiritually he is a perfect model of humanity, a paragon of patient, cheerful selflessness. (He is even more forbearing than his father in the face of adversity, and with the added vulnerability of his lameness.) In fact, characters like Tiny Tim resemble nothing so much as the selfless German children we encountered in Chapter 5 Chapter 5, the children idealized by Coleridge and Pestalozzi.

Two Images of Newsboys. The street urchin on the right appeared in the 1872 edition of Elizabath Oakes Smith's novel The Newsboy The Newsboy. The appealing little boy on the left was the subject of an 1857 picture by the New York painter James Henry Cafferty, t.i.tled "Newsboy Selling New York Herald." For all the contrast between them, the two pictures are essentially mirror images of each other. (Both ill.u.s.trations: Courtesy, Harvard College Library) (Both ill.u.s.trations: Courtesy, Harvard College Library) It was fictional children like Tiny Tim-needy children who were forbearing and grateful, and sometimes disabled as well-who would become the ordinary objects of charity in scores of stories and sketches written in the middle of the nineteenth century. A Christmas Carol A Christmas Carol was only the first of a host of stories published over the next several decades (and beyond) that evoked the gap between rich and poor, and used young children to imagine ways of bridging this gap through acts of direct personal generosity at Christmas. One such sketch, a nonfiction account published in 1844 (the year after was only the first of a host of stories published over the next several decades (and beyond) that evoked the gap between rich and poor, and used young children to imagine ways of bridging this gap through acts of direct personal generosity at Christmas. One such sketch, a nonfiction account published in 1844 (the year after A Christmas Carol A Christmas Carol appeared), sets the scene. Traveling on the ferry between New York and Brooklyn, the writer has encountered a small girl, palpably impoverished, and is struck by something unusual in the girl's demeanor, something that set her apart from "the whining, obtrusive beggars of this large city." Sitting quietly amid the other, more prosperous patrons of the ferry, this child signified "poverty that complains not." Her face conveyed "utter hopelessness," but also a striking "resignation." The writer was drawn to that, and other pa.s.sengers were, too: "Children crushed to the earth with poverty and crime are common in large cities: they are painfully numerous. But it is seldom that such quiet, uncomplaining little sufferers are met there." appeared), sets the scene. Traveling on the ferry between New York and Brooklyn, the writer has encountered a small girl, palpably impoverished, and is struck by something unusual in the girl's demeanor, something that set her apart from "the whining, obtrusive beggars of this large city." Sitting quietly amid the other, more prosperous patrons of the ferry, this child signified "poverty that complains not." Her face conveyed "utter hopelessness," but also a striking "resignation." The writer was drawn to that, and other pa.s.sengers were, too: "Children crushed to the earth with poverty and crime are common in large cities: they are painfully numerous. But it is seldom that such quiet, uncomplaining little sufferers are met there."40 Here was the basis of the familiar, almost stereotypical genre in which poor children stand huddled in the cold outside the home of a rich family, gazing patiently through the window at the latter's Christmas luxuries. As might be expected, these stories invariably deal with a Christmas encounter between someone rich and someone poor, an encounter in which the former is touched by both the plight and the patience of the latter (generally a child). The encounter is marked by a special Christmas gift that leaves both the giver and the recipient deeply touched. It is the old exchange of gifts for goodwill.

Again and again, it was the pa.s.sivity, the uncomplaining resignation, of such fictional children in the face of pervasive, ambient opulence that rendered them fit objects of direct charity. It was because they asked for nothing that they proved themselves worthy of receiving something. In one such story a little girl clothed in a dress that is faded but "clean" is looking into the window of a toy shop on Christmas Eve. But when a prosperous woman standing next to her wonders out loud whether the girl "'wanted something she couldn't get,'" the girl responds in "an unexpectant manner," saying only that the toys were "'good to look at.'"The prosperous woman thereupon offers the poor little girl a gift of $5, and the girl proceeds to give the money to her mother. After the prosperous lady learns about the girl's selfless gesture, her own own daughter, too, decides to pa.s.s along some of her surplus Christmas presents. At the end, the reader is a.s.sured that the poor little girl will "never forget" these gifts in times of future hards.h.i.+p. daughter, too, decides to pa.s.s along some of her surplus Christmas presents. At the end, the reader is a.s.sured that the poor little girl will "never forget" these gifts in times of future hards.h.i.+p.41 There is a deeper pattern to some of these stories, and it is a revealing one. It has to do with resolving the vexatious public issues of cla.s.s division-issues that were essentially unresolvable within any version of the prevailing ideological language-by transforming them, under cover of fiction, into issues that are are resolvable: private issues of family, morality, and forgiveness. I have not found a single nineteenth-century Christmas story that deals forthrightly with the dynamics of American cla.s.s relations. resolvable: private issues of family, morality, and forgiveness. I have not found a single nineteenth-century Christmas story that deals forthrightly with the dynamics of American cla.s.s relations.

In the commonest version of this pattern, the poor children turn out, at the end, to be related to their benefactors by blood itself. Take, for example, a story published in G.o.deys Lady's Book G.o.deys Lady's Book in 1858, with the t.i.tle "Christmas for Rich and Poor." This story was accompanied by a two-page ill.u.s.tration showing precisely the now-familiar stereotypical scene: the rich family inside on the left side, the poor children outside on the right. Any reader of this story would have been led to a.s.sume that the story dealt with cla.s.s divisions. And indeed, as it happens, the two children in 1858, with the t.i.tle "Christmas for Rich and Poor." This story was accompanied by a two-page ill.u.s.tration showing precisely the now-familiar stereotypical scene: the rich family inside on the left side, the poor children outside on the right. Any reader of this story would have been led to a.s.sume that the story dealt with cla.s.s divisions. And indeed, as it happens, the two children are are poor, and their mother is ill as well. They had been out earlier that evening (the story is set on Christmas Eve), attempting to buy a small present for their mother in a local shop, and there they had been approached by a wealthy older man who overheard their plight (and witnessed their selfless demeanor) and immediately invited them to visit his house later in the evening so that he could provide them with food to take to their sick mother. That they do (once inside the house they observe toys "scattered in careless profusion"). But as they stand conversing with the rich man's daughter, waiting for their promised basket of food, it transpires that they are actually the children of the rich man's poor, and their mother is ill as well. They had been out earlier that evening (the story is set on Christmas Eve), attempting to buy a small present for their mother in a local shop, and there they had been approached by a wealthy older man who overheard their plight (and witnessed their selfless demeanor) and immediately invited them to visit his house later in the evening so that he could provide them with food to take to their sick mother. That they do (once inside the house they observe toys "scattered in careless profusion"). But as they stand conversing with the rich man's daughter, waiting for their promised basket of food, it transpires that they are actually the children of the rich man's other other daughter, his favorite and most indulged daughter, a woman who had shamed the family fifteen years earlier by eloping (on Christmas Eve, at that) with a man whom her father had refused to let her marry. The wayward daughter's husband had soon proved unable to support her decently, and after his death she and her two children had fallen into abject poverty. All this while her wealthy father had refused to have anything to do with her. But now, on daughter, his favorite and most indulged daughter, a woman who had shamed the family fifteen years earlier by eloping (on Christmas Eve, at that) with a man whom her father had refused to let her marry. The wayward daughter's husband had soon proved unable to support her decently, and after his death she and her two children had fallen into abject poverty. All this while her wealthy father had refused to have anything to do with her. But now, on this this Christmas Eve, he is eager to relent. The story ends with a scene of forgiveness and reconciliation. Christmas Eve, he is eager to relent. The story ends with a scene of forgiveness and reconciliation.42 In other words, the division of social cla.s.s that separated the "rich" from the "poor" of this story's t.i.tle was more apparent than real. Not only did these poor children behave like well-trained members of respectable society-that is actually what they were. The real problem that the wealthy man in the story had to deal with was not that of social cla.s.s but of family dynamics. The cathartic gesture he makes at the end is one in which he forgives his daughter, after fifteen years of exile, and takes her back into the family. Of course, he feels relieved and cleansed by this act, but his catharsis, and that of the story's readers, have little to do with the expectations raised by the story's t.i.tle and its accompanying ill.u.s.trations.43

"Christmas for Rich and Poor." This pair of pictures were printed on two opposing pages of This pair of pictures were printed on two opposing pages of G.o.deys Lady's Book G.o.deys Lady's Book for December 1858. They provided the ill.u.s.tration for the story of the same t.i.tle. for December 1858. They provided the ill.u.s.tration for the story of the same t.i.tle. (Courtesy, American Antiquarian Society) (Courtesy, American Antiquarian Society) THE J JADED R RICH.

At the same time that Christmas stories appeared about poor children who were patient and grateful, other stories were appearing that portrayed the jaded responses of more prosperous children. By the 1850s, fictional accounts about such jaded rich children were becoming commonplace. An 1854 children's book written by Susan Warner, the author of the 1849 best-seller The Wide, Wide World The Wide, Wide World, drove this point home. In this book, Carl Krinken: His Christmas Stocking Carl Krinken: His Christmas Stocking, Warner indicated that the presents received by the children of the rich made them feel "discontent." Such well-off children were hard to please, Warner wrote; they generally "fretted because they had what they did, or because they hadn't what they didn't have." The Christmas stocking of a typical rich child was stuffed with "candy enough to make the child sick, and toys enough to make him unhappy because he didn't know which to play with first...."Warner added sarcastically: "It was a woful [sic] thing if a top was painted the wrong color, or if the mane of a rocking-horse was too short, or if his bridle was black leather instead of red."44 Several decades later, no less popular a writer than William Dean Howells would write a delightful story about a little girl who expresses a wish that Christmas could come every day-and who has her wish fulfilled in horrific fas.h.i.+on. After a few weeks, the girl and her friends become so sick of receiving "disgusting presents" that they begin to throw them out on the street unopened, and soon the police began to warn the children "to shovel their presents off the sidewalk, or they would arrest them." Before long, the overworked garbage collectors of the city are refusing to pick up any more Christmas tras.h.!.+ Eventually, of course, the little girl learns her lesson. Several decades later, no less popular a writer than William Dean Howells would write a delightful story about a little girl who expresses a wish that Christmas could come every day-and who has her wish fulfilled in horrific fas.h.i.+on. After a few weeks, the girl and her friends become so sick of receiving "disgusting presents" that they begin to throw them out on the street unopened, and soon the police began to warn the children "to shovel their presents off the sidewalk, or they would arrest them." Before long, the overworked garbage collectors of the city are refusing to pick up any more Christmas tras.h.!.+ Eventually, of course, the little girl learns her lesson.45 On a more modest scale there was the story that Harriet Beecher Stowe had written in 1850, "Christmas; or, The Good Fairy." In that story (discussed in Chapter 4 Chapter 4), Stowe indicated that Christmas shopping for one's own family and friends had become difficult, since such prosperous folk were "sick, and sated, and tired with having everything in the world given [them]" at Christmas. But Stowe's tale went on to propose a solution to this problem. Its plot hinged on just that point: It was easy enough, after all, to find people who had not been sated by Christmas presents, people who could be counted on to be intensely grateful for even the smallest trifle.

Those people, of course, were the poor. The language Harriet Beecher Stowe chose to describe them is quite suggestive. A poor person offered the prosperous shopper a "fresh, unsophisticated body to get presents for;" the poor as a cla.s.s provided the rich with a supply of "unsophisticated subjects to practice on." And that is just what this story is about. Its prosperous main character becomes a "good fairy" for a poor family who lives in the neighborhood-and, indeed, the poor family does respond with all the grat.i.tude anyone could wish.

Unsophisticated subjects to practice on. This may sound like strange language. But others were making much the same point. Take Louisa May Alcott, for example. The four young heroines of Little Women Little Women, in the opening chapters of that novel, do the very thing that Stowe proposed: They go off on Christmas morning (after receiving their own presents of the New Testament) and bring gifts to a poor family in the neighborhood. There is evidence that many Americans shared this concern. In the last two decades of the nineteenth century, there was something of a movement to form Christmas clubs for prosperous children, clubs that were designed to foster selfless behavior during the Christmas season by encouraging their members to hold Christmas parties for their less-privileged peers, and to give away some of their own old Christmas presents. The Children's Christmas Club of Portland, Maine, organized in 1882, pressed its members "to save [old] toys, books, and games, instead of carelessly destroying them," and to present these castoffs at a Christmas dinner held for the children of the local poor. A similar club was later formed in Was.h.i.+ngton, D.C., with the daughter of the U.S. postmaster general serving as its president, a.s.sisted by the daughter of the U.S. president himself, Chester Arthur.46 Such material suggests that some members of the American bourgeoisie were facing a real Christmas dilemma. Their own children had become jaded with presents. On the other hand, the actual poor-who were unlikely to be surfeited with gifts-were a sea of anonymous proletarian faces, and in any event they were as likely to respond to acts of token generosity with embarra.s.sment or hostility as with the requisite display of hearty grat.i.tude. Giving to the children children of the needy would solve the dilemma neatly. of the needy would solve the dilemma neatly.

Typically, the children selected to partic.i.p.ate in such events (as in the case of the Portland Children's Christmas Club) came from a pool that had been carefully screened by charitable organizations. These needy children made ideal recipients of face-to-face charity. They could be counted on to be both well behaved and truly grateful. They would respond neither with the jaded indifference of more privileged children nor with the guarded resentment their own parents might display. And they would show show their grat.i.tude, with touching smiles and exclamations. Face-to-face charity-the exchange of gifts for goodwill-could be made to work in mid-nineteenth-century America, after all. But the economic divide could be bridged only by going across generational lines. In shorthand language, cla.s.s had to be mediated through age. their grat.i.tude, with touching smiles and exclamations. Face-to-face charity-the exchange of gifts for goodwill-could be made to work in mid-nineteenth-century America, after all. But the economic divide could be bridged only by going across generational lines. In shorthand language, cla.s.s had to be mediated through age.

In any case, from mid-century on-and with what appears to have been increasing frequency into the 1890s-some well-to-do Americans devoted part of their Christmas days to visiting the children of the poor. These visits were ordinarily encouraged and arranged by the charitable agencies themselves. The first instance I have found of what would become the standard ritual took place in 1844, when Margaret Fuller chose to spend part of Christmas Day with the children in New York's Asylum for the Deaf and Dumb-and to report on her visit in the New York Tribune New York Tribune (this episode is recounted in (this episode is recounted in Chapter 5 Chapter 5). After 1850, New York's charitable agencies for children inst.i.tutionalized this kind of event. They began to hold formal open houses that more prosperous residents of the city were invited to visit on Christmas Day, open houses that received lots of publicity (they also served as effective fund-raisers).

A favorite place to visit was the children's nursery on Randalls Island, the munic.i.p.al establishment in the East River (it also contained the city hospital, insane asylum, and almshouse). On Christmas Day, 1851, the New York Tribune New York Tribune reported that "quite a large party of ladies and gentlemen" attended "a capital entertainment" given to the children at the munic.i.p.al nursery and hospital. The following year, too, the reported that "quite a large party of ladies and gentlemen" attended "a capital entertainment" given to the children at the munic.i.p.al nursery and hospital. The following year, too, the Tribune Tribune reported that the children on Randalls Island were visited by "several dignitaries, including several merchants of the City," who brought "a supply of juvenile presents suitable to the season." On this occasion the children "marched in procession to meet them at the dock." And of course they "most gratefully accepted and heartily enjoyed" the dinner that followed. reported that the children on Randalls Island were visited by "several dignitaries, including several merchants of the City," who brought "a supply of juvenile presents suitable to the season." On this occasion the children "marched in procession to meet them at the dock." And of course they "most gratefully accepted and heartily enjoyed" the dinner that followed.47 And so on in subsequent years (the Randalls Island open houses continued into the twentieth century). Of course, Randalls Island was physically cut off from the rest of the city. But charitable inst.i.tutions located within the city, even in its less savory areas, also invited visitors on Christmas Day.48 The most heavily publicized of these was in the Mission House located in the Five Points section, the most notorious slum area in the city (in the entire nation, for that matter). But the terms in which the The most heavily publicized of these was in the Mission House located in the Five Points section, the most notorious slum area in the city (in the entire nation, for that matter). But the terms in which the Tribune Tribune reported the first such occasion, in 1853, are revealing. The report, headed " reported the first such occasion, in 1853, are revealing. The report, headed "CHRISTMAS AT THE FIVE POINTS," indicated that the Mission House (located on the site of a former brewery) was "open all day" and received many visitors. In fact, [t]he streets were thronged in that neighborhood with well-dressed ladies and gentlemen, and some of the richest carriages of the City; the effect of which was to make the topers [i.e., drunkards], male and female, shrink back into their dens, while the children saw and felt the effects of such visits to the