SETTLEMENT WORK IN A UNION TOWN LucILE EAVES, THE SAN FRANCISCO SETTLEMENT ASSOCIATION, AND ORGANIZED LABOR, 1894-7906

Ann Wilson

Manyofthe pro-labor legislativereforms achievedin Californiaduring the Progres sive Era came about as a result of coalitions forged betw’eenlabor leaders and middle-class activists. Butthe relationship between the two groups was often a contentious one. In 1902 the LcthorClarion,house organ ofthe SanFrancisco LaborCouncil and the State feclration of Labor,responded warilyto the “eightthousand wealthy women”convening in LosAngeles for the national convention of the General Federation of ‘Women’sClubs. Invoking the clubwomen’s“earnestwish to.. . makethis world abetter placein which to live,”an unnamed author remarked that

the laboringwomanknowsthat ifyouwouldstandforonetiling, just one ... thegreatest

crimeofthis agewouldbe removedand abolished.Thisischildlabor.. . . Insistthat all goodsthat arebroughtintoyourhome,fromabroomtoabeefsteak,fromashoetoabonnet, [lacJtheproductofashopwheretheunionlabelisinevidence.Thatisall.Thewayissimple. Thedutyplain. It doesnot requireeitheroratoryor spasmsofethics. Simplyaskforthe unionlabeloneverything,[and] the childwillheset free.

Although it acknowledged the valueofretaining organized womanhood as an ally,the Labor Clarioninsisted that labor organizations would lead the way in bettering society. In closing, the author challenged clubwomen to “help in the cause of humanity, where the battle is waging. . . and where victory will comewithout you,but infinitely easier and ciuickerwith you.”

79 SETUEuENT WORK IN A UNION TOWN

Ayearlater,the samenewspaperturned its attention to the “publicists,educators,and other professionaland business men who undertake to speak and w’riteon labor union topics.” This time,however,it expressed unabashedenthusiasm forthe “manyintelligent and fair-mindedmen and women”ofthe socialsettlement movementwho “haveearnestly and unostentatiouslytried to establish cordiallysympathetic relationswith working men, w’omen,and children,and havesucceededin accomplishingvast good.”The writer praised the SanFranciscoSettlementAssociation,and especiallyits head worker, LucileEaves,for establishing closer relations with the labor movement than had been the case elsewhere. Accordingto the LaborClarion,the “practicalassistance”ofEavesandpeoplelikeher“resulted in a better understanding of the movementby a class which does much to form public opimon.”2 Aformerlecturerat StanfordUniversitywith an abidinginterest in the Californialabor movement,LucileEavesindeed offereda great dealofpractical assistanceto the SanFran cisco LaborCouncil,and her work contributed to a fruitful cross-classcoalition that pro duced an important legislativevictoryfororganizedlaborin the firstyearsofthe twentieth century. Asheadworker forthe SanFranciscoSettlement Association’sSouth ParkSettle ment, Eavestook up the very battle the LaborClarionassignedto women of her class:she committedherselfto abolishingchildlabor.Yetshehardlylimited herselfto the consumer activismassociatedwith the unionlabel.Instead,Eaveschanneledthe resourcesofthe Settle ment into a campaigndesignedby Californialabor leadersto restrict children under Four teen fromthe state’sfactories,stores, and workshops. In the process, she transformed the South Park Settlement from a relatively sleepy neighborhood house into a lively, reform- oriented institution where men and women of different class backgrounds found it possible to work togethertowardacommonpoliticalgoal.At the sametime,her tenureasasettlement worker gavehervaluableexperiencethat laterhelpedherbuildasuccessfulcareerasaprofes sional sociologist,despite the widespread gender discrimination that disadvantagedaca dcmicwomen ofhergeneration. Theearlyhistoryofthe SanFranciscoSettlementAssociationrevealshow LucilcEaves took advantageofa uniqueinstitutional spacein order to both further her careerand reach her class-bridgingpolitical goals.Drawingupon the work of Estelle Freedman,Kathryn Kish Sklar,Suzanne Lebsock,and LindaKerber,this essay recognizesthe importance of social settlements as literal embodiments of a politicized “woman’ssphere.”3Like other settlements, the SouthPark Settlementservedas an incubator foractivistand professional networks and helped to launch individual women into public life during a period when Victoriangendernormswere undergoingcontestedchange.Butas anorganizationmadeup of men and women responding to the social conditions of the urban far West, its story provides a useful addition to the historiography of the settlement movement,which has focusedprimarilyon the femaleclominatedsettlements ofNew York,Boston,and . Although many historians have praised Eastern and Nlidwestern set.tlementleaders for so A,i,1 ‘ilson representing a vanguard of social justice during the , some have been more critical, highlighting instead the repressive aspects of reformers’aspirations for social con troL1Bydirecting our attention to the farWest, a regionlittle coveredbyhistorians ofsettle ments, the present study adds to our understanding ofthe varied agendas that found a home within the national movement.5 Drawing on institutional records, newspaper reports, letters, and the published works of resident staff, I argue that the South Park Settlement could have followed a relatively apolitical trajectory had it not been for the inspired leadership of EucileEaves.Becausethe menanelwomenwho foundedthe SanFranciscoSettlementAssociationbelievedthat pov erty in San Francisco was neither dramatic nor inevitable, they initially veered away from direct political action aimed at structural social change. Instead, they busied themselves with providing wholesome entertainment and uplifting instruction for local children and adults. This cautious orientation quickly changed,however,with the arrival ofLucileEaves as head worker in 1901.Passionately committed to the development of a “scientific”labor movement,Eavesleveragedthe resources ofthe Settlement in order to forgean activist part nership with California labor leaders. Her agenda, then, differed from that ofher predeces sors. Where they had sought to create a space in San Francisco where middle-class and working-class people could mingle sociallyand intellectually, Eavesseized that space and used it toward an explicitly political end.This essaytraces that institutional transformation andshow’show Eaves’sclass bridging efforts,made possible by her work at the Settlement, helped to win the passage of a revamped child labor bill in 1905.

The San Francisco Settlement Associationwas founded in the spring of 1$94following a visit thatJane Acklamspaid to Californiaearlier that year.In the midst ofeconomic clepres sion,Adclarnsand her sister Alicetraveledto PaloAltoand Berkeley,where Addamsmet with faculty and students of the recently established Leland Stanford, Jr., University and the University of California.6A detailed record of her stay has not survived,but it is likely that Addarns delivered some version of her 1892paper on the “Subjective Necessity of Social Settlements,”in which she outlined her philosophy ofsocial democracy.7Addams also may have spoken about her work on HullHouseMapsanclPapcrs,a sociologicalstudy of Chicago’s nineteenthward that was published the followingyear.6Whatever her topic, Acidamsleft a strong impression. Soonafter her departure, alocal committee formedto discuss the possi bilities for establishing a settlement house in San Francisco, and on April 14,1894,the San FranciscoSettlement Association wasborn.9 The men and women who founded the San Francisco Settlement Association w’ere prominent figures in local intellectual and charitable circles. The Association’sfirst Presi dent, BernardMoses,was a University ofCaliforniaprofessorwith lecture responsibilities in history, economics, political science, and jurisprudenee he later went on to serve on the

81 .r - -- -.. -- -

SETTiENIENT WoRI IN A UNION TOWN

Philippine Commission under William Howard Taft.’°Other members included Fred F. Haynes, a recent Harvard Ph.D.,Frank Angell,professor of psychologyat Stanford Univer sity, anctjessica Peixotto, a University ofCalifornia graduate student who later became the University’sFirstfemalefullprofessor, servingin the department ofeconomics.” Some,like Hayncsand FannieW. NIcLean,a Berkeleyschoolteacher, had spent time in the settlements ofBostonand NewYork.’2Others were activeon the boards oflocalcharitable groups like the Harrison Street Boys’Club, the BuforciKitchengarten, and the Associated Charities of San Francisco—an organization that provided the San Francisco Settlement Association with “constant advice”during its first year.’3 Many of the council members and early assistants were collegeeducated, and alarge number were listeclin the ’sexclusive SocialDirccteiy, lending support to historian Carol Roland’ssuggestion that participation in charitable ac tivities was held in high esteem by San Francisco elites.’1 The organizations that contributed members to the SanFrancisco Settlernetit Associa tion shared a perception that poverty in San Francisco was less drastic, and more easily avoidable, than poverty in the nation’s industrial centers. The Associated Charities of San Francisco claimed in its 1895annual report that “forclimatic reasons, the poverty and dis tress in our city can neverbe so severeas in the Eastern ,”eventhough it acknowledged that the depression of 1893had caused widespread hardship.’5Three years later, Millicent Shinn,editor ofthe Ovcrlaod?Ionthlvand amember ofthe Californiabranch ofthe Association of Collegiate Alumnae—another organization that contributed members to the San Fran cisco Settlement Association—published a study of San Francisco charities in which she concurred with benevolentworkers who insisted that “noreallyhonest, industrious, capable person need lack work or seek charity.” Shinn further suggested that “drunkenness and laziness are the real causes of all poverty in San Francisco,”especially “amongforeigners.”6 Thisperception was shared byvisitors like Katherine Coman,president ofthe CollegeSettle ment Association and a professor of economics at Wellesley College, who commented in 1903that “themetropolis ofthe PacificCoast is the paradise ofthe worldngman.”In Coman’s estimation, San Francisco presented “little need of reliefwork except for the ne’er-do-well and the incapacitated.”7 Despite their optimism about the uniquely salubrious socialconditions oftheir West ern hometown, SanFranciscosettlement workers believedthat specialeffortwas required in order to bring disparate social classes into mutual understanding. Leveragingthe skills of charity workers and university professors alike, the San Francisco Settlement Association established the South Park Settlement with two goalsin mind. On the one hand, settlement workers hoped to “serveas a mediumamongthe different socialelements of the city” inorder to bring about “a more intelligent and systematic understanding of their mutual obliga tions.” Thiseffort would be facilitated by residence in a working-class neighborhood and cooperation with localreligious,educational,charitable, and labororganizations. In a related fashion, the members of the Settlement Association hoped to arouse “healthy interest in

82 AnnWilson social problems” and to assist “in the efforts for their solution” by sponsoring community discussions led by “impartial”cxpcrts. The early emphasis of the Settlement, then, incor porated w’bolesomeentertainment and moral uplift with social scientific research and dis eussion. The Settlement Association’s choice of neighborhood provides additional insight into its assumptions and priorities The gift of a monthly subscription of fifty dollars from phi lanthropist PhoebeApperson Hearst macicit possible forthe Association’sleaders to secure appropriate headquarters in August 1894.Theychose alargehome at 15South Park, located in the southeast corner of SanFrancisco’sSouth ofMarket district. Bytheir own description, the neighborhoodwas “onespeciallysuited forthe work that a Settlement undertakes to do,” as it situated the settlement workers among families representing diverse social classes. South Park,asmall square that was once the “residencequarter of the localaristocracy,”was now “occupiedby families varying very greatly in circumstances,” including “afew families who are well-to-do,. . . a great manyfamiliesofworkingmen, who earn good wages,” and a smaller number of “familiesin need of assistance.” To the west ran “Third street, a street of small stores of every description, among which saloons, restaurants, bakeries, and pawn shops are the most numerous,” and to the east stretched the industries of the w’aterfront, which “constitut[ed] an important part of the life ofthe neighborhood.” ‘ Other local busi nessesincluded wine-vaults, flourmills,marbleworks, gas and electric works, lumber yards, and furniture factories. These dotted the map along with single-familyhomes, subdivided apartment flats, and densely constructed rear tenement buildings—all of which filled the gaps amongboarding houses,hotels, restaurants, and liquor stores. The South Park Settle ment, set apart from bustling surroundings on a quiet, tree-lined square, provided a wel conling setting for cautious middle class settlers acquainting themselves with the exigen cies of urban, working class life. The settlers must have found added reassurance in the fact that so many other charitable institutions shared the environs. The Silver Street Kinciergar ten, the Episcopal Mission of tile Good Samaritan, St. Mary’sHospital, Our Lady’sHome for Old and Infirm Women, and a branch of the San Francisco Free Library were all within walking The demographic characteristics of the South of Market neighborhood influenced tile courseofsettlement life.AfterChinatown, SouthofMarket was SailFrancisco’smost thickly populated district; it was alsotile largest and nlost important area served by the Associated Charities.2 But San Francisco’sgrittiest neighborhoods could not match tile extreme pov erty endemic to a place like Chicago’snineteenth ward, witil its dense tenement buildings and overlapping immigrant communities.23Havingwitnessed the scene around , visitors found South Park to he a “surprisingly pleasant” quarter w’ith“little to suggest tile need ofsettlement work.”21This favorableimpression derivedin large part fromthe fact that most area residents spoke English,a factor that rendered “easyand natural tile manysocial gat]lenngs, lectures, concerts, and entertainments which form so important a part of the

83 _____

= -

SETTLEMENT WORK IN A UNION TO\VN

South Park Settlement life.”25Eventhough half of the population livingsouth of Market Street in 1900was foreign-born,the Irish and German immigrants who passed through South Park may have seemedless “foreign”to settlement workers than the non English speakingItalian and LatinAmericanimmigrantswho livednearthe city’snorthern water front.26That the Settlement AssociationchoseSouth Park forits home,rather than North Beachor Chinatown, suggestsa beliefthat certain populations were moreimportant than others when it cameto fosteringcross-classunderstanding. Furthermore,while the South Park Settlement opened its doors to neighboring Irish, German,and Americanworking- class families,there is no evidenceto suggest that it extended a similar welcome to the Japaneseworkingmenw’hoboardedjust oneblock to thewest.27 Duringits firstfiveyearsofoperation,the SouthParkSettlementquietlywent about the work ofencouragingfriendlyrelationsamongits neighbors.Settlementworkersfoundthem selves“confrontedon everyside [by]sickness,poverty,ignorance,viciousness,[and]lackof work,”but resolvedthat “sympatheticfriendshipismorevaluedthan materialaid,and. . . we cananddogive[it] withjoy.”26Thebulk ofthis friendshipwas deliveredin the formofclubs andclasses[orboysandgirls.TheSanFranciscoBoys’ClubAssociation,which organizedits clubs through the Settlement,chargeditselfwith the “moralelevationofboys in SanFran cisco,”and to that end offered“as many channels as possible for the overflowof energy hitherto wasted, or worse,in this locality.”20Boysbetween the agesoftwelve and sixteen gatheredforathleticactivities,modelgovernmentpractice,and trainingin basket-weaving, chair caning,and book covering,while olderboys niet weeklyto discuss “municipalques tions”ofthe day.‘ Girlswere similarlytargeted formoraluplift,organizedinto classesthat taught skillsin sewingand cookingand lessonsin art and literature. Bothboys and girls enjoyedaccessto the Settlement’sgrowinglibrary,and occasionaloutingsgavecity-bound youth achanceto enjoypastoral rompsthrough Berkeleyand GoldenGate Park.32 TheSouthParkSettlementprovidedsocialand educationalprogramsforadults aswell aschildren. Twomothers’clubsmetregularlyforcoffee,sewing,andlectureson topics such as “ClaraBarton,”“TheWomen ofIndia,”and “ColonelWaring’sStreet CleaningBrigade,” evokingsubjectsofinterest to elitewomen’sclubs ofthe day.33Men organizedthemselves into the Political EconomyClub and gathered on Tuesday eveningsfor “discussions of practical valuein this time of socialferment.”These meetingsbrought workingmen into contact with universityprofessorsincludingBernardMoses,CarlPlehn,CliveDay,andF.A. Ross,who deliveredtalks on a rangeofpolitical and economicmatters, fromRoss’s“Signs and Causes of SocialDiscontent”and Day’s“TheIndustrial Revolutionof the Nineteenth Century”to Plehn’s“EvilsofTaxationin California.”OtherspeakersincludedC.E.Hawkes, presidentofthe SanFranciscoTypographicalUnion,ReverendW. D.P.Bliss,awelltraveled Christian Socialist,and FrederickW. Dolirman,alocalbusinessmanandcivicleader. Althoughit representedonlya smallpart ofthe South ParkSettlement’sactivities,the PoliticalEconomyClub embodiedthe Settlement Association’smissionto case socialup-

$4 Wilson heavals by bringing clivcrsesocial elements into mutual understanding. This objective led historian Philip j. Ethington to argue that the Settlement endeavored “to make the public sphere more rational, more open to dispassionate, scientific ideas, and more democratic: more accessible for the working people of the neighborhood.” But Ethingron suggests that despite its best efforts, the Settlement “couldcarve out onlya smallsegmentofthe political sphere,” overpowered as it was by a “sea of mass-media produced on an industrial scale by [William Randolph] Hearst and his competitors.”35However,as the South Park Settlement gradually devoted moreenergyto fostering cross-class goodwill,and especiallyas ft entered into coalitions with working-class leaders, it claimed a much greater ability to intervene in public life.In time, the South Park Settlement became a potent agent of reform. The first steps in this transformation were guided by Dr. Dorothea Moore, a Boston- trained physicianwhojoined the Settlement as head worker in 1898.After the end of her marriage to newspaperman in 1888,Nbore spent time at the University Settlement in New York and at Hull House, where she met and married ]iersecond husband, Ernest Carroll Moore. In 1898the couple relocated to Califor nia,where Ernestjoined the facultyat the University ofCaliforniaand Dorothea took charge of the Settlement.36 Under Nloore’sleadership, the South Park Settlement began to resemble its more politically’inclined counterparts in the East and Midwest. Moore conceded that in San Francisco “acertain bounteousness of physical life,the abundance ofsun and salty winds, a certain ease of the hard side of struggle, together with a tang of the \Vestern spirit. . . have here so coneurreclas to makelivingtake on its less tragic, its simpler aspects.”Nevertheless, she insisted on the need for“enlarged civic action.”37Moore appealed to the San Francisco Merchants’ Association to help fund scholarships for the study of social conditions by college students and won their assistance in improving nearby streets and establishing a public playground.(in the latter project she collaborated with the CaliforniaClub, a middle- class women’sclub to which shebelonged.36Moore also facilitated the research projects of visiting scholars. Stanford economist Frank Fetter led a group ofstudents in the “first sys - tematic study of the Settlement district,” and nutritionist MeyerJaffa, ofthe University of CaliforniaAgricultural Experiment Station, embarked on studies ofinfant feedingpractices in North Beachand dietary habits in Chinatown. Moore even sent a resident to work in a local laundry to gain ]

85 SETTLEuENT WoRl IN A UNION TOWN apart from political economylectures, someboys’clubs, and a psychologycoursegivenby ErnestMoore,the dailywork ofthe Settlementcontinuedto becarriedoutmainlybywomen, asit had beensincethe secondyearofoperation.4° Despitetheseeffortsat “enlargedcivicaction,”the SouthParkSettlementrefrainedfrom direct participation in localpolitics. Mooreherselfwas intimately involvedin movements amongclubwomen,leadingthe CaliforniaClub and the Californiafederation ofWomen’s Clubs in a campaignto establish a statewidejuvenilecourt system.Butshe did not involve the Settlementin this work.41Indeed,thereseemsto haveexistedaclearseparationbetween the academicstudies conducted through the South Park Settlement and the practice of directpoliticalaction. Socialscientificinvestigationmayhavecontributed to amoreintelli gent understanding ofmunicipalissues amongprofessionalsand scholars,but aside from their participation in communitylectures,researchersdid not developpracticalapplication forthe resultsoftheirwork.Thisequationchangeddramatically,however,with the arrivalof LucileEavesin 1901.

AlthoughLucileEavesbrought new energyto the SouthParkSettlement,sheaccepted her positionreluctantly.Herdreamwas not to becomeasettlementworker,but to establish herselfasaprofessionalsocialscientist.Bornin Leavenworth,Kansas,in 1869,Eavestaught in an industrial school for the Nez Percë Indians in Idaho and in the public schools of Portland, Oregon beforeobtaining her bachelor’sdegree from Stanfordin 1894,just two yearsafterthe universityopenedits doorsto women.Afterobtainingherdegreeshedirected the historydepartment at SanDiegoHighSchoolin southern California,but her sightswere set on acareerin academia.In 1898shebeganstudies in sociology,economics,and philoso phyat the UniversityofChicago,whereshewas exposedto anunusuallyclose-knitcommu nity of women studying the socialsciencesunder the tutelage ofAlbionSmall,J.Laurence Laughlin,andThorsteinVeblen.Thanksin part to the unflaggingsupport ofMarionTalbot, Chicago’scleanof women, many of the female students in Eaves’scohort—including SophonisbaBreckinriclge,FrancesKellor,KatherineBementDavis,andAnnie M.MacLean— successfullycompletedtheir studies and went on to makea nameforthemselvesas profes sionals.ButEaves’ssojournin Chicagodid not last long. Thoughshereturned to the cityto continue her studies duringthe summers,Eavestraveledwest in 1899tojoin the facultyof StanfordUniversityasalecturerin “PacificSlope”history.Byacceptingafull-timeposition, Eaveswas ableto financiallysupport both herselfandher sisterAnnaRuth,with whom she livedformostofher life.1 FortunatelyforEaves,the intellectualclimateat Stanfordwas nolessexciting.In Palo Altosheworked closelywith adynamicgroupofscholarswho were activelyprobing ques tionsofsocialandpoliticalreform.HercolleaguesincludedcharitiesexpertsAmosG.Warner and MaryRoberts Smith(later Coolidge),economistsFranklin fetter and E.DanaDurand,

86 AimWilson

and the sociologists E.A.Ross anti George Howard, who became Eaves’smentors anti close friends.The student bodywas equallydynamic,sprouting personages like reformer Franklin Hichborn, suffragistsIda Rusted Harper and Ann Martin. and future U.S.President Herbert Hoover.13These were happy times for Eaves,hut they came to an abrupt end in late 1900, when Jane Stanford, the university’s sole trustee, dismissed Ross after lie publicly con demned Chinese immigration before a group of San Francisco labor leaders. Eaveswas not alone when she resignedin protest, but as a woman—and one without a Ph.D—she found it difficult to locate alternative academic employment. Therefore, when the San Francisco Settlement Associationofferedher the post ofhead worker in the summer of1901,she appar ently accepted it with Fewother options. Byrelocating herselfto 84 South Park,Eavesfound

herself succumbing to the bifurcated development ofearlytwentieth - century . The path she hoped to followwas precloiuinaiitly maleand ensconced in the academy. The path that welcomedher,however,was largelyfemaleand rooted in socialsettlements, volun tary associations, and, to an increasing degree,government.44 Despite her misgivings about taking on a position that was not “exactly university work,” Eavesdiscoveredthat the South Park Settlement presented an excellent opportunity to learn “averygood deal about social and economic conditions,” and she quickly developed a fiercecommitment to what she defined as popular education.45This work took on unique urgency given political developments in San Francisco. In the aftermath of a violent 1901 strike in which police defended strike-breakers, city voters swept mainstream political fig ures aside and elected as mayor Eugene I. Schmkz, president of the Musician’s Union and a representative of the nascent Union Labor Party.46This remarkable election made San Francisco the largest American city to be governed by a labor party, a situation Eaves re garded with cautious enthusiasm.47Though a strong supporter of trade unions, she shared ’sconviction that it was the duty ofintellectuals to hold the labor movement to its “highest ideal.”Eavesfelt that the South Park Settlement could carry out that responsi bility byworking to ensure the “intelligentuse ofthe great political power which these great organizations will wield.” Presenting her thoughts to the readers of the Settlement Association’s1903annual report, Eavesargued that closecoolieration with trade unionists would earn settlement workers “the right to criticize more radical measures which might proveinjurious.”Shefurther suggested that the Settlement had an important role to play in promoting the “the strongly educational tendencies” ofthe labor movement andi in lending support to legislation needed to protect the “weaker membersof the community.”48Making the most ofher new situation, and determined to connect her abstract intellectual interests to meaningfulwork in the public sphere, Eavesled the Settlement into partnerships with Californialabor leaders. The organization LucileEavesworked with most closelywas the San Francisco Labor Council (SFLC), a group that represented the city’s skilled ancisemi-skilled workers and espoused abrand of “businessunionism” that meshed well with the Settlement’s outlook.49

87 SETTLEuENI WORK IN A UNION TOWN

Eavesdeclaredits leadersto be “practicalsociologists”of“unusualnatural ability,”perhaps comparingthem to EdgarE.Clarke,the unionistdispatchedbyTheodoreRooseveltto serve as an “eminentsociologist”on the commissionthat mediatedthe Anthracite CoalStrike of 1902.Butshelamentedtheir lackoffreetimeto devoteto scientificstudy,andshe (earedthe impact this might have on the course of public lifein San Francisco.To help ensure the developmentof“intelligent”urban politicalleadershipand a “scientific”labor movement, Eavesofferedto share her clistifiationsof “the world’slatest thought on economicques tions.”° Tothat end, shecontributed oversixty articlesto the SFLCnewspaper,the Labor Clarion,between 1902and 1906. Coveringawide range oftopics,Eaves’s“Reviews of LaborLiterature”indeedpresented the latest thought on economicquestions, drawing material frompopular magazinesand academicjournals alike.A typical reviewsummarizedthe findingsof US LaborCommis sioner Carroll D.Wright’s SixrccnthAnnualRcport,a tome Eaves called “indispensableas a referencebook foreverystudent of the labor movement.”5’Asa non-academicpractitioner herself,EavesheldWright in the highest regard,insistingthat “noone. . . possessesafuller knowledge of labor conditions in this country than our Commissioner.”52Eavesreserved further praise for the “dignifiedforbearance”of United Mine Workers president John Mitchell, another important figure in the Anthracite Coal Strike.53Other articles offered historical analysesofEuropeanand Americantrade unions, explanations ofcontemporary labor law, and commentaryon the danger of machinepolitics. Interestingly, Eavesnever addressed the issue ofwoman suffrage—whetheror not she was an advocateremains un clear—butshedid touch uponthe uniqueneedsofworking women.’1 Nomatter her subject, though,Eavesusedstraightforwardlanguageand carefullyconstructed argumentsin order to narrow the dividebetween academicsocialscienceandwhat sheperceivedasthepractical concernsofhard-workinglabororganizers. On a personal level,Eaves’scontributions to the LaborClarionhelped to developher scholarlythinking about t]iesuccessesand failuresof Californialabor unions.Writing in March1903,she noted that “few students ofSanFranciscoconditions haverecognizedthe factthat the strengthofthelocallabormovement islargelydueto raceconditions.”Eaveswas commentingon two aspects oflocaldemography.On the onehand, she noted approvingly that “theclassesofEuropeanimmigrantsthat aremost difficultoforganizationand assimi lation rarelycometo California.”ThegeneralknowledgeofEnglishand the “superiorintel ligence”ofIrish,German,and native-bornAmericanworkers, she argued,contributed to a greaterunity ofactionthan was possiblein polyglotEasterncities. On the other hand, she stressed the important influenceofChineselabor. While Eavesrecognizedand distanced herselffromthe “raceprejudice”ofwhite workingmen,she neverchallengedexclusionary views.Likethe unionists shesoughtto educate—andlikeher mentor,the staunchlynativist E.A.Ross—shebelievedthat the presenceofChinese workersunfairlyloweredthe wagesof white craftsmen.Nevertheless,she maintained sufficientcritical distance to evaluatethe

88 gration. lectures entitled book impact w’orkcr. on inaugurated it institution factor campaign on ence its Union however, raise Council’s themselves.’9 opened tending the arguments exempted hundreds Association two implicating nia clubs, make Settlement tatives tile next that “secure enthusiastic Labor labor most Legislative Club—derived years. of tile Whereas In year’s the a on Eaves—who to of the special ill addition this the forces and problems loss state’s “University Walter the the Disputes” to the the by tile Law’ of against Her agricultural craft, ‘vVith like put fruit Settlement to the mould belief postcards of the discussions the Pacific, history of attention State strength effort and greater Collegiate could Dorothea most forth Committee the age approval, Settlement child with program crop vigorous to financial MacArthur, the had in Legislative public her South limit Senate and belonged authority to served by prominent of meet the by their Settlements labor “common labor, accomplish participation to voluminous gymnasium of on and Alexander California “The of banning on Hawaiian rural Moore herself reporting Park Alum opposition the opinion,” assistance the weakened wives for employment in as in support at topics but History to moderator. a California lobbying Committee “frank editor canning dcvelopment precincts Settlement from statewide, nac, enemy” the w’ith public entered and the children both and labor of Saxton work that once islands she but Association of canners’ her of discussion.” friends.”59 by particular from of of tile two those season Trade the of for from San prepared the the it role of organized Ann warning qualifications legislation, a labor for politics bill In invited these could month labor-led could from and local meticulously Chinese it instigated CoastScamoi’sJounial, Typographical latter acklition Francisco Wilson the of prominent came twelve deceptive in so Unions,” would Micheal A movement”—an the goals work branches interest Sacramento.62 thoroughly be Labor also of subsecjucnt her for literature event farmers Eaves mainly in of Collegiate labor. California labor campaign to Eaves to meetings to and furnish usc in result a Clarion, 1903 fruit fourteen Kazin tactics sponsoring was lively assist as members researched Eaves pledged the to announced to “contributed of through that In -, working a Union.” astutely when canning in working by fields. the attended in university a talk “neutral discussion in more Eaves Alumnae labor support that the proved Their organized outlined September lost amendment years.6’ Consumers’ the that assertion given of newspaper the law The her was lectures lectures The profits. than drafting men opened the observed movement. compames, efforts a people. by the territory” successful. San would new work of proposed more by Eaves to but community Labor trained the a six onJapancse and by Settlement the “good-sized last Katherine 1902 Francisco that series like Canners that were not on the decades of trade League many than Not with women.”57 jeopardize bill readily of Clarion that for legislation “Injunctions these, doors the anticipated where cover the who In it settlement of legislation an only Rcprescn more thwarted, any unionists women’s provided ways the her ci “regular Califor who and Sailors’ Cornan agreed, later. mailed voiced would joined feared immi Labor of Eaves could other audi story than con long 1910 She the the the do an to 89 ‘ SETUEMENT \\‘oRK IN A UNIONTOWN even fewer restrictions than the existing law. Accepting defeat, the LegislativeCommittee withdrew its proposal and vow’cclto return in 1905. For the next two years,Eavescontinued to fight against child laborbyhelping to ensure strenuous enforcementofthe compulsoryeducation law, ameasure that did make it through the 1903legislature. As afirst step, Eavestook on a briefposition at the California Bureau of Labor Statistics, where she conducted a study on women and children wage earners in San Francisco and Oakland. In a survey ofover two hundred businesses, she concluded that far too many children had been permanently withdrawn from school.61Next, Eavesdirected a private study carried out by members of the Settlement Association. Using the records of San Francisco’sTwenty-First School District, which encompassed the South Park neigh borhood, Eavesand her coworkers investigated the whereabouts ofseveralhundred children between the agesoffiveand seventeenwhowere listed ashaving attended neither public nor private schools during the school year ending in June 1902.In a report published in the WcstcrnJounial of Education, Eaves publicized her findings. First, she Foundthat of the 436 children investigated, 141had moved or could not be found, suggesting a high number of “transient residents” in the district. Ofthe children agedeight to fourteen whowere covered by the existing law, “allbut eight were in schoolor started at the beginning ofthe next term.” Eavesconcluded that “theactual number ofchildren on the streets has been grosslyexagger ated,” but she insisted that there still remained “an unquestionable need for the present vigorouseffort to enforcethe compulsory education law.”65 Blurring the line between disinterested investigation and engaged political interveti tion, Eavestook the matter ofenforcementinto her ownhands. Throughout her research she remained “onthe lookout for children ofschool ageplaying on the streets” and she included in her report severalcomments about “dirtyfaced”girls and gangs of“little criminals”whose parents allow’cdthem to stay home forthe “mosttrivial reasons.”Eavesreferredat least three young boys to juvenile detention homesand macicfivevisits to a single familyin order to persuadethem to place their daughter back in school.66Thoughshe admitted that families often put their children to work because of “stern economic necessity,”she pointed to in stances of “carelessnessor indolence on the part ofthe parents” and was not afraid to inter venewhere she found parental guidance to be lacking.67At the close ofher report, shelegiti mated her actions by calling for increased intervention by truant officers and “other inter ested neighborhood workers.”66 In 1905the San Francisco LaborCouncil and the SanFrancisco Settlement Association returned to Sacramentoto win the passageofa revampedchild laborlaw.This time,how’ever, they organized on amuch grander scale.Bothsettlement w’orkersand union officialshelped to draft revisions that made the bill more palatable to canning companies, but members of the Settlement Association took the lead in obtaining the support of business interests throughout the state—making good on LucileEaves’spromise that the Settlement would influence “those prominent members of the community who do the most to mould public

90 AnnVilson opinion.” J. P. Chamberlain, a San Francisco lawyer and a member of the Settlement Association’sgoverningcouncil,securedthe endorsementofthe SanFranciscoivlerchants’ Associationand the LosAngelesand Santa Barbarachambers ofcommerce.He alsomade arguments onbehalf ofthe bill before the joint Senateand Assemblycommittee. Settlement workersjoined himin interviewingeverymemberofthe legislatureand together theywatched carefullyto prevent the bill fromcomingto the floorwhile its Friendswere absent. Settlement workers also arranged for the publication ofsupportive editorials in San Francisco new’spa pers, and they sent arguments in Favorof the measure to nearly every paper in the state. Finally,they won Governor George Pardee’sconsent to be quoted as being “heartilyin sym pathy with such legislation.”Thanks in part to Lucile Eaves’sefforts to bring her middle- classpeers into collaborationwith the leaders ofthe SFLC,the measurepassed, the Governor signed it into law, and the state Labor Commissioner energetically took up the cause of enforcement. In [906the California State SupremeCourt sealed the victory by declaring the lawconstitutional.7° Becauseofits synergy,the coalition between the San Francisco Settlement Association and the San Francisco LaborCouncilstands out in the history ofrelations between working class and middle-class reformers in early twentieth century San Francisco. Certainly the LaborClarion remarked on the uniqueness ofthe partnership, praising LucileEavesforestab - lishing closer relations with the labor movement than had been the case with other middle classgroups. The significanceofthe LaborClarion’sunique affection forEavesis underscored bythe relative absence ofCaliforniaclubwomen fromcontemporary reports about the legis lativecampaign.Although Dorothea Moore brieflymentions child labor reform as aconcern ina 1906report on the work ofwomen’sclubs in California,MaryGibson’sARecordofTwcnty FiveYearsoftheCaliforniaFcclerationofWomen’sClubselidesthe issue altogether, focusinginstead on the concurrent battle to establish a statewide juvenile court system. A yearbook of the California Club from the same period is similarly silent on child labor, and contemporary newspaper articles consistently name the SFLCand the San Francisco Settlement Associa tion as campaign leaders, but give no mention of allied women’s groups.7 Though they consideredchildren’sissuesparamount, organizedwomenat this timewere apparently more likely to assume political leadership on problems relating to juvenile delinquency, public education, and the dearth of urban playgrounds. To the extent that middle-class women outside the Settlement did get involvedin the campaign for child labor reform—the Colle giateAlumnae provided financial assistance, after all—they appear to have done sovia their association with LuciteEaves.Her presence helped to bridge the divide between tradition allydistant groups. Historians havenoted the difficult challengesposed by class-bridging activismin early twentieth-century San Francisco. Rebecca Mead’s analysis of San Francisco trade union women and California’slegislated minimum wage, for example, has shown how middle elassand working-class women came to loggerheads overlegislation purporting to protect

91 SETTtt.IEcT \VoRI IN A UNION TOWN theinterests offemaleworkers72Conflictbetweenmiddle-classandworking-classactivists in the woman suffrage movement has also been well documented, notably by Susan Englancler’sstudy ofthe SanFranciscoWage Earners’SuffrageLeague.73What, then, con tributed to the successfulpartnership between the SanFranciscoSettlement Association and the SanFranciscoLaborCouncil?What macicthis coalitiondifferent? Althoughthe South Park Settlementwas foundedwith the goalofbringing disparate classestogether in mutualunderstanding,this aimwas not fullyrealizeduntil LucileEaves ledthe Settlementinto politicalcollaborationwith the SanFranciscoLaborCouncil.Several factorsmadethe partnershipstick.First,Eavesearnedthe respectandtrust ofworking-class leaders by placingher scholarlyabilities at their disposal.Her contributions to the Labor Clarion,togetherwith herwillingnessto dedicatethe Settlement’sresourcestoward investi gationsdesignedto improveenforcementofthe compulsoryeducationlaw, establishedher commitment to labor’scause—eventhough her effortsclearlyspoke to her own goals,as well. This trust was further bolstered by Eaves’sinsistence on opening the doors of the Settlementto greaterusebylocaltrade unions.Second,Eavesand her cohorts willinglyfell into step behind SFLCleadership,rather than attempting to wrest control ofthe campaign for themselves,as clubwomen sought to do in the campaignfor the legislativeminimum wage.Third,theneedforchildlaborreformwasatopiconwhichallpartiescouldeasilyagree. Althoughthey mayhaveapproachedthe issue fromdifferentperspectives,trade unionists, settlementworkers,andcivic-mindedmerchantsallagreedthat the state shouldinterveneto restrict childrenfromthe workplace.Finally,the Settlementitselfprovidedsharedinstitu tional space—or“neutral territory,”to use Eaves’sphrase—where all these groups could cometogetherto work toward their commongoal.

Thevictoryonchildlaborclosedachapter in the historyofthe SouthPark Settlement. In August1905,six months after the law was signedinto effectby GovernorPardee,Lucile Eaveswrote to E.A.Rossexpressingher desireto pursue doctoral study in sociologywith Franklin Giddingsat ColumbiaUniversity. Afterfouryearsofhard work, she felt shewas readyforachange,and sheadmitted fearsthat that her settlement responsibilities—which entailed entertaining neighborhoodchildren as well as spearheadingpolitical reforms— tended toward “provincialism.”Shefullyintended to return to Californiawith her degree, however,believingthat it would affordher greater effectivenessin leadingthe “newsocial movements”of the PacificCoast.74Beforesheleft, Eavesturned her post at the Settlement overto Mary Roberts Coolidge,w’ho,havinglost herjob at Stanfordas a result of a break down sufferedafteradivorce,foundherselfin a positionsimilarto the oneEaveshad beenin fouryearsearlier.75BySeptember,Eaveshad movedto NewYorkCity.tm The ensuing years brought unexpected challengesfor the San Francisco Settlement Association.When the earthquake and fireofApril1906destroyed the South Park Settle-

92 AnnWilson ment and leftits ne1ghborhooclin ruins, settlement workers relocated to the Mission Dis trict, where they reestablished themselvesas the SanFrancisco Settlement. The few’records that remain from the years after 1906suggest that the organization’s reform impulse less ened during this period in favorof neighborhood reliefand a continued emphasis on social clubs for boys and girls. A 1912tundraising piece, for example, describes the Settlement as “great Club-House, a SocialGathering Place and a Center for Neighborhood Relief in the NHssion, adding that it “doesnot givemoney to the poor because it has no moneyto give.”77 Newspaper coverage fromthe same period similarly notes frequent social events, but does not suggest anysustained political activity.78And when the reform-minded National Asso ciation of Settlements was founded in 1911,the San Francisco Settlement did not become a member. Instead, San Francisco was represented in that group by Elizabeth Ashe of the Telegraph Hill Neighborhood Center, a settlement whose history remains to be written.79If the San Francisco Settlement Association indeed participated in reform campaigns after 1906,the traces are difficult to find. For her part, Eaveswent on to build a successful career as a professional sociologist. When the 1906earthquake struck SanFrancisco, she immediatelyleft her studies to partici pate in the relief effort.8 By1910she had published her book about Californialabor legisla tion andcompleted her Ph.D.,thanks in part to fellowshipsfromthe University of California and the Carnegie Foundation. Although she had intended to participate further in the social movements of the PacificCoast, she took advantage of newrprofessional opportunities to teach applied sociologyat the university level,first at the University ofNebraska, alongside her former Stanford colleague,George Howard, and then at Simmons College in Boston, where she also served as director of the Women’s Educational and Industrial Union. In 1925 she finallyachieved her goalofbecoming a full professor. Despite her academic placement, however,shecontinued to applythe fruits ofher researchto concrete politicalends, conduct ing numerous studies on working women and children in order to inform the practice of socialworkers and policy makers. In this sense, she held on to the model of social scientific practice she developed ashead worker forthe San Francisco Settlement Association.

AnnWilsonrcccivcdaBuchclorofAitsinI,itcrdisciplina,ySocialscicnccsfromthcUnivcisiryofMichigan. ShcisctincntlyworkingonaMasrciofArtsinhistoiyarSanFrancisco5tatcUnivcrsuy. “Scttlcmcnt Workina UnionTown”wasawardcd&stGraduatePaperinthe20012002SanFranciscoLabor ArchivcsandRcscarchCenterEssayContest,andGrandPrizcat theNorthcrnCaliforniaPhiAlphaThcta ConfcrcnccinApril2002.

93 75 11 F. of Mina House 1930” 1880 the 1923,” trom Histon’ Rivka Chicago Peggy Volume 66; Papers, of Allen in Culture, Neighbor California. of Gutman, Black Rutgers ‘Hull the 1870 to 45 1895 See Kerher, of Women Microfilms Latin Oxford 1950, University Mississippi, loses (Knoxville: cinch l23. (New Politics, of N in Hybrid ofSettlements survey. Nlarta Political Sldar, treatment Quinn, the Club, ofArncrican 1607 Linda Hill: 1918 York: (1970): University of see Press,.1992); 1893), University 62; Kish Brunswick: Nebraska. feminism, University 1987). depth 22:1 Pioneer 1892 GenderandAmerieanSonal University Bernard Lasch 35 Women’s (New American Jownal west Women, Handbook “Cultural in HouseMovement and of Century (Chapel SocialControl Crocker,SocicilW’orka,iclSocial ed., lllinis Community (New and 1939 andthcProgrcssh’cMovcmcnt, (Chicago: A ot School, (Chicago: Rise cds., Arbor: Kathryn Library, Nloses: 1945 Moses, 1990): New Settlement, comprehensive American uaiterIv America, 1914 go History” receive 1874 &Company, 193(1 Studyof Elizabeth 16. 1919 of VenididtflarAlchliteCture 55. also 1896 to (Ann 1$90s: and Colorado, iii TOWN 1890 most settlements Chico Silverberg, theSettlement “Women 1885 West, 212 See 127 Hutchinson Rousmanier, 1590 Work:Thc Bernard yet Bancroft the Kennedy, “Bernard Press the University 1984); Oakland Oakland NotableAmericcui P. Arnericcrn Otdet:A can of in Crowell of \Vomen’s Papers From of active Foundation, have Ruth the 1895, ccl., 199$), UNIO of Helene 1895). Building Movement, 61 John \Vest Press, Nation’s Men at 2(1962): A California, Lebsock, 1894,” in see ThcSocialSettlcrncnts Movement, Albert). House Sage Watson, Co. the movement’s in theArneri the (Urbana: iN Change: the lists House Press, University E. Report, houses in Acldams of and ThomasY. 1889 the dud Work Rhetoric T.James, include 1930 TheSentinels ,” “Hull as homes Suzanne Institution Russell PiogressiveMoverncnt, Jane revisions York: Autobiography University WORK forRefonn: The the Kdlevand York: Powcr,Placcs:Pcrspective.s andSocial 1889 Crowell& Settlement ci,idtheNcwlmrnigicntts. House, \Voocls in Stdar, Settlements Addams University Karger, Edward 1894, 1961, FirstAnntial Y. 1995); settlement York: stands A. andthe (New Place: critical Female mission exploration in Settlement (New People, 79. House HistoricalReviesu’42: Kish Florence still Work Berkcley;James of For 1950 Spearheads Columbia rialCitics. (New Press, interpretations eds., l4Jtine 24$ Robert (SFSA), Thomas western and theAmerican February Settlement Princeton Sklar, SETTLF\lExT Hcindbookof 1915 andtheArner;canSettlement Progress Piofessionciltcm Craft Dccgan,]wie in Strategy: women’s 198$). York: Incitist \\‘oman’s Sec study, Peixotto,” 20 Kathryn the 77; as HowarciJacob 1911 Jo May1902. York: on \Vomen’s and Change 2000): architectural positive \Vhile works Two 9 California, 29; 1967 as and 658 University in (New Refonn Thought alone. of and an - Scalapino, Books, Art and TlieSocialSettlcments Mary of \Vorlds, Progressivisrn:Hull 512 Association ‘Jessica (New’ later 1903, (Princeton: Press, Other ThesecuchforFernaleMoralAuthoritv For 1970). Troylander, Yale The Anderson, TheHispanicArnericcm available and for and 1993); (1985): Science is Limits Housel,lovement, Robert Woman “Separatism Years Movement Francisco), Female Politics, (1979): Report. Foundation’s Folk:Social to 1994). California the Press, Rescue: August 1990). 10:4 tone anclAnnmai-ieAclams, University Sarah sympathetic tothePresent Haven: of 1990); Press, in Transaction 5:3 Social PhilanthiropvandSocial 28 Settlement to 39. 1984). (San Pluralism Tennessee the Sage 1886 Arno NJ: 9 College Annual Press, Institution: of Settkrnent Press, literature Fonnath’e Spheres, (New set Davis’s Scholarship,” \\‘omen, Press, Freedman, lcNlurry Library, Bellquist Studies Settlement located the Relations The First F. N Clarion, 89): 1_issak, in SpearheaclsforRefonn: The Carolina 19$9);juclithAnn York: C. Acldams Addams, Russell 19t4, 21 1900 Francisco Centers, bust Sally Lcthor Estelle Allen LaborClcwion Eric The SFSA, San NOTES I Reformcrs,”Signs 2 Fern 1830 1920,” “Separate (1988 1890 Davis, University Slums: Press, Chicago Brunswick, Carson, Oider:TheSettleme,it Shpak North hood Neiglthors:Raceancl (New historians, ?\linneapohs with Pascoe, University “Inside in University International, 6jane Berkeley. 6HullHotisesJapsandPape,s 7]ane SldltisandPapels: Science: Ilancroft 94 American Ann\ ‘ilson

(Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Press, 1971):42 43.

2 Fannie \V. Ntckean to Jane Addams, 26 Septenther 1893.Jane Addams Papers; Philip Ethington, ThePublicCity: ThePoliticalConstructionofUrbant_i[cinSanFrancisco,18501900(Berkeley:University of California Pres, 1994), 353. Fred E.Haynes tofaneAclclams, 19]anuary 1895; SfSA, FirstAnnualReport,1895. San Francisco (Harrison Street) Boys’Club, FirstAnnualReport,1894, Bancroft Library, University of California, Berkeley; Associated Charities oI’SanFrancisco,AnnuctlReport,1895,Bancroft library, University ofCalifornia, Berkeley. The Buford Kitchengarten offered classes inhousekeeping, sewing, and cooking to neighborhood girls. SeeC. K.Jenness, ThcCharitiesofSanFrancisco(PaloAlto:Published forthe Department ofEconomics and SocialScience, Lelancl StanforclJr. Univerisity, 1894). For more on the Kitchengarten movement, see Dolores Hayden, TheGrand Do,ncsticRevolutioti(Cambridge: The MIT Press, 1995):125 26. OttrSocietyBlueBook(San ErCincisco:Hoag& Irving,1895);Carol Roland,“TheCalifornia Kindergarten Movement:AStudy in Class and SocialFeminism”(Ph.D.cuss.,University ofCalifornia Riverside,1980),13. AssociatedCharitiesofSanFrancisco,AnnualReport,1895. Millicent Shinn,“Povertyand Charity in San Francisco,”OverlandMonthly14(November 1889):541,543. ‘7Katherine Coman, “The Sotith Park Settlement, San Francisco,” ThcConimons8 (August1903): S. Ibid.;SFSA,FirstAnnualReport. ‘ SFSA,FirstAintttctlReport, Sanborn Insurance Nlaps,1899,microfilm, University of California, Berkeley. 21 Ibid.; SFSA,First Annual Report, 1895. Formore information on the South of Marker district, see\\illiam Isseland Robert W. Cherny,SunFrancisco186.51932:PoliticsPower,andUrbanDevelopment(Berkeley:Universityof California Press, 1986),58 63;and JulesTygiel,WorkingmeninSanFrancisco,18801901(New York:Garland Publishing, 1992),233 73. The South of Market neighborhood is alsodescribed by Jack1_onclonin his short story,”Soutb ofthe Slot.” Formoreon San Franciscocharities,see MaryAnn Irwin, “GoingAbout anti Doing

Good’:The I ady NlanagersofSan Francisco”(master’sthesis, San FranciscoState University, 1995),and

Roland,“TheCaliforniaKindergartenNlovement.” Isseland Cherny, 59. AssociateclCharitiesof San Francisco.AitittictlReport,1895. Fora particularlyunfavorableportrait,seeRayGinger.Altgeld’sAmcrica:TheLinccshtlclealversusChangiitgRealities (New York: Fuiik & \\‘agnalls, 1958),15 34. 24 Coman, 7.

25 FannieNIcLean,“SouthParkSettlement:Characteristic\\‘ork in a SanFranciscoNeighborhood,”TheConnnoits 14 (June 1897):2. Ibid.; Issel and Cherny, 59. Sanborn Insurance Nlaps, 1899,microfilm,UniversityofCalifornia,Berkeley.Becauseofthe demographics of its neighborhood,the South ParkSettlementneveremphasi:eclAmericaniEationprogramsin its literature. Other San Franciscosettlements,however,were moreexplicit in attending to the perceivedneedsof immigrant communities. TheTelegraphHillNeighborhoodAssociation,located nearthe city’snorthern waterfront,catered its programs to Italian immigrants. The True SunshineEpiscopalMissionfocusedits work on Chinese immigrant women. See\Voocls and Kennedy, 15 24, and Pascoe. chapter 3. 24 SFSA, FotirthAnnualReport,1898,Bancrnft Library. University of California, Berkeley. San Francisco Boys’Club Association, SeconclAitnttalReport,1895,Bancroft Library, University ofCalifornia, Berkeley. 5SFSA, SecondAnnualReport,1896,Bancroft Library,University of California, Berkeley; SFSA, FifthAiiiittalRepoi’t, l$99, Bancroft Library, University of California, Berkeley. SFSA,SecondAnitualReport.

‘‘ SFSA,FirstAnnualReport;SFSA,FifthAnnualReport. SFSA,ThirdAnnualReport;SFSA,Fotti’tltAnnualReport.For more on women’sclubs,see Karen Blair,ThcClubw’ounan

95 SETTLEx1ET \VORK IN \ UNlt.\ Iü\VN

as feminist(New York:Holmes& XleierPublishers,1980). SFSA,FowtliAnnualReport. ‘ Ethington, 353 54. ‘ Dorothea Moore lived an interesting and eventful lifethat deserves further attention from historians. SeeMark Thompson, AmericanCharactenTheCuriousLifeofCharlesFlctcherLumini.suncltheRediscoveiyoftheSouthwcst(New York: Arcade Publishing, 2001),15 16,12226, 13539; GayleGullett, &comingCitizens:TheEmergenceandDevelopmentof theCalifonnaUomen’sMovemoit,1880 1911(Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2000), 141-42;jane Addams to Anita McCormick Blame,Sjanuary 1896,]ane AddamsPapers; RockwellDennisHunt, CcthfoniiaandCal!fonuaiis (New York: The Lewis Publishing Company, 1926),475-76. SFSA,F!fthAnnualReport. Ibid.; florothea Moore, “SanFrancisco Settlement Association,”MovhaiitsAssociationRevien’(February 1900):3; California Club, ‘iembook,1905, Bancroft Library, Universit)’ of California, Berkeley, CA;Gullett, 139 40. SFSA,FfihAnnualReport;Ethington, 352. ‘ Although Bernard Moses and Fred Haynes were amongthe first resident workers, both leftthe Settlement afterless than a year. Thereafter allhead workers, and most residents, were women. Mary Kincaidto Fannie McLean, lsjuly 1895,\tcLean Family Papers, CartonS, Bancrolt Library, Universityof Calilornia, Berkeley; SFSA, FiftliAiinucilReport.

Gullett, 141142;MaryGibson,ARecordofTh’entyFiveYcarsofthcCtilfirniaEedcrationofWomen’sClubs,1900192.5 (California Federation ofWomen’sClubs, 1927),34 36. Maryjo Rccgan, “LucilcEaves,”in Niaryjo Deegan,ed.,WomoiinSociolo,D’:ALIlaBibliographicalSourcebook(New York:Greenwood Press,1991),140 4l;j. Graham Morgan,“Women in AmericanSociologyin the 191 Century,” ]ournaloftheHistoryofSociolo’2:2 (Spring1980):29.Formoreon women and the socialsciencesat the University ofChicago,seeEllenFit:geralcl,EncllessCrusade:WomenSocialScicntistsandProgressiveReform(New York:Oxford University Press. 1990). Foradiscussion ofintellectual currents at Stanfordduring this period, see Ethington, 349 52. 4]ames C.Mohr,“AcademicTurmoiland PublicOpinion:The RossCase at Stanford,”PacJicHistoricalReview39 (1970):39-61;Mary0. Furner,AclvocacvcmdObjectivitv:ACrisisintheProfessionalizationofAmo’icanSocialScience,1865 1905(Lexington: University of Kentucky Press, 1975),22959; Deegan,“1_ueileEaves,”141.On women and earlysocialscientificpractice,seeNancyFolbre,“The‘SphereofWomen’in Early Twentieth -Century Econom ics,”mnSilverberg,ed.,GenderandAmei-icanSocialscience,35-60;and RobinNluncy,CreatingafenudeDominionin AmericanReform,18901935(New York: Oxford University Press, 1991). ‘ LucileEaves to IA. Ross,20 November,1901,Eclw’arclA.Ross Papers,‘WisconsinHistorical Society, Madison,Wisconsin. 16Tygiel.“Where Unionism Holds Undisputed Sway:AReappraisalofSan Francisco’sUnion LaborParty,” Californiaflistoty63 (Fall 1983):196 215, Lucile Eaves to IA. Ross, 20 November, 1901. SfSA,NinthAnnualReport,1903,Bancro[tLibrary,UniversityofCalifornia,Berkeley. MaryAnn Mason,“NeitherFriends nor Foes:Organised 1_aborand the CaliforniaProgressives,”in William Deverelland TomSitton,ecis.,CaliforniaProgressh’ismRevisited(Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress,1994), 60. The SFLCtook the leadin formingthe CaliforniaState FederationofLabor. See PhilipTaft,LaborfoliticsAmerican Style:IheCalifoi’niaStateFederationofl_abor(Cambridge:HarvardUniversityPress,1968). “ Lewis I. Gould, ThePresidencyofTheodoreRoosevelt(Lawrence, Kansas: University Press of Kansas, 1991),70- 71.SFSA,NinthAnnualReport. “LaborCiarion,26 September1902, e 1_abarClarion, 23] anuary 1903. ‘LciborClctrion,5 December1902.

96 Aiiii\ilson

For a representative selection ofarticles, see Labor Clarion, 31October 1902,27 March 1903,1May 1903,15

January 1904, 11March 1904, 11November 1904, 28 April 1905, 5 May 1905, 19]anuary 1906. LaborClarion,25 March1903, 24 April1903. 6Eaves, AHistoryofCalj.rniaLaborLcgislatioii(Berkeley:University ofCalifornia Publications in Economics, 1910), 5 6. Both Saxton and KaEincite Eavesin their work.SeeMexanclerSaxton,TheIndispensableFunny:Laborcutcithe AntiChineseMovementinCalifornia(Berkeley:University ofCalifornia Press, 1971),and Michael Kain, “The Great Exception Revisited: OrganiEed Labor and Politics in San Francisco and LosAngeles, 1870-1940,”PacificHistoriccd Rcvicw55 (August 1986): 371-402. LaborClarion,19September1902. LaborClarion,14November 1902,7 November1902. 55LaborClcuion,26 December1902; Coman, 9 ° Association of Collegiate Alumnae Rcgistcr,December,1903.Inthe LaborClarion,Eavesemphasized her university background. LaborClarion,19September 1902. Eaves,AHisteiyofCalforiiiaLaborLegiclation,299. Ibid.; LaborClarion,28August1901;SFSA,NinthAnnualRcport. ° Eaves,299 300;LaborClarion,27March 1903. EleventhBiennialReportofthel3ureauofLctborStatisticsforthcStateofCalfornia(Sacramento:SuperintendentState Printing, 1904), 1117. LudileEaves,“SchoolAttendancein the 21”District SchoolofSanFrancisco,”WcstcrnJournalofEducation,October 1904, 717-20. 66Ihid, ° t_aborClarion,21August1903. Eaves,“SchoolAttendance,” 720. Eaves’szealousness in enforcing the compulsory education lawisreminiscent of the energy that Florence Kclleybrought to factory inspection in Illinois. Both women iced resistance and angerfromthe people they believedthey were helping. And while the reformsthey pursued mayhavebenefited many, both women likelycausedat least some short term hardship forfamiliesthat depended on children’s wagesin order to makeends meet. Inthe caseof Hull House,Kelleyfocusedon enforcement ofchild labor laws while JaneAddams macIcaneffortto assist impacted familiesthrough mothers’meetingsand working women’s clubs at the Settlement. Vs’hetheranysimilardynamicoccurred at the South ParkSettlement isunclear. Forthe HullHouseexperience,seeSidar,FlorenceKellevandthcNation’sWork,280 85,and “ACommunityol ‘v\’omen Reformers.”671-73. LaborClarion,14November1902. Eaves,AHiston’ofCaliforniaLaborLegislation,301-04. ° Dorothea Moore,“TheWork ofthe W7omen’sClubsin California,”AnnulsofiheAmericanAcadcmvcfPoliticciland SocialScience28 (Summer 1906):257 60;Gibson,A RecordofTwentvFiveYeats,34 36:California Clcib,Yearbook, 1905;Call(San Francisco) 21]anuary 1905;MerchantsAssociationReview,February 1905,4. Rebecca]. Xlead,“Let the \\‘omen Get their Wages as Men Do’: Trade U nion \Vomen and the I.cgislatccl Minimum\\‘age in California,”PacificHistoricalReview’67(1998): 317-47. ° Susan Englander,“TheSan FranciscoWage Earners’SuffrageLeague:ClassConflict and Class Coalition in the California\Voman Sufirage Movement,1907 1912”(master’sthesis, San FranciscoState University, 1989).See alsoGuflert,BecomingCitizcns.Cooperation between clubwomcnand trade unionists was stronger in I_osAngeles. See Katz, “Frances Nacke Noeland ‘Sister Movements’: Socialism, Feminism and Trade Unionism in LosAngeles, 1909-1916,”California History67(Septemher 1988):18189. Forcross class collaboration andeonflict among women in other cities,seeNancySchromRye,AsEqualsandAsSisters:Feminism,theLaborMovenient,ancitheWomen’s TradeUnionLeagueofNew’York(Columbia:UniversityofMissouriPress,1980),and Meredith Tax, TheRisingofthe Women:FeministSolidaritvanclClcissConflict,18801917(New York:MontHy ReviewPress,1980).

97 =

SETTiEMENTWORK IN AUNION TOWN

° Ludile Eaves to E. A. Ross, $ August 1905. ° Deegan, “Lucile Eaves,”141; Deegan, “Mary Elizabeth Burroughs Roberts Smith Coolidge (1860 1945),”in

Maryjo Deegan,ed., WomenI SocioIov:AJIb t3ibliographicciISourccbool(New York:Greenwood Press, 1991),100 109. ° Lucile Eaves to E. A. Ross, 28 September 1905. ° SESA,“DollarCampaign,” San Francisco Settlement Vertical File,California Historical Society,San Francisco. Seealso Phoebe A. Hearst Papers, San Francisco Settlement Folder. Container 10,BancrottLibrary,Universityof California, Berkeley. Call,29 September 1910,2 May 1912,5]une 1912. ° Settlement Bible,”Archiveofthe National FederationofSettlements, 1899195$ (\\‘ooclbridge:CT: Research

Publications.19891990),Text fiche. Telegraph Hill NeighborhoodCenter, AnnualReport, 1911.BancroftLibrary, UniversityofCalifornia,Berkeley,CA. sEaves “\Vhere San Francisco was Sorest Stricken,”CharitiesandtheCommons16(May1906): 161163;james Rogers,“SocialSettlements in the San Francisco Disaster,”CharitiesanddieCommon.s16:9(June 2,1906):31113. Decgan,“LucileEaves,”142.Asdirector ofthe WEIU, Eavesauthored severalreports related to working women andchflclren:TheFoodof9’oiking’oineninBoston(1917):TiainiugforStoreScnicc:thel.‘tjcatio,iulEvpcricuccsand TrainmgofJtnenilcEniploveesofRetailDepctrtinent,DivGoodsandClotlnngSiorcsinBoston(1920);Oldcigesiipportofuvmcn teuchc,:s:PmvisionsforOldAges ladeliv‘WomenTeacher.siii thePublicSchoolsofMassachusetts(1921);GainfulEmplovnientof Handicappedl’omen(1921);ChildreninNcedofSpecialCcirc:,Studie.sBasedonTwoThousandCaseRecordscsfSocialAgencies

(1923):A1_cgucvtoWa’eEmuingl ‘ume,cASwvesofGai,fiilIvEmployedWomeninBrattleboro,1‘crmola,andofRelief11‘hich TheyHaveRccenedfromtheThomasThompsonTnist(1925).

9$