THE GENEROSITY OF SERVICE

Probably the most generous people in the world are the very poor, who assume each other’s burdens in the crises which come so often to the hard pressed.  The mother in the tenement falls ill and the neighbour in the next room assumes her burdens.  The father loses his work, and neighbours supply food to his children from their own scanty store.  How often one hears of cases where the orphans are taken over and brought up by the poor friend whose benefaction means great additional hardship!  This sort of genuine service makes the most princely gift from superabundance look insignificant indeed.  The Jews have had for centuries a precept that one-tenth of a man’s possessions must be devoted to good works, but even this measure of giving is but a rough yardstick to go by.  To give a tenth of one’s income is wellnigh an impossibility to some, while to others it means a miserable pittance.  If the spirit is there, the matter of proportion is soon lost sight of.  It is only the spirit of giving that counts, and the very poor give without any self-consciousness.  But I fear that I am dealing with generalities again.

The education of children in my early days may have been straightlaced, yet I have always been thankful that the custom was quite general to teach young people to give systematically of money that they themselves had earned.  It is a good thing to lead children to realize early the importance of their obligations to others but, I confess, it is increasingly difficult; for what were luxuries then have become commonplaces now.  It should be a greater pleasure and satisfaction to give money for a good cause than to earn it, and I have always indulged the hope that during my life I should be able to help establish efficiency in giving so that wealth may be of greater use to the present and future generations.

Perhaps just here lies the difference between the gifts of money and of service.  The poor meet promptly the misfortunes which confront the home circle and household of the neighbour.  The giver of money, if his contribution is to be valuable, must add service in the way of study, and he must help to attack and improve underlying conditions.  Not being so pressed by the racking necessities, it is he that should be better able to attack the subject from a more scientific standpoint; but the final analysis is the same:  his money is a feeble offering without the study behind it which will make its expenditure effective.

Great hospitals conducted by noble and unselfish men and women are doing wonderful work; but no less important are the achievements in research that reveal hitherto unknown facts about diseases and provide the remedies by which many of them can be relieved or even stamped out.