Many of those who come to this country are in debt for their passage.
Others have left near relatives at home who must be helped to come
over. Some have come, intending to establish themselves and to be
married here. Some expect to take back a part of their earnings to
better the condition of those left behind. Their coming, whether to
stay permanently or to return, often does not relieve them of their
obligations to the group in the old country.
One of the strongest impressions that the reader gets from the letters
in _The Polish Peasant_ is that of the frequency with which relatives
in the old country ask for money from the one who has gone ahead. It
is not only his wife and children, or aged parents, that ask for
money, but all the members of the wider familial group, and sometimes
even friends with no claim on the score of kinship.
The purposes for which they ask money are various; in the Borek
series, for example, a son of the family is asked to send money
because the family is in debt and has taxes to pay; to send money for
the dowry of his sister; for a forge; for a sewing machine, and for a
phonograph. He is also told that if he sends money home it will not be
wasted, but will be put out at interest. Other claims for money are
put forward in other series, possibly the most common one being a
request for a steamship ticket. The letters show clearly that it is
customary to send money for fête days, "name days," or birthdays,
Christmas, Easter, and other occasions. A failure to do so brings
reproach coupled with a reminder that others who had gone from the
village had sent money. In the Wrobelski series the family ask money
from the member in this country for a new church at home. Every Sunday
the priest reads aloud the names of those who have contributed. It
therefore seems to the immigrant imperative that from his present
earnings certain amounts shall be set aside.
When the first hard times are past and the members of the immediate
family are reunited, there comes the reaction to the experience of
depending on the money wage. There arises the fear of disaster growing
out of interruption of the income, or misfortune involving especially
heavy expenditure.
The United States Treasury Department in its "Thrift" campaign lays
down the doctrine _save first_ and _spend afterward_.[21] This is what
the members of the foreign-born groups have long been doing, and
probably this policy is the only possible basis for a rational use of
one's resources. Yet doing this gives rise to comment on the "low
standard of life." And thrift often seems to border on miserliness.
Indeed, the problem is by no means so simple as the use of the
categorical imperative would indicate. The whole question of deciding
between the claims of the present and of the future is a very
difficult one. The economist gives us little definite help. He lays
down the so-called "rule of uses" and tells the housewife so to apply
her resources that the utility extracted from any unit may be at least
as great as if that unit were applied elsewhere. Now the foreign-born
housewife, like other housewives, has certain resources of money and
time and strength, and these she wishes to distribute wisely. But she
labors under many disadvantages, of which it is only fair to take
notice.