THE three primary objectives of the F. E. R. A. were ade-
quacy of relief, use of the work principle for employables, and
diversification of the relief program. These three goals were
not set forth specifically in the relief statute of 1933. The act
did not define with any exactness the group of people to whom
states receiving federal aid could give assistance nor did it out-
line what kind of relief was to be offered. No preference was
expressed either for direct or work relief; the act contained no
statement about differentiating programs to meet special relief
needs. Administrator Hopkins and the key men of his staff,
however, had definite ideas concerning the manner in which
relief should be administered. The Administrator therefore
determined to use the power conferred upon him by the act ¹
to bring states and localities in line with what he conceived to
be the best relief practices.

The hearings on the Federal Emergency Relief Act and
the debates in Congress on the act would seem to indicate that
Congress, insofar as it gave thought to the problem, more or
less assumed that the details of relief administration would be
left in the hands of the states and localities. Many of the details
were worked out by state and local officials. The F. E. R. A.,
however, had a good deal to say concerning general objectives,
and in many cases insisted upon prescribing fairly minute regu-
lations designed to insure accomplishment of these broad objec-
tives. Section 4 (a) of the Federal Emergency Relief Act of
1933 had merely provided that grants should be made to the
several states "to aid in meeting the costs of furnishing relief
and work relief and in relieving the hardship and suffering
caused by unemployment in the form of money, services,

-87-