overcoming the handicap of unfamiliarity with the place, as well as
toward dispelling any sense of injury in the mind of a professional
colleague, by calling first at the office of the local agency and
talking the problem over thoroughly, consulting the map and getting what
hints the local agency may be able to furnish. The first question to ask
oneself, therefore, is "Will it not be worth while to go myself?"

If for geographical or other reasons this is impracticable, the next
thing that should receive careful consideration is the type of letter to
be written. If the situation is very emergent (as in the case of Adolph
R. cited earlier), the request may have to be sent by telegraph; but
even in a telegram it is possible to convey some detail. To try to save
money by confining oneself to ten words is unwise. If time admits, a
letter is more desirable, and the principle of its construction is as
simple as the Golden Rule--give the other person all the information you
would like to have if you were receiving the letter. Where the
correspondent is not a trained social worker, very specific suggestions
and directions should be given as to how you wish the man dealt with if
found.

There might also be laid down a Golden Rule for recipients of requests
from out-of-town that missing men be traced. "Give the request
right-of-way over your regular work, and send back as prompt and as full
a reply as you would wish yourself" might adequately cover the case. A
reply which contains a history of actual steps taken as well as results
gained, is more satisfactory than one which does not. Good case workers
believe in reciprocity and treat their neighbor's problem as their own.
"We heard that a man we were interested in was in the vicinity of a
certain city, and in the effort to trace him wrote to the charity
organization society in that place, but without success. Several months