Please note: this text may be incomplete. For more information about this OCR, view
About OCR text.
April 9, 1910
RECORD AKD GUIDE
747
ESTABUSHED-^ MRRT'H SIV.^ 186 8,
TOEATEDiorULE^Ajt.BmLoiKG^cj^rrEeTURE'.KcaisQfOLDDEGaF^jTiorf,
BirsDfess Alto Themes of GEffeRfil IKter?sj .j
PRICE PER YEAR IN ADVANCE EIGHT DOLLARS
Communications should be addressed to
C. W. SWEET
Published Every Saturdap
By THE RECORD AND GUIDE CO.
president, CLINTON W. SWEET Treasurer, P. W, DODGE
Vice-Pres. & Genl. Mgr., H. W. DESMOND Secretary, F. T. MILLER
Nos. 11 to 15 Eaat 24tl> Street, Neir York City
(Telephone, Madison Square, 4430 to 4433.)
"Entered at the Post Office at Neto York, N. Y., as s'-ciind-chiss matter."
Copyrigbted. 11110, by The Record S: Guide Co.
Vol. LXXXV.
APRIL 9, 1910.
No. 2195.
IN tlie excellent series of monographs on various aspects of
social reform, issued by the Russell Sage Foundation, there
has been published recently a volume on "Housing Re¬
form," hy Mr. Lawrence Veiller. Every New Yorker inter¬
ested in the subject wiil know that Mr. Veiller's experience
makes him particulariy competent to write with authority on
this important subject; and it is safe to say that tbis boolc
contains about all there is to know in respect to housing
reform just at present. Of course, it is not written particu¬
larly for New Yorkers. It is described as a "handbook for
practical use in American cities," and its chief object is to
summarize for the beneflt of other cities the costly experience
of New York in relation to the tenement house problem. Tbe
substance of Mr. Veiller's argument can best be boiled
down by quoting some extracts from the chapter of "Don'ts"
with which his book concludes. "Don't," he says, "buiid
a model tenement until you have secured a model hous¬
ing law." "Don't attempt to legislate first and investi¬
gate afterwards." "Don't urge that ali new houses shall
be fireproof." "Don't complain of the entorcing authori¬
ties until you are familiar with their methods of adminis¬
tration." "Don't neglect the landlord's side of the ques¬
tion," "Don't urge municipal ownership and operation of
tenement houses." "Don't confuse fields of puhlic and pri¬
vate effort." Running through most of these bits of advice,
one can detect a general idea. If tenement house reform is
to be effective, its advocates must understand the conditions
and the means of practical work. The one thoroughly prac¬
tical method of securing the best possible domestic sur¬
roundings for the inhabitants of a large city is a teuement
house law adjusted to local conditions. Model or munici¬
pal tenements are merely examples or playthings. A city
cannot depend upon either charitable people or on munici¬
pal credit for its dwellings. It must derive them from tbe
speculative builders, and its whole object must be to se¬
cure the cooperation of the speculative builders in erecting
a sufficient amount of the best available quality of hous¬
ing. THERE WILL ALWAYS BE DIFFERENCES OF OP¬
INION AS TO HOW HIGH A STANDARD OP PLAN AND
CONSTRUCTION MAY BE EXACTED OF PRACTICAL
BUILDERS BY THE LAW; but Mr. Veiller for the most
part understands and teaches that no unnecessary burdens
should be imposed upon him.
MR. VEILLER'S GENERAL point of view toward "Hous¬
ing Reform" is then entirely commendable; but one
cannot help suspecting from certain passages in his book
that HE HAS NOT YET GRASPED THE REAL NATURE OP
THE ECONOMIC CONDITIONS which underlie the housing
problem in certain large cities. The following passage, for
instance, indicates a curiously blind misconception of the
fundamental cause of congestion. Mr, Veiller has been point¬
ing ont that in 1867 the first New York law provided that
no tenement house should have a yard less than ten feet in
depth, and that this was a foolish provision, because almost
all tenements then had yards fifty feet in depth. He goes on
to say: "If the law had then fixed the minimum depth of
yards at 50 feet there would not have been through all those
fifty years a gradual encroachment upon the yard space, and
the building of the house flrst 60 feet deep, then 70 feet deep
then SO feet deep and finally 90 feet deep. The builder, find¬
ing that the law prohibited any such depth and required that
a yard of fifty feet be left, would have found no opportunity
to change, and the consequent artificial stimulation of land
values would never have arisen." From this passage, Mr.
Veiller apparently believes that if tenement houses had never
been allowed to occupy more than half the lots on which they
stand the value of tenement house real estate would not have
been "artificially" increased and the condition of the teue¬
ment resident would have been very much improved. But this
is merely tantamount to the assertion tbat if by a legal pro¬
vision you diminish by almost one-half the real estate avail¬
able for tenements, you will diminish also the price of the
remainder; and sucli an assertion is economically absurd.
The effective demand for the remainder of the lot would have
remained the same, because the residents of tenement houses
are usually obliged to live in a certain district, and the price
of the lot would probably have become larger rather than
smaller. Such a provision would inevitably have intensified
congestion, and it certainly would not have diminished prices.
The object of any tenement house law should be to allow just
as much housing room to be provided ou a lot as can be pro¬
vided in a safe and sanitary manner, because every restric¬
tion which increases the cost of a building or diminishes its
area tends to add something to the rent and thus to intensify
the economic motive which causes congestion.
THE existing teneraent house law probably did not ou
the whole go much farther than was necessitated by
the conditions of safe aud sanitary housing, hut although it
diminished the proportion of a lot which could be occupied
by a tenement house it certainly did not counteract the "arti¬
ficial stimulation of land values." On the contrary, since the
enactment of the law both land values and rents have mate¬
rially increased, and because of this increase and the cessa¬
tion of cheap tenement house construction in Manhattan the
congestion has of late become very much worse. So far as
the Record and Guide can see, there is ho practical method
of doing away with this congestion except by some method of
distributing the population and business on which it depends.
The method whereby Mr. Veiller proposes to do away with
the "lodger evil" is utterly impracticable. He proclaims that
"in certain classes of tenements the taking in of lodgers or
boarders, except with the written consent of the landlord,
must be prohibited, and the iaadlord must be held respon¬
sible for any departure from this rule." Such a prohibition
could not be enforced by a landlord unless he lived in a build¬
ing and inspected it continually. In case it were enacted it
would either be a dead letter or, so far as enforced, would
provide almost as wonderful an opportunity for petty graft
as the excise law.
THERE is a great deal of construction work going ahead,
a very large amount of huilding materials coming to
town, and there would he more work and more materials
required but for a certain lack of confidence among build¬
ers and operators. There bas existed for several weeks a
feeling of apprehension that has caused a distinct slowing
up in new business undertakings. Ask for a reason, and it
will be found that the THREAT OF WIDESPREAD LABOR
TROUBLES AND THE IMMINENCE OF DECISIONS OF
FAR-REACHING IMPORTANCE BY THE SUPREME
COURT OF THE UNITED STATES ARE THE BUGBEARS
OP THE HOUR. Some cautious builders who have finished
up speculative operations, even those who have "cleaned up,"
are putting off further activities until they can see farther
â– ahead than they can at present; but the rest, having an
abiding faith in the future, notwithstanding temporary set¬
backs, are goiug ahead with their new work. It is gen¬
erally supposed that, in regard to lahor matters, there will
be a DECISION BY THE UNITED BOARD OP BUSINESS
AGENTS IN A FEW HOURS. It Will then he apparent
whether there is to he a general walkout, or merely a few
desultory strikes of no consequence in their general effect,
except as they may tend to arouse further friction and pro¬
voke the governors of the big employers' association to a
counter demonstration. It is hoped that the words of Hon.
Samuel B, Donnelly, now U. S. Public Printer, will not he
forgotten by either party. The abolition of the Arbitra¬
tion Plan would BE A GRAVE ECONOMICAL MISTAKE,
The fact that plans filed were less in number during the
quarter just ended than the record for the corresponding
quarter last year, is not particularly significant, in view of
the extraordinary circumstances prevailing last year and
the large amount of work already planned. Some reaction
in architects' offices was to be expected, but the new work
still coming out averages very high in quality, and there is
enough planned out to make 1910 a big year for contractors
if the labor troubles pass over.