Their appearance is very attractive. On the west and the north is a new,
wide city playground, giving a clean sweep of sun and breeze. The houses
surround on three sides a large gravelled central area which creates a
private playground—an obvious advantage for the little ones who would be
out of place in the big, public playground designed for older and more
active children. At one end is a play pavilion, and the gardens with
open fences reach to the playground at the rear of the houses. The
central courtyard is entered by a driveway that permits of the
collection of ashes and garbage without littering the sidewalk in front
of the houses.
An easy question is, why couldn’t these houses have front verandahs on
both stories? The equally easy answer is that such verandahs add to the
first cost and to the subsequent rental. There are balconies at the
rear.
[Illustration: DWELLINGS for the PHILADELPHIA MODEL HOMES COMPANY John
Irwin Bright Architect]
[Illustration:
PLANS OF RICHMOND HOUSES.
]
[Illustration:
PLANS OF RICHMOND HOUSES.
]
[Illustration:
DIAGRAM SHOWING ARRANGEMENT OF RICHMOND HOUSES.
]
Work was begun in the summer of 1915, and in December the houses were
completed and occupied. The work was done under Mr. Feld’s daily
supervision, and done well, without a general contract. Thus a
substantial saving was effected, and the construction is abreast of the
standard set in work carried out on the usual plan.
In each case a tenant was ready for the house when it was ready for him.
The rental is $8.50 per month for an apartment of two rooms and bath,
with a pantry having wash-tubs and a range in one of the rooms. Each of
the two families in an apartment house has a partitioned share of the
cellar. An apartment of two rooms, kitchen and bath is to be had for
$10.50. The rental is $13.50 for the one family houses, which give the
tenant five rooms, with bath and furnace. There is at all times a
waiting-list for these eminently delightful and desirable little homes
close to a particularly busy center of diversified manufacturing
enterprise.
At the end of the eleven months to November, 1916, the rent amounted to
$5,517.65 out of a possible $5,676,—the difference being due to the fact
that periods of occupancy did not precisely overlap. After deducting
expenses and interest paid on mortgages the Model Homes Company was able
to show a profit of $1,873.19; of this sum it set aside $400 for a
depreciation account; and it paid to the Association $1,400, which was a
seven per cent. return on the $20,000 invested by the Association. (See
page 121.)
A rebate of one-half of one month’s rent was made to tenants who had
lived in an apartment or a house a year and done no careless damage
requiring repairs. Trees were planted in the yard and before the houses,
and the occupants have always evinced a lively interest in their little
garden-plots. The nationality census is interesting. In the first year
there were these families: Scotch, 3, German, 5, French, 2, Norwegian,
5, Swedish, 1, Italian, 1, American-born, 31 (18 of Irish extraction),—a
total of 48.
In 1914–15 the Association shared the gratitude of certain poor families
which had no work in sight for the bread-winner, by arranging with the
Emergency Aid Committee to supply the necessary materials and
supervision if the Committee would provide the wages of laborers and
mechanics engaged in repair work on the properties. Nine men began work
on this basis in February, and fifty at one time were finally employed.
The work was continued until July, when funds were no longer available.
In all, eighty men benefited by the arrangement: seventeen painters,
eight carpenters, fifty-five laborers. From the Emergency Aid Committee
$4,000 was received, and was disbursed for wages, tools, car-fare and
incidental expenses. Two hundred houses were completely put in order and
painted, yards were repaved, fences were rebuilt, grading was done, and
a vacant area was prepared for gardening purposes. Moreover, men who
knew nothing of plastering or cement work learned how to do it, and thus
acquired a new accomplishment of market value. They put down floors,
relaid walks, whitewashed cellars, and concreted walls where dampness
had exuded. Some of these men who came as utterly green hands still
remain in the employ of the Association.
In 1916 the Whittier Centre, with whose purposes the Association is
wholly in sympathy, carried out a plan for improved housing facilities
for the negro population. The Centre is organized for the study of this
problem, and for practical measures devised as the outcome thereof. It
formed the Whittier Centre Housing Company, with a capital of $25,000,
which took title to property at Dickinson and Opal Streets. The planning
and construction of the first group of houses was put in the hands of
the Association, and Mr. Feld supervised the building of seven
two-family dwellings with apartments of three rooms and bath, at a
rental of $3.00 and $3.50 a week. As an indication of the lively demand
for such cleanly and attractive quarters, it should be noted that there
were two hundred applications for the fourteen apartments available.
That this enterprise pays is shown by the fact that in midsummer of 1917
a dividend of 5 per cent. was paid.
[Illustration:
CAMBRIA STREET HOUSES OF THE RICHMOND GROUP. PLAYGROUND IN THE REAR,
BETWEEN THE SIDE ROWS OF HOUSES. ONE FAMILY HOUSES. 5 ROOMS, BATH,
AND HEATER IN EACH. RENT, $13.50 PER MONTH.
]
[Illustration:
GAUL STREET HOUSES, RICHMOND GROUP. FIRST AND LAST FOUR HOUSES ARE
TWO-FAMILY HOUSES, WITH 3 ROOMS AND BATH ON EACH FLOOR. RENT $10.50
PER MONTH PER APARTMENT. THE HOUSES IN THE CENTER OF THE GROUP ARE 5
ROOM DWELLINGS. RENT $13.50 PER MONTH.
]
As for houses for negro tenants owned by the Association, an interesting
group will be found along Naudain Street between Seventh and Eighth, and
in the vicinity. Here simple rooms may be had for a couple at the low
figure of 80 cents a week, or $1.00 for larger rooms. The standard of
self-respect and cleanliness among the tenants is high. Many of the
houses were formerly dens of the lowest order, and the Association does
not relax its vigil to prevent a recurrence to former conditions. In all
there were, in 1917, 125 colored families in houses owned or controlled
by the Association. It is probable that in the near future the
Association will take over other properties west of Broad Street and
south of Lombard in the district into which negroes are moving. The
Association is hopeful of doing much more in the future to help the
negroes find good homes.
The number of houses owned by the Association at the beginning of 1917
was 179; the number of families in these houses was 244. The agency
properties in charge of the Association numbered 224, and there were 460
families housed in them. This gives a total of 704 families in 403
dwellings.
Agency properties have been handled by the Association, to the expressed
satisfaction of owners, since it was in the second year of its
existence.
The Association charges 7½ per cent. for its management; a charge fully
justified by the quantity and the quality of its executive supervision.
The properties handled for others may be thus classified: first, houses
received from owners who built with an intent frankly philanthropic, and
who realized that the Association was qualified by experience to run
these properties to the greater advantage of owner and tenant; second,
houses bought at the suggestion of the Association and left in its hands
for reconstruction and management; third, houses held as ordinary
business investments, and committed to the oversight of the Association
for the sake of an assured lucrative result; fourth, houses received
from trust companies or estates; fifth, houses turned over by charitable
or philanthropic institutions which have received them as bequests.
In the last connection, it is to be observed that the legacy is made to
perform a twofold service. Low-wage families are assured a good home at
a small cost; and the legatee receives a return which may be put to
philanthropic uses. Of course in some cases there is so much to be done
to rehabilitate the property bequeathed that for a time there is no
income from it. But the possible dual objective of a legacy is worth the
thoughtful consideration of those who would have a bequest mean as much
as possible to those who come after them.
It is seen from this brief review of the impersonal side of the business
operations of the Association that in certain particulars the procedure
of Miss Hill has been modified. Miss Hill relied largely on volunteer
collectors. The Association in addition to its unpaid collectors employs
several who are paid. Miss Hill obtained purchasers for houses which she
desired to improve. The Association, as a stock company, has purchased
outright a number of houses. It has realized that whereas certain
landlords on a grand scale in London controlled vast areas, in
Philadelphia, aside from the Girard Estate, with its admirable model
homes for persons who can afford them, there are very few owners of
large, undivided tracts where blocks of model houses might be created.
So it has been accustomed to purchase its groups piecemeal from a number
of owners.
It is probable that in the future the Association will undertake to an
increasing extent the construction of new dwellings. For a long time to
come, if not always, it will continue to renovate old dwellings, for the
old dwellings, situated in the congested areas, are the abodes of most
of the poor, who are traditionally averse to uprooting; and often the
poor feel much more at home in an old house “fixed up” than in a new
house to which the adjustment only comes by the slow stages of a social
education. Of course a point is reached, especially on a soaring market
for all building materials, when it pays better to build anew than to
make over the old. The philanthropic side of the Association’s endeavor
will cling to the old houses. The sheer business astuteness of the
enterprise will erect new dwellings. The problem is to keep the due
proportion between the business and the philanthropy.
[Illustration: CHART SHOWING INCREASE IN NUMBER OF PROPERTIES OWNED BY
THE OCTAVIA MILL ASSOCIATION FROM 1896 TO 1915]
The tenants of the Association are not allowed to sublet or to take in
lodgers without explicit authorization. That this regulation is sensible
is obvious. Any other course would lead to all the evils of overcrowding
and of positive immorality which the organization was created in large
part to fight. The housing of the single man is not attempted. The
Association is aware of the importance of the bachelor’s problem. It is
a matter that the munition-factories and other industrial plants in
quest of shelter for their employes are daily called upon to consider.
Were its means and its executive facilities less limited, there is no
doubt that the Association would grapple as courageously and as
successfully with this issue of the housing of the single man as with
the problem of the housing of families.
Charles H. Ludington, President of the Association, says in his report
for the year 1916: “It is also the desire of the Board to give as much
publicity as possible to the special lines of service which the
Association is now prepared and equipped to offer—(1) Advice with regard
to the restoration to approved standards, and the altering for
profitable use of old or unsanitary dwellings. (2) Undertaking, after
submitting estimates, the entire carrying out of such improvements and
the future supervision and management of the property for the owners if
desired. (3) The management of residential properties held by
institutions or corporations, insuring for them the maintenance of
sanitary and proper conditions, together with the social service offered
to the tenants by the Association through rent-collectors trained in our
methods. We have frequently been able to render valuable assistance of
this kind both to individual owners and to institutions owning real
estate of this character, which, through neglect or merely formal
management, has deteriorated. Instances have been brought to our
attention where, entirely without the knowledge of the owners,
conditions have existed not merely unsanitary but also otherwise highly
objectionable and which would have subjected the owners to just
criticism. This the standards of management of our Association will
absolutely prevent. (4) Industrial housing by employers for their
employees. The interest in this subject is showing marked increase, and
the Association is ready to place its experience and facilities at the
disposal of corporations or firms considering the matter, and to prepare
plans, procure estimates and supervise construction, and if desired to
undertake the management of such properties in and about Philadelphia.
(5) Improved housing for wage earners. The experience and information
which the Association has gathered, especially in recent years,
qualifies it in the judgment of the Board in tendering its services as
an expert to anyone who may be ready to consider this character of
investment. There is unquestionably in our judgment a need in
Philadelphia for new building of this kind, i. e., for dwellings that
will rent for under $15.00 per month. The operating builder is supplying
only houses of a more expensive grade and for quick sale, because there
is more profit in this for him. That sanitary, durable and comfortable
dwellings can be built for rental at less than $15.00 per month, and
made to yield under proper management a return of 5 per cent. has been
repeatedly demonstrated in this and other cities. To any interest that
is willing to consider such investment with the further view of meeting
a community need, we should offer our services. From our own actual
experience in this field and our knowledge of similar undertakings
elsewhere, our organization can, we believe, render valuable help in the
planning and execution of such projects.”
IV
DAYS AFIELD
To read of the work of the “friendly rent-collector” in cold print is
one thing; to feel the pulse of it by personal contact is another
matter.
Dr. E. R. L. Gould, in a report that he made to the Commissioner of
Labor in 1895 on “The Housing of the Working People,” described at
length Miss Hill’s system of rent-collecting, which made the process so
much more than a soulless, impersonal proceeding.
He said, “There are abundant testimonies to the efficiency of
rent-collecting as practised by Miss Hill. Her system has been adapted
with uniform success in many large cities in Europe and to a smaller
extent in this country.... The moral influence of Miss Hill’s system has
been to admit women to a greater extent into the management of housing
companies, a practice which has undoubted advantages. Several of the
large London dwelling companies acknowledge that their success,
financially and morally, only began with the introduction of
rent-collecting through lady volunteers.”
A bad tenant is not turned into a good one merely by a periodic demand
for money. If all tenants were always in comfortable circumstances, if
they never suffered from lack of employment, if protracted illness
disabling the bread-winner of the family never spelt acute privation for
the rest, if every poor and ignorant foreigner understood from the first
his relation to the community and to society at large, and scrupulously
maintained this relation for his part, the “friendly rent-collector”
might be superfluous. But as conditions stand, the very soul of the
Octavia Hill system is this personal contact which has the business
transaction for its immediate warrant; and by the acid test of business
results its efficacy is demonstrated.
In the great majority of cases the rent-collector does not have to ask a
leading question: the tenants are ready enough to flock round her and
pour their woes into her ear. Her appearance is often the signal for a
fusillade of questions, petitions, and complaints.
“Am I going to get that paint for my stairway, please ma’am?” “The rain
last week leaked into the cellar something terrible.” “The water in the
backyard won’t drain off. The bricks around the hydrant has all sunk
down.” “It’s been four days since the man was here to take away the
garbage.” “The neighbors keeps puttin’ ashes in the garbage can, and
garbage with the ashes. Sure I dunno who’s been doin’ it.”
Such are the petty complaints that all the rent-collectors hear on all
their rounds. These matters might be considered to be wholly within the
domain of the superintendent and his mechanics. But the tenants do not
differentiate. Their appeal is to anyone who may be supposed to be
connected with the Association. Sometimes they ask modestly, meekly.
Sometimes they ask in accents of more or less defiant challenge. Miss
Hill herself describes how she was locked into a room by an irate woman
who said she wouldn’t pay the rent till the mantel was repaired, in a
house so recently taken over by the new landlady that there had not been
an opportunity to attend to the matter.
The friendly rent-collector bides her time, keeps her tongue behind her
teeth, and makes allowances for the previous condition of servitude to
low ideals and to grasping landlords, which has been that of many of her
charges.
The real reward of the work to the right sort of worker is in this
lively, daily chance to meet the people and to help them in their
problems by the service that is better than the outright gift of money.
Here, for a trivial instance, we come to a humble door where the rent is
due, and a poor man has great boxes of laces which he means to move
upstairs and store where he lives. There is really no space for the
stuff in the one room that he shares with wife and baby. He plans to
sell his wares from his cart beside the curbstone on the morrow. The
boxes are nearly as big as an upright piano. He cannot afford another
place for storage. That is his problem. To you and to me, living in a
whole house, the advent of such boxes would be nothing to worry about.
But if this vendor can’t secure from the friendly rent-collector a
suspension of the unwritten rule against overcrowding his small space,
he is in a grievous predicament.
[Illustration:
ONCE THE HOMES OF PHILADELPHIA’S MERCHANTS AND BUSINESS MEN. CHANGING
NEIGHBORHOOD CONDITIONS MADE IT NECESSARY TO ALTER THESE HOUSES FOR
TENEMENTS. EACH HOUSE HAS 5 APARTMENTS, 2 TO 3 ROOMS EACH. RENT,
$5.50 TO $13.00 PER MONTH.
]
A few minutes later we find a whole court in an uproar over an incident
that would mean little to those of us who have gardens of size and
gardeners of skill. One of the fathers living in the court—a one-armed
man—has spent a blistering Sunday afternoon inducing morning-glories to
cling to the strings he has put up against the high board fence. The
little plot of ground on which his plants grew was perhaps thirty feet
long, and a foot and a half wide. He took pride in the result, and his
neighbors praised it. When his back was turned a little Polish child of
two, living next door, came trotting along, pulled down the wire netting
he had arranged in front, and tore off the vines that he had laboriously
twisted round the strings.
The indignant neighbors insist, in conclave, that the mother stood in
the doorway laughing while the child wrought this mischief. To the
friendly rent-collector the mother, with small English but with a
profusion of gesture, explains her injured innocence. After long and
excited parley, in which everyone who is at home in the court takes
part, peace is restored, and the tactful mediator leaves behind her
smiles and good humor in place of sullen resentment.
In this case the chief complaint the neighbors brought was that the
mother—who was supposed to know so little of our tongue—had used such
AWFUL language!
“I didn’t use to be a good woman myself,” said another mother in this
court. “My mother didn’t use to be a good woman, either. But now my
daughter’s comin’ on, and I want her to be different. I want her to be a
Christian. She sings hymns somethin’ lovely.”
In an Italian yard near by are old railway-ties high piled, to be
chopped into kindling. In their enthusiasm for saving money, the
householders are likely to fill the court as high as the roofs with the
beams, if not restrained by the rent-collector’s timely warning that
they must leave some room for other purposes.
One of the houses shows menacing patches of brown specks on the
plastering of a tiny bedroom—that means the larvæ of vermin. In a hole
in the midst of each patch are the live insects. The friendly
rent-collector makes a careful note of the fact. There is an evil day in
store for this common pest of the tenants in old houses, when the
Association shall bring its batteries of formidable disinfectants to
bear. The Association is not fond of spreading wall-paper over the
surfaces where insects live and thrive.
Here is a young man with a moral inheritance that the friendly
rent-collector knows by heart. He has a job slicing bacon with a
meat-packing concern. Today is a holiday, he explains. Query: will he
hold down the job, or go on drifting? The fever of the wandering
ne’er-do-weel burns in his veins. His father is a dipsomaniac, who runs
amuck periodically with a carving-knife and finds his foes in his own
household. He once killed a man and escaped to an adjoining State.
Detectives caught him and he was lodged in the “Pen.” He blamed his wife
for it, and sent her letters demanding $80 for a shyster lawyer to get
him out. He sent her pictures of caskets, as portents of her fate when
he should finally emerge from durance vile.
At last she raised the money and got him out. He wept on the
doorstep—the neighbors, whose heads were at all the windows, said he
shed buckets—and she took pity on him and abandoned her design of
procuring a separation. He has been home for a few days, and on this
particular day husband and wife are off on a picnic together. The son
knows all the story. How long is the peace to last? Will the boy in time
follow in the erratic footsteps of the father?
Here is another sinister family history that faces the visitor. The
mother is feeble-minded. There are five children. Two of the boys and
two of the girls inherit the maternal defect. The other child, a girl,
is normal. The father works by fits and starts. A former source of
income to the family was a woman boarder of bad character. The Society
for Organizing Charity and the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to
Children have interested themselves in these derelicts, and the Octavia
Hill Association is trying to help.
Another kind of trouble constantly cropping up is that of the victims of
rascally insurance-agents. They turned over their books to the agents to
keep. The agents took the money and either did not enter the sums or
recorded them incorrectly. In some cases those who expected an old-age
pension or at least their burial expenses will not get a cent.
“But,” someone may ask, “what has this humanitarian effort to do with
rents and dividends? Couldn’t the money be obtained and no questions
asked, no advice given, no ‘hard-luck stories’ heard? Business is
business. Let the charitable societies, the soup kitchens, the Salvation
Army or what you will, look out for the other side of the matter.”