GENERAL CONCLUSIONS ON HOUSING PLANS

[223]Of the 896 families investigated only 356 received additional aid, and 19 of the 356 failed to supply information as to the nature of the aid received.

Forty per cent of the entire number received additional aid in comparison with 24 per cent of the bonus cases. In most instances no earnings or savings were available for the purchase of a lot and for initial building expenses. The household grants were therefore needed especially by those who had lived in the burned district.

TABLE 95.—AMOUNT OF ADDITIONAL GRANTS FROM THE RELIEF FUNDS MADE TO FAMILIES RECEIVING AID UNDER THE GRANT AND LOAN PLAN

Six cases of families that built homes worth more than $2,000 each will give some idea, though inadequate, of the circumstances surrounding some of the more fortunate of this group of 896 applicants.

The first is a German family of three members, the man a waiter, aged forty-four, who earned $50 a month before the fire, his wife, and one dependent child. He was one of the 93 applicants who had owned the home in which he lived. His house and lot were valued at $6,000, and by sub-letting a part of the house he added $20 a month to his income. The insurance carried was $3,500, of which $2,800 was paid. He built a temporary shack to house his family, at a cost of $300, towards the payment of which he was granted $150. He now has an eighteen-room houseworth $8,700. The business loan of $6,200 negotiated by him was reduced by $200 at the time of the investigation, and he was sub-letting rooms, somewhat irregularly, at $145 a month. His wages as waiter had increased $5.00 a month. The child’s constant sickness had been a handicap. The grant was for the temporary shack erected probably before the insurance was received or any definite plan made for permanent rebuilding.

The second family, Danish, had also three members, the man a carpenter, aged forty-seven, his wife, and a child. Before and after the disaster the man made $80 at his trade and he later became a teamster at the same wage. The family belongs to the group that paid rent, which was reduced by sub-letting. Their rental had been $18 a month for a second-story flat of five rooms, three of which had been sub-let for $15 a month. The insurance carried on his household goods was $200, of which he collected $70. The seven-room house built after the fire cost the Dane $3,800, the lot $850, to pay for which a private loan of $3,300 was negotiated, and a grant of $200 obtained from the housing committee. The debt at the time of the investigation had been reduced to $2,320. The man, being a carpenter, had done most of the inside work on his house. The family was occupying three rooms and sub-letting four at a monthly rental of $18.75. There had been no sickness in the family. The grant was small in comparison with the cost of the house and lot, but it may have been the fillip needed to bring the man to the point of purchase. The rate at which the debt was being canceled seems to justify the big venture. If the family escape the handicaps of sickness and accident during the next few years, the result will indicate that the housing committee was warranted in extending aid.

1234Methods of Housing RehabilitationNos. 1 and 3 represent the $500 bonus; No 2 is a grant and loan cottage built by a committee contractor and is being paid for in instalments; No. 4 represents a beginning with the aid of a small bonus of $100 from the committee. Four cottages in the background received early housing grants

1234

Methods of Housing Rehabilitation

Nos. 1 and 3 represent the $500 bonus; No 2 is a grant and loan cottage built by a committee contractor and is being paid for in instalments; No. 4 represents a beginning with the aid of a small bonus of $100 from the committee. Four cottages in the background received early housing grants

The third, another German family, likewise is a family of three, but in this instance an old couple, the man seventy-seven, and a grown son, an electrician who had earned $140 a month. The house which they had owned before the fire, valued with the “lot” at $10,000, had 19 rooms, 13 of which were let for $82.50 a month. An insurance of $6,000 was carried, on which $4,500 was collected, which happened to be the exact amount of the mortgage on the property. This family also, soon after the fire, built a cheap cottage, price $500, towards payment for which the housing committeegranted $305. The electrician and a married son, the one other child, who lived away from home, later built a $6,000 two-story twenty-room apartment house, from which is drawn $110 a month in rents. There is no record of the source from which the $6,000 was drawn. This group had carried no burden of sickness.

The fourth is a large Irish family, a man of forty-four, his wife, and eight children. As agent for a railroad company he had earned $80 a month before the fire, and was afterwards advanced to $100. They had rented for $30 a month a house of 11 rooms, four of which they had sub-let for $20. They had no insurance, but had savings to the amount of $500. The house of eight rooms which they built after the fire on a $1,500 lot, cost $5,000, towards payment for which the housing committee granted $250. The Rehabilitation Committee gave $100 for furniture. At the time of the investigation the mortgage on the property amounted to $2,300, and two of the children were earning $89 a month. This family is financially better off than in 1906. While in camp they had suffered to some extent from sickness.

The fifth is another Irish family, that of a laborer of thirty-seven, his wife, and two young children. Before the fire he had earned $65 a month, after the fire $85, but at the time of the investigation he was earning but $60 irregularly. The family had formerly rented a four-room flat for $13 a month, and though no insurance was carried, had savings amounting to $1,600. Of this sum $650 was used in purchasing a lot on which a $3,000 house was built. The house was not yet entirely furnished at the time of the investigation. The committee grant was $250. The debt carried exactly equaled the amount of savings before the fire. The family had had sickness, which had meant a heavy outlay for medical care.

The sixth and last is an American family of two maiden sisters, aged about fifty-five. As dressmakers they had earned $60 a month and had lived in their own house of 17 rooms, valued with the lot at $6,000, on which was a $2,800 mortgage. They sub-let six rooms for $45 a month. The insurance collected was but $300, and after the fire they were able to earn but $55 a month. The sixteen-room house they built cost $7,000, on which they had a debt of $4,800. Their housing grant was $200, and they hadreceived an additional rehabilitation grant of $200 for furniture and a sewing machine. At the time of the investigation they were earning $70 at their trade and were collecting $20 a month for rent. They too had been handicapped by sickness, and had had difficulties with their contractor.

Perhaps no more important rehabilitation work was done than that by the housing committee. Partly through its stimulating efforts, by means of the grant and loan plan, many persons, the majority of whom were wage-earners who had carried but little insurance, accumulated small savings, and had but few friends and relatives to extend help, were brought to own their homes.

The chief difficulty that the committee had to contend with was the securing of competent and reliable contractors and plumbers. From time to time they had to make changes which increased their own work of supervision and worked hardship to the applicants. By giving a few orders at a time to a contractor, with the promise of further orders if the work were satisfactory,[224]the effort was made to stimulate sound work. The best results were secured, as has been shown, by the encouragement to men to themselves build or to superintend their own building. Those who had initiative or the resource of friends in the building trade were able to get what they wanted; those who lacked business push trusted to contractors. The lesson is plainly writ, however, that where feasible, the encouraging of men, in an emergency, to assume responsibility for providing their own homes, promises better results than to offer, under abnormal conditions, to build houses in quantity for sale. The personal equation in this matter, as in every other, precludes the drawing of any sweeping conclusion. The plan of the housing committee to study each applicant, and then make the plan as closely fit his case as the prevailing conditions will allow, is a safe one.

[224]The result was a rushing of work for the sake of prospective orders.

A very large proportion of the workingmen and small tradesmen in San Francisco own their own houses and lots. The landvalues in certain sections had not been excessive, so that many wage-earners were able to invest savings in small lots on which to establish permanent homes. What part the Corporation took in adding to the number of those who own their own homes has been shown in this study.

It has been pointed out that the bonus group received the most bountiful housing aid, that the grant and loan group came second in the securing of liberal assistance, and that the camp cottage people were given the least.

The re-visit, to recapitulate, showed that a majority of the persons who received the bonus, which it must be borne in mind cannot be called a relief measure, possessed not a little property, were fairly well established in business or at profitable employment, and were entirely able to re-establish their homes when the unsettled conditions had passed. At the date of the re-visit this group of people were housed in their own homes, which compared favorably in almost every way with those occupied when the earthquake came.

The erection of cottages within the camps to serve as temporary shelter for approximately 18,000 people, was well planned and efficiently executed. As has been shown, a number of the cottages came later into the possession of speculators or were soon taken over by landlords in satisfaction of unpaid ground rent. On the other hand, many were owned by persons who were able to purchase small lots, and who in the fall of 1908 bid fair to retain their attractive and comfortable little homes. Without the gift of the cottages this would not have been possible to them. It would seem on the whole that these applicants were better housed at the date of the investigation than at the time of the fire which, probably, more than any other single fact, indicates the soundness of the housing plans.

The standards of many of the families who received camp cottages were so low that an extensive scheme of constructive philanthropy by which an effort might have been made slowly to raise their standards of living would have been of great value. This would have been a stupendous task. But should the expenditure of another great rehabilitation fund be called for, ought not such an attempt to be kept in mind?

The plan to aid applicants with small grants and loans was undoubtedly well conceived and effectively worked out. The machinery installed by the housing committee enabled it to reach the class of people whom it was most anxious to help, also to weed out a large number that it was thought unwise to aid. The great merit of the grant and loan policy was that it stimulated a large number to purchase lots and erect homes of their own who otherwise would probably never have seriously considered the possibility.

PART VRELIEF WORK OF THEASSOCIATED CHARITIESFROM JUNE, 1907, TO JUNE, 1909

InParts IandIIfrequent mention has been made of the important rehabilitation rôle played by the Associated Charities. In this fifth part of the Relief Survey, measure is taken of the burden carried by the Associated Charities for the two years after it resigned as an investigating agent of the San Francisco Relief and Red Cross Funds and took up, with the financial aid of the funds, its independent work of caring for the remnant. The remnant was composed of the people who had suffered from the earthquake and fire but had asked for no help until more than a year had elapsed; of those who continued to need aid because of the extraordinary vicissitudes of their life; of others who had formed the habit of turning to a relief agency for assistance; and of those who required further succor because that given by the Corporation had been inadequate.

The Associated Charities was selected for special study, not only because it had been continuously the agent of the Corporation, but because its work promised to give the fullest answer to the question: To what extent has the San Francisco problem of dependency deepened? This study is, then, in a sense, an exhibition of the aftermath of the great disaster.

The range of the inquiry involved the asking of three questions: First, what was the character of the rehabilitation? Second, how was it done? Third,—a quadruple question,—how much was induced by the disaster itself, how much by the fact of the existence of relief measures the year after the disaster, how much by the administration of these measures, and how much by conditions that tend at all times to produce dependency?

The field of investigation plainly defines itself as: first, to know the number and character of the persons that remained dependentafter the fifteen months of conscientious rehabilitation work, and to compare them in regard to number and character with the lesser number of persons that for two years before the disaster were under the care of the Associated Charities; second, to learn what methods of relief were used to render these persons once more effective members of the community; and third, to measure in some degree the efficiency of these methods.

The primary purpose of this study was to learn as far as possible the psychological effects of the disaster by studying a group of refugees who continued to draw on the relief funds after the general public had fallen out of the bread line. It has been impossible, however, to hold strictly to the purpose, because the Associated Charities,[225]in resuming its normal place in the community, aimed rightly to administer to the needs of the city’s poor whether or not the individual applicant could show a relation between his necessity and the disaster. From the point of view of the Associated Charities, all persons applying for aid from June, 1907, to June, 1909, had an equal claim on its funds. Its power of realizing this aim of impartially meeting the needs of the applicants has been limited by the fact that as a society it was known by the public at large, as well as by the direct and indirect sufferers from the disaster, by their relatives, and by their friends, to be acting as the financial agent of a corporation that continued to have large sums of money to disburse.

[225]Before and since the disaster the Associated Charities has been, except for the work done by the Hebrew Board of Relief, the accepted general relief society. It has had, throughout, the active co-operation of the Catholics.

The interest in the relief administration centers in the desire to know to what extent it altered the poverty situation of the city. The presumption is, of course, that the work of the Associated Charities and kindred agencies was greatly increased by the disaster, but it is important to get a specific idea of the increase for the two selected years, and to determine what proportion is a distinct result of the social upheaval brought by the earthquake and fire of 1906.

To answer this question required a knowledge of the workof the Associated Charities for the two years before the fire as exact as for the two years under consideration.[226]By one of the most notable incidents of the great fire, the building containing the records of the Associated Charities escaped the flames. These records, no previous study of whose facts had been made, were therefore available. The stories of the applicants to the Associated Charities for the two years preceding April 18, 1906, have been analyzed, and in order that comparison might be possible, a similar study of records has been made of the post-disaster cases.

[226]At the time of the fire the Associated Charities had been in existence for over seventeen years. Its original aim had been to confine its work to organizing charity; but as there was no general relief society in existence it was called on more and more to do relief work. By 1905 the society had a list of 900 subscribers; an annual income of not more than $5,000; a staff consisting of a general secretary, two or three paid investigators, and a stenographer on part time. In addition to these, the office had the exclusive use of two district nurses supported by special funds. With a staff and an income so limited it was possible to give little beyond emergency aid to needy families in their homes. The problem of homeless men was not touched. The initial steps had been taken looking to co-operation with other philanthropic agencies along several lines. In conjunction with the Merchants’ Association, a charities endorsement committee had been formed; a children’s agency had been established, and a department of legislation and law organized to originate needed social legislation and to give free legal aid to applicants. For a résumé of the development of the work of the society after the disaster, seePart V,pp. 317-318.

As the means to aid during the two years from June, 1907, to June, 1909, were drawn almost exclusively from the Corporation and the Board of Trustees of Relief and Red Cross Funds, a statement of the work of the Associated Charities is practically a survey of the further use made of the disaster relief funds.

The Associated Charities, as an independent agent, reopened its doors to applicants on June 17, 1907; but since it had assumed the responsibility before the complete transfer of duties was effected, data are here given for the period beginning June 1. From June 1, 1907, until June 1, 1909, 6,766 applications were made to it in the following order:

From April 18, 1904, to April 18, 1906, 1840 cases had applied for aid at the office. There was therefore a nearly fourfoldincrease in applications during the two post-disaster years under comparison. There are no data to show the sequence of increase or decrease of cases for the earlier period. The number of monthly applications during 1908 and 1909 was as follows:

TABLE 96.—NUMBER OF APPLICATIONS TO THE ASSOCIATED CHARITIES FOR ASSISTANCE, BY MONTHS. 1908 AND 1909[227]

[227]As the figures in this table are for the calendar years 1908 and 1909, the totals do not correspond with the figures for the period from June 1, 1907, to June 1, 1909, presented in other tables in this Part. While there were some inconsistencies between various records consulted, as to the number of applications per month, it is believed that the figures presented are approximately correct.

Although for three of the months of 1909, June, November, and December, there was an increase of applications over the corresponding months of the previous year,—an increase of 41, 28, and 22 per cent respectively,—the work for 1909 as a whole, compared with 1908, decreased 39 per cent.

In relating the facts found in the case records of applicants from June 1, 1907, to June 1, 1909, 815, or 12 per cent, of the 6766 records are omitted,—107 because they were found to be the records of cases belonging not to the Associated Charities but to other relief societies; 606 because they were not relief society records, but were those of cases cared for in the City and County Hospital which for reasons of office organization were, during a number of months of the year 1907, filed with the Associated Charities’ records; 102 because they were too incomplete to give the required data. The facts drawn from the remaining 5951cases are compared with 1550 cases of the earlier pre-disaster period. Two hundred and ninety cases, or 15.8 per cent, of the 1840 cases of that period (April 18, 1904, to April 18, 1906), had to be omitted, some because they were records of cases handled by other relief societies, and a larger number because the statement cards lacked sufficient data to permit tabulation. The large number of cases marked “Unknown” throughout this study makes it incontestably plain that the records are lacking in many details. Though admirably complete as compared with those before the fire, and much more so during the years 1908 and 1909 than during 1907, yet data have failed with regrettable frequency.

TABLE 97.—ASSOCIATED CHARITIES CASES CLASSIFIED AS HAVING LIVED OR NOT HAVING LIVED IN THE BURNED AREA, AND BY NUMBER AIDED, AND NUMBER REFUSED AID. JUNE 1, 1907, TO JUNE 1, 1909[228]

[228]Data are not available as to the former place of residence of 123 of the 4,247 applicants aided, and of 90 of the 1,704 applicants who were refused aid.

One point on which the records in many cases fail to supply information is as to whether or not the applicant had been burned out. In the previous studies of this Survey no division has been made of the refugees into the two classes of those who lived within or without the burned area, because dependency as a result of the disaster was known to be due not alone to having been in the first named class. Since one of the vital points of this study, however, is to determine how much of the relief work of the AssociatedCharities during the second of the two-year periods was due, directly or indirectly, to the earthquake and fire, an effort has been made to reach the point by dividing the 5,738 applicants about whom the fact was known into two groups: 3,996, or 69.6 per cent, of whom had lived within the burned area; 1,742, or 30.4 per cent, of whom had lived without. The further classification given inTable 97reveals the interesting fact that a large number of persons who had lived in the burned area made no recorded application for rehabilitation until after June, 1907.

Fifty-three per cent of those burned out, who by June, 1909, had come to the Associated Charities for assistance, first made application for relief needed as a result of the disaster, after the rehabilitation work was done. Many of them had undoubtedly received their share of clothes, had stood in the bread line, and had lived in the camps, but as their names are not on the records of the Rehabilitation Committee they had had, up to the time that they applied to the Associated Charities, no rehabilitation in the accepted sense of the term.

The social characteristics of these cases are second in importance only to the question of their relation to the disaster.

What do the records show with regard to their nationality, their family relations, their ages, the size of their families, their occupations, and their characteristics in general? What were the disabilities that drove them to ask for help? What proportion of the disabilities from which they suffered can be marked against the rehabilitation methods?

Forty-one different countries, as shown byTable 98, are represented by the persons who made application in each of the two-year periods, and of whom the place of birth was learned.

Completely devastated. First tents in Washington SquarePartly Rebuilt. Cottages in Washington SquareTelegraph Hill and Washington Square

Completely devastated. First tents in Washington Square

Partly Rebuilt. Cottages in Washington Square

Telegraph Hill and Washington Square

The situation as far as nationality governed application shows but slight variation between the two periods of time. There are, however, a few interesting variations; as, for instance, the falling off in the second period in the number of applicants born in the British Empire, in the Scandinavian countries, and in the United States. Only the Irish and Italians have materially increased their proportionate numbers. Did the relief funds causethis increase, or did the catastrophe bear most heavily on these nationalities? When it is recalled[229]that the Latin Quarter was wiped out and that “South-of-Market,” largely the residential quarter of the poor Irish, was entirely burned, the fire seems undoubtedly to be responsible.

[229]Part I,p. 4.

TABLE 98.—NATIVITY OF APPLICANTS FOR RELIEF FROM ASSOCIATED CHARITIES, BEFORE FIRE AND AFTER FIRE[230]

[230]Data are not available as to the nationality of 307 of the 1,550 persons applying for relief before the fire, and of 726 of the 5,951 persons applying for relief after the fire.

No question is of greater importance than that involved in the relation between relief and the family. InParts IandIIthe effort of the Rehabilitation Committee has been shown to have been to limit closely the amount of aid given to single, able-bodied persons and to able-bodied men.[231]This policy is shown in the following table to have influenced the work of the Associated Charities also, so that the widow and the handicapped family received primary consideration in the extended rehabilitation work.

[231]SeePart I,p. 47, andPart II,p. 123. This policy was, of course, being carried out in spirit when breadwinners were helped not with continued general relief, but with means to re-establish a home through a housing or business grant.

TABLE 99.—FAMILY TYPES AMONG APPLICANTS FOR RELIEF FROM ASSOCIATED CHARITIES, BEFORE FIRE AND AFTER FIRE[232]

[232]Data are not available as to the family type of 89 of the 1,550 persons applying for relief before the fire.

Since the term “families” covers the widest range of variations in social status, it has seemed wise to make the nine family classifications given in the abovetable. It is plain that the seventh group lacks in value as compared with the classifying of each group separately according to sex. The incompleteness of the records made a separation by sex impossible. The most notable difference in the numbers applying for relief before and after the fire occurs in the case of widows with children. If to the 1,044 widows with children—taking the figures of the second period—be added the 258 deserted women and the 30 orphaned families, all supported by women, 1,332, or 22.3 per cent of all the cases, are shown to be families dependent upon women as breadwinners. If the 798childless, detached women be added to the 1,332, we have 2,130 women dependents, or 35.7 per cent of those that applied,[233]which must be compared with 26.8 per cent for the period before the fire. The 164 widowers and deserted husbands with children, 2.7 per cent of all the cases of the later period, is a relatively larger number of such cases than is usually found in charity records. The proportion of the group called “illegitimate families” rests upon facts open to challenge as to exactness or completeness. Though the presumption is that the number is too small, 65 such cases for the second period are all that can be proven by the records. The fact that the percentage of applications from single men was less after than before the fire shows that the policy to limit relief given to this class had a deterrent effect. The 49 dependent minors applying to the Associated Charities in the two periods for various reasons were not referred for care to the city’s child-caring agencies.

Back to Index Next