icae 
 
AA 
 
 ini 
 
PHILADELPHIA 
 
 0 / 
 
 Social Science Association. 
 
 BUILDING SYSTEMS FOR THE GREAT CITIES. 
 
 A PAPER READ BEFORE THE ABOVE ASSOCIATION, APRIL 5, 1877. 
 
 BY MR. LORIN BLODGET. 
 
 REPRINTED FROM THE PENN MONTHLY FOR APRIL, 1877 
 
 PUBLISHED BY THE 
 
 PHILADELPHIA SOCIAL SCIENCE ASSOCIATION, 
 
 720 LOCUST STREET, PHILADELPHIA. 
 
THE FOLLOWING IS A LIST OF THE PAPERS READ BEFORE THE 
 ASSOCIATION. 
 
 
 1871. Compulsory Education. By Lorin Blodget. 
 
 Arbitration as a Remedy for Strikes. By Eckley B. Coxe. 
 
 The Revised Statutes of Pennsylvania. By R. C. McMurtrie. 
 
 Local Taxation. By Thomas Cochran. 
 
 Infant Mortality. By Dr. J. S. Parry. 
 
 1872. Statute Law and Common Law, and the Proposed Revision in Penn¬ 
 
 sylvania. By E. Spencer Miller. 
 
 Apprenticeship. By James S. Whitney. 
 
 The Proposed Amendments to the Constitution of Pennsylvania. By 
 Francis Jordan. 
 
 Vaccination. By Dr J. S. Parry. 
 
 The Census. By Lorin Blodget. 
 
 1873. The Tax System of Pennsylvania. By Cyrus Elder. 
 
 The Work of the Constitutional Convention. By A. Sydney Biddle. 
 What shall Philadelphia do with its Paupers ? By Dr. Ray. 
 Proportional Representation. By S. Dana Horton. 
 
 Statistics Relating to the Births, Deaths, Marriages, etc., in Philadelphia. 
 By John Stockton-Hough, M. D. 
 
 On the Value of Original Scientific Research. By Dr. Ruschenberger. 
 On the Relative Influence of City and Country Life, on Morality, Health, 
 Fecundity, Longevity and Mortality. By John Stockton-Hough, M. D. 
 
 1874. The Public School System of Philadelphia. By James S. Whitney. 
 
 The Utility of Government Geological Surveys. By Prof. J. P. Lesley. 
 The Law of Partnership. By J. G. Rosengarten. 
 
 Methods of Valuation of Real Estate for Taxation. By Thomas Cochran. 
 The Merits of Cremation. By Persifor Frazer, Jr. 
 
 Outlines of Penology. By Joseph R. Chandler. 
 
 1875. Brain Disease, and Modern Living. By Dr. Isaac Ray. 
 
 Hygiene of the Eye, Considered with Reference to the Children in our 
 Schools. By Dr. F. D. Castle. 
 
 The Relative Morals of City and Country. By Wm. S. Peirce. 
 
 Silk Culture and Home Industry. By Dr. Sami. Chamberlaine. 
 
 Mind Reading, etc. By Persifor Frazer, Jr. 
 
 Legal Status of Married Women in Pennsylvania. By N. D. Miller. 
 The Revised Statutes of the United States. By Lorin Blodget. 
 
 1876. Training of Nurses for the Sick. By Dr. John H. Packard. 
 
 The Advantages of the Co-operative Feature of Building Associations. 
 
 . By Edmund Wrigley. 
 
 The Operations of Our Building Associations. By Joseph I. Doran. 
 Wisdom in Charity. By Rev. Chas. G. Ames. 
 
 1877. Free Coinage and a Self-Adjusting Ratio. By Thomas Balch. 
 
 Building Systems for Great Cities. By Lorin Blodget. 
 
 ^42V<o Vv '''a>\ 
 
 \'6 v -v\ 
 
A BUILDING SYSTEM FOR THE GREAT CITIES.— 
 THE BUSINESS AND SOCIAL INFLUENCES 
 OF BUILDING SYSTEMS ILLUSTRATED. 
 
 HE questions presented in the modern life of cities are among 
 
 i the greatest we have to deal with. The tendency of popula¬ 
 tion is now more than ever before, to concentrate in communities 
 which offer the fullest measure of business and social advantages, 
 and in spite of every effort to disperse the increasing population of 
 the older states, the result is that the greater cities increase more 
 rapidly than any part of the country outside their limits. A great 
 city affords much more of positive attraction than it has-been usual 
 to concede, and its attractions are not those of fancy or taste only; 
 they are, in the highest degree, those of economy and profit in the 
 exchange of what every man can produce. The greater share of 
 the accumulated wealth of cities is made up of labor put to the 
 best uses, and of exchanges made without loss. 
 
 But the facilities the cities afford in the creation and exchange 
 of wealth, have heretofore had a dark side in the losses and inse¬ 
 curity to which persons of moderate means, and particularly to 
 which all persons who work for wages, have been subjected. The 
 separate household, and the independence of ownership, have 
 become more and more difficult of attainment, and with the loss of 
 these, a loss of much more became almost inevitable. It has for 
 years been an unfortunate feature of the social condition at New 
 York particularly, that the increasing population were without 
 homes, except in tenement houses, or flats, or some form of sub¬ 
 ordinate or dependent residence, the injurious consequences being 
 apparent, and the evil increasing instead of diminishing. The ten¬ 
 ant, or tenement house is the worst form of this huddling of peo¬ 
 ple, chiefly the laboring classes, or the poor as they are called, in 
 such cities, into close and stifling rooms in a building usually of 
 the most squalid surroundings. Enterprising and benevolent 
 people have made many efforts to reform and improve these 
 tenement houses, but with little success. A building containing 
 from forty to a hundred rooms, each of which is separately let to 
 
 one or more persons—no family having more than two_can 
 
 scarcely be expected to offer any incitement to cleanliness, order 
 and self-respect. Certainly all experience proves that rapid and 
 permanent demoralization follows upon the gathering of laborers, 
 
4 
 
 building systems. 
 
 or of the employed classes of any grade, in any form of tenant or 
 tenement house at present in use. 
 
 To inspire self-respect, to develop or even to sustain independence 
 of character and to insure morality and social order, the separate 
 house and family are indispensable, at least with the great body of 
 people. And the struggle to avert demoralization and distress is 
 real and pressing; it will not admit of delay or evasion. The ten¬ 
 ement house is a danger and a shame. It is a frightful inhumanity 
 also; not only where the loss of life by pestilence is incurred, but 
 also in the frequent deadly accidents by fire and falling walls which 
 are now so common. Our exemption from these calamities in Phil¬ 
 adelphia is almost complete, yet they are near enough to us to be 
 vividly realized in the few we see, and the frequency with which 
 we hear of them in other cities. 
 
 The urgent question of the day is whether it is possible for the 
 people of this country to live in the great cities in safety, occupy¬ 
 ing separate homes, and living in reasonable security in dwellings 
 of their own. It is certainly a great question, and on its solution 
 depends the further question, whether it is not inexcusable cruelty 
 to permit a million of people to gather in any great city. 
 
 Through the rare good fortune of possessing an especially favor¬ 
 able site, the development of an adequate system of city house 
 building has fallen to Philadelphia, at least so far as the inaugu¬ 
 ration of such a system is concerned; and perhaps fifteen years of 
 continuance at it, have vindicated and confirmed it. It cannot be 
 claimed as having been deliberately designed, nor is it as yet car¬ 
 ried to anything like its proper completeness of results. But it 
 has made great progress, and has grown to such proportions as 
 justly to attract attention in most of the cities where the want of 
 a proper system causes great loss and suffering. The object of 
 this paper is to state, as clearly and directly as possible, what has 
 been done here, in order to aid others in making use of the results 
 of our experience. It is also desirable just now to help forward 
 the general work of perfecting the system here, and it cannot be 
 too strongly stated that the object proposed to be attained is almost 
 the highest that can engage attention. It involves the greatest 
 results possible in the happiness of great numbers of intelligent 
 people, and in their advancement to a higher civilization. It affects 
 the habits of the thousands who too often spend their small earn¬ 
 ings in mere daily living: and decides whether or not they can ac- 
 
BUILDING SYSTEMS. 
 
 5 
 
 quire and possess real property, The difference between a proprie¬ 
 tor, however small, and an incapable or a wasteful spendthrift, often 
 reaches far beyond the personal interests of either or both, and 
 becomes an element of the greatest public dangers. 
 
 The actual mode of proceeding in what are here called building 
 operations is co-operative. The owner of the title to the land un¬ 
 improved is one party, the one who advances capital or money to 
 build is another, the contracting builder another, and often the 
 several sub-contractors enter into the work as parties in interest, 
 agreeing to take a certain number of houses as their share of the 
 cost of building a large number. The co-operation of three dis¬ 
 tinct interests is the most general, the land owner, the capital ad¬ 
 vancer, and the contracting builder; but it is perhaps equally 
 frequent that the land owner advances a sum of money equal to 
 the value of the ground, which sum of the two elements of cost is 
 placed in a ground rent or mortgage on the building contracted to 
 be built. But the co-operative feature is always foremost, and it 
 is indispensable to success. If the furnisher of materials, as lum¬ 
 ber, bricks, stone or anything else, agrees to take a number of 
 finished buildings for his materials, he probably values his mate¬ 
 rials higher than if sold for cash, but he simply shares in the profit 
 of the general contractor, and is a co-operative builder himself. 
 The fact that in some cases this co-operative building is not as 
 well done as it should be, is quite likely to be realized, but it only 
 occurs when proper supervision is not provided for. As compared 
 with building for cash under rigid supervision, the loose co-opera¬ 
 tion of what are called bonus building operations is not desirable; 
 yet many thousand dwellings have been so built in a most credit¬ 
 able manner, and now constitute streets and blocks much increased 
 in value, fully occupied, and paying a fair profit on all they cost. 
 Thousands of dwellings have been so erected by contractors who 
 had no capital themselves, and who, in perhaps half these cases, 
 made little profit. Others more skilful made profits rapidly even 
 by what is called bonus building, and became able to build with 
 their own capital. 
 
 The public are concerned only with the final results; if these 
 present the form of well-built streets of permanent dwellings, owned 
 by those who occupy them, it is of little consequence whether the 
 original builder had any capital or made any profits, whether the 
 operation was a co-operative or “bonus” arrangement, or whether 
 all the expenditure was by one party only. 
 
6 
 
 BUILDING SYSTEMS. 
 
 Of the mode of erecting buildings in the tenement-house system, 
 we know little, except that it cannot be co-operative. It cannot 
 afford negotiable securities in ground rents or mortgages, nor can 
 it interest or employ many persons. Its range must be very nar¬ 
 row, and without social or other features of general interest. In a 
 few cases such building is primarily with a benevolent purpose, 
 and may, like the Peabody buildings in London, become conspicu¬ 
 ous public benefits. But in most cases the tendency is to parsi¬ 
 mony and abuse in the erection of the buildings themselves, and 
 still more in their subsequent management and in the treatment of 
 their tenants. The details of management of thousands of these 
 buildings are given in the New York Sanitary Survey of 1865, and a 
 more frightful picture of sordid avarice than that developed by that 
 survey as existing in the management and care of these tenement 
 houses could not be imagined. The squalor, vice and enforced mis¬ 
 ery of the unfortunate occupants exhibits a state of things to which 
 the comfort of prisons and penal institutions affords a relieving 
 comparison. No greater contrast can be conceived than is pre¬ 
 sented by the comparison of a well built street of two-story brick 
 dwellings neatly kept, and chiefly owned by workingmen occu¬ 
 pants, with the narrow alley separating double rows of lofty tene¬ 
 ment houses, reeking with filth and vice. Surely the building 
 surface of the earth is large enough to distribute these foul accumu¬ 
 lations, and to cleanse them by a reasonably wide dispersion. 
 
 THE TENEMENT-HOUSE SYSTEM. 
 
 The most graphic and vivid portraitures of the tenement-house 
 system, with its attendant miseries and horrors, was given in 
 a Sanitary report for the city of New York, made in 1865, as 
 the result of the survey before referred to. It was inaugurated 
 by an association of citizens simply, but out of its disclosures 
 grew the energetic Board of Health organization for that city 
 established in the same year. An accurate canvass by able 
 young physicians was then made of the entire city, the results 
 of which are very striking. New York had then no more 
 population than Philadelphia has now, probably less, yet the 
 fearful concentration in certain districts or wards would appear in¬ 
 credible if it were not officially stated and the location and popu¬ 
 lation of each house shown in elaborate plans and diagrams. In the 
 Fourth Ward of that city there were then 714 tenement houses, and 
 53 private dwellings. In 242 of these tenement houses, there were 
 
BUILDING SYSTEMS. 
 
 7 
 
 2,119 families; and in the others, which were not originally built for 
 such uses, there was an average of 5 families, or of 28 persons to 
 each house. The superintending officer of the survey reported 
 that “ there are more than 400 families in this district whose homes 
 can only be reached by wading through a disgusting deposit of re¬ 
 fuse .” The whole district was a permanent nursery of fever and 
 contagious diseases. Several of the most celebrated nurseries of 
 vice, filth, and disease are found on Rose, Vandewater, Cherry, 
 Roosevelt and Oak streets, and they are scarcely less horrible 
 now than in 1865. I have often visited them, and personally ex¬ 
 amined the district in 1872, finding it then incurably wretched, 
 although the New York Board of Health had forced the tearing 
 down and rebuilding of a few of the worst great tenement houses. 
 One of these houses contained 105 families, and 472 persons; an 
 alley nine feet wide separated it from another containing 25 
 families, and another seven feet alley reached a house contain¬ 
 ing twenty families. Neither of the three had any frontage on a 
 regular street, being reached only by these alleys. The locality 
 was called “ Gotham Court!' 
 
 In the Fifth Ward of New York, the same survey showed 185 
 tenement houses, with 961 private dwellings, a much better condi¬ 
 tion, although the tenement houses were all reported as nests of 
 disease. 
 
 In the Sixth Ward there were 609 tenement houses, with 4,400 
 families, and 23,000 tenement population. This district had then, 
 and still has, many incurable “ fever-nests.” The population was 
 less than 5 per cent, of American birth, and the well-known Bax¬ 
 ter street is there. Then 500 persons lived in filthy cellars, but 
 these have since been driven out. The celebrity of that ward for 
 vice and crime has been won by a long persistence in crowding the 
 worst of the laboring classes of a great city into tenement houses, 
 surrounded by conspicuous and flagrant vice, and without the 
 power that separate houses would give to preserve the rising gen¬ 
 erations from degrading contact. It is somewhat better now than 
 in 1865, yet frightfully depraved, and hopeless of permanent reform 
 
 In the Fourteenth Ward one-half of the buildings were tenement, 
 houses, and a very few only were private dwellings. Of its popu¬ 
 lation, in 1865 numbering 33,000 (in 1870 but 26,000), four-fifths 
 lived in tenement houses. Four small squares from the Bowery to 
 Mott street, then contained 4,168 persons, all living in tenement 
 houses. This district has in some respects improved. 
 
BUILDING SYSTEMS. 
 
 Returning to the west side of the city, part of the First and the 
 whole of the Third Ward constitute an Inspection District, in which 
 there were then 241 tenement houses, with a very few private resi¬ 
 dences only. One locality in this district was described as a “per¬ 
 petual fever-nest,” in which many of the worst tenement houses 
 were located. “ The common mode of arranging them is as follows: 
 On a lot of ordinary size 25 by 100 feet will be erected a front house 
 25 by 50 feet, and a rear house 25 by 25 feet, with a court 25 by 25 
 feet and frequently less; these houses are commonly 5 and frequently 
 6 stories high ; the principal rooms, of which there are four to each 
 floor, occupy the width of the building, front and rear, with small 
 bed-rooms between, one to each main room. This arrangement 
 gives accommodation to four families on each floor, making, in a 
 six-story building, 24 families. This is the average, but there are 
 many exceptions where the over-crowding far exceeds this.” In 
 the Seventh Ward there were 627 tenement houses; in the 
 Eleventh 2,049 \ i* 1 the Sixteenth, Seventeenth, Twentieth and 
 Twenty-first, an average of over 1,200 each; the Seventeenth 
 having 1,890 of these structures—in all cases containing more than 
 three families each. (See Appendix for a tabular statement in 
 full.) 
 
 Other wards and districts give even a darker picture than this 
 here quoted, but I have not space to refer to them. The general 
 result is, that of tenement houses containing more than three fami¬ 
 lies there were, in 1865, in New York 15,511, with an average of 
 8 families and 33 persons to each house ; the whole number living 
 in them was 486,000, and there were 15,224 persons then living in 
 cellars. The total number of these unfortunates was 501,224, or 
 nearly two-thirds of the entire population of New York ! 
 
 Nothing can be more impressive than this statement of the actual 
 condition of the half million of people who in one great city are 
 subjected to such demoralizing influences as are described in the 
 report from which we take these figures. I cite the facts at some 
 length in order to enforce attention to the sanitary and social 
 advantages of our single-house system, and to make a contrast so 
 strong that it must receive attention. What was true of New 
 York in 1865 is practically true to-day—there are more nearly 
 20,000 of these structures now, with fully 500,000 people occupy¬ 
 ing them. The general discouragement of such surroundings is 
 adverse to habits of economy, and but little chance is afforded for 
 
BUILDING SYSTEMS. 
 
 9 
 
 the laboring man to save enough to secure a home. Distress and 
 demoralization are inevitable, and the suffering of this enormous 
 class must necessarily re-act on even the wealthy in many ways. 
 Deadly diseases are propagated from these “ fever-nests” and social 
 pest-houses, from which the wealthy resident of an adjacent street 
 can scarcely hope to be secure. In fact, the motive to the costly 
 survey, of which the volume I quote from is the report,was a hope 
 that some relief from these dangers could be obtained. But it has 
 been found in the ten or twelve years since elapsed that, although 
 a vigorous policing may improve those crowded prison-houses for 
 the laboring classes to some extent, and occasionally order one of 
 the worst to be torn down, the tenement house proper is in the 
 main incurable, a scourge to the poor man, the ruin of all hope for 
 improvement of his family, and a terror to the neighborhood as a 
 source of disease. 
 
 During at least the full period elapsing since this sanitary sur¬ 
 vey of New York, in 1865, I have had my attention drawn to the 
 contrast presented by the single-house system, and to the elevating 
 influence it has on the population of a great city, in contrast with 
 the degradation and demoralization inevitable in the tenement 
 house. I have made many examinations of the streets and quar¬ 
 ters so decisively condemned in 1865, and have seen but little im¬ 
 provement in them. Cleanliness and healthiness are always 
 impossible; while on the contrary, I have seen men with their fam¬ 
 ilies pursuing precisely the same occupations, living in Philadel¬ 
 phia in neatly-kept houses of their own, in cleanly streets, and with 
 every evidence that they felt inspired by all the present comfort 
 and hopes of improvement that elevate and honor man in the 
 humblest as well as in the highest position. 
 
 I claim, therefore, that it is a social question of the highest char¬ 
 acter, that is raised in this discussion of the mode of building up a 
 great city. As an act of sanitary precaution, or of benevolent 
 public spirit, there could be no greater service conferred on a city 
 than to introduce and enforce the single-house system. Even at a 
 cost of large sums for cheapening the ground rents, or reducing 
 the capital invested in their erection, an appropriation to aid the 
 building up of streets and squares with single houses would be wise. 
 But here, at least, no aid whatever has been or is necessary. As 
 a business, such investment both in land and buildings pays well. 
 There is an ample margin of profit to the land owner, to the capi- 
 
10 
 
 BUILDING SYSTEMS. 
 
 talist, and to the working builder alike; and when the working¬ 
 man has taken shares in a building association, there is a profit 
 to him n buying a house, and relative loss in renting one. Cir¬ 
 cumstances singularly favor the greatest work of popular benefi¬ 
 cence almost that the world has known; a work that may carry 
 our population up to millions, without giving us a single square 
 or street of squalor and shame. Such is substantially the condi¬ 
 tion of things in this city at the present time; a population of 850,- 
 000, at least, has passed through a season of unprecedented busi¬ 
 ness depression, with scarcely an instance of serious suffering, or 
 any material check to the growth of the city, or to its expansion in 
 streets and the erection of new houses by many thousands every 
 year. Probably a greater number of persons are now enrolled in 
 building associations than ever before, and are prepared or prepar¬ 
 ing through them to become owners of their own homes. Cer¬ 
 tainly the number of such members is nearly seventy thousand, and 
 the capital accumulating reaches nearly to thirty millions of dol¬ 
 lars ; all of which saving will in due time be invested in the cov¬ 
 eted home, which is the object of membership in these associations. 
 
 In a recent publication of this society, embracing a valuable 
 paper by each of two gentlemen, thoroughly qualified to state the 
 condition of the Building Associations of Philadelphia, the statis¬ 
 tics of these people’s saving funds are given more fully than I have 
 space to do here. Mr. Joseph I. Doran, in one of these papers, 
 gives conclusive authority for the statement that the sum of $50,- 
 580,000, at least, has passed through these associations into real 
 estate in Philadelphia, from 1849 to 1876; and he estimates that 
 $7,672,000 was the amount of payments to them during 1875, 
 at least an equal sum being invested by them during the year. 
 He gives the number of stock-holders or members in 1876, as 
 67,500, or “ over one-fifth of the number of persons having occu¬ 
 pations in Philadelphia.” There were 450 active Building Asso¬ 
 ciations in operation in that year. 
 
 THE SINGLE-HOUSE SYSTEM. 
 
 The system of building which has grown up here in Philadelphia 
 has attained its present position through a series of generally pros¬ 
 perous years, and the efforts of many practical and enterprising 
 builders. It is scarcely to be credited to any general design, 
 though some acts of local legislation have greatly favored it—par¬ 
 ticularly those which forbid the erection of wooden buildings, an 
 
BUILDING SYSTEMS. 
 
 ii 
 
 restrict the opening of streets less than thirty feet wide. The 
 greater merits of the system have grown upon citizens here uncon¬ 
 sciously, and have not received the attention they deserve. To en¬ 
 lightened citizens of other States and countries, however, they have 
 been of great and increasing interest, and a wide-spread desire 
 exists for information by which their benefits may be practically 
 introduced into other cities. It will serve a valuable purpose even 
 here to renew attention to the very favorable circumstances under 
 which this city adds 5,000 dwellings annually to its present great 
 number of occupied houses, and a fair statement of what is already 
 attained will encourage further effort to improve and benefit the 
 city. In all its leading features, the single-house system appears 
 to be applicable to most other cities as well as to this; the only 
 question is whether land is available within easy reach, and whether 
 the price for land is not impracticably high. The street railroads, to 
 a great extent, cover the question of mere distance, and bring a 
 suburb five miles away within easy reach of the business center, 
 where the workingman finds employment. In the case of New 
 York, perhaps the difficulties of distance, and the water surround¬ 
 ings, become more nearly insuperable; though even there the neces¬ 
 sary provision must and will be made for rapid-transit to the wide 
 stretch of lands within sight of the city not yet occupied. Cheap 
 and prompt communication with the upper tracts of the island 
 itself, and with New Jersey and Long Island across the rivers on 
 either side, cannot be long delayed. It certainly appears as the 
 least of the surrounding difficulties to provide this transit; and not 
 for a moment to be compared with the constant deadly struggle 
 against disease and vice which is forced upon them by the tenement- 
 house system. It must be admitted that there are great difficulties 
 in the case of a city bounded and limited as New York, but the 
 only way to solve them is to enter at once and resolutely upon the 
 duty of offering encouragement to those who must live in other 
 than brown stone edifices, and to give them a chance at least for 
 the possession of houses of their own. This can never be done 
 in tenement-houses. 
 
 I have not now before me the exact results of Mr. Peabody’s 
 beneficence in London, but it is generally understood to have 
 secured no more than good rooms at a moderate rental, in a well- 
 regulated house. It is not unlike a hotel, in which the occupants 
 provide their own food and furniture, but are subject to examina- 
 
12 
 
 BUILDING SYSTEMS. 
 
 tion and possible rejection when they enter, and to proper discipline 
 while there. Large capital, with benevolent direction, and perma¬ 
 nent supervision, are essential conditions of the system. It is ex¬ 
 cellent in its way, but not generally applicable, or even possible. 
 
 All experience has shown that for the best ends of society there 
 must be, in the relation of men and families in a city to each other, 
 something like the theory of the citizen’s position in political life; 
 each must enjoy and retain a separate individuality, with entire 
 liberty under due responsibility. Give every possible opportunity, 
 but hold every man and every family in a city to responsibility as 
 independent elements of society. In a tenement-house the occu¬ 
 pants soon cease to recognize any responsibility; they are reckless 
 and wasteful of what is their ow^i, and what is not their own. In 
 a house which has cost the occupant care and labor to purchase 
 and to furnish, the foremost thought of the owner and occupant is 
 to maintain and improve it. 
 
 STANDARD FORMS OF THE SINGLE HOUSE. 
 
 The form of building under the single-house system is estab¬ 
 lished with much uniformity—perhaps too entirely uniform, some 
 may say, but the necessities of the case admit only the best, and it 
 can scarcely be defiied that the forms employed are wonderfully 
 successful. There are three primary forms, as they may be called: 
 described as the two-story four-roomed house, the two-story six- 
 roomed, and ‘the three-story eight-roomed. They are always of 
 brick, erected on stone walled cellars not less than seven feet deep, 
 14 by 28 feet for the smallest hcruses, 14 to 16 by 42 to 45 feet for 
 the six-roomed houses, and the same for the three-story houses of 
 eight rooms, which differ from the larger two-story houses only in 
 having three stories on the front and two stories at the back. All 
 these are built in contiguous rows or blocks, with a common wall 
 between them. No external or dividing wall is less than twelve 
 inches thick, with hard or pressed brick for the outside, and salmon, 
 or light absorbent brick for the inner facings. There is little criticism 
 possible upon either the materials or the mode of building of these 
 standard houses, which have taken the place of all others almost, 
 and are limited by well defined building laws, so that there is 
 scarcely any opportunity for the substitution of inferior structures. 
 In fact, there is no temptation to do so ; the great number annually 
 built, and the facility of access to unbuilt suburbs, would deprive 
 the careless or lawless builder of all profitable use for poor houses. 
 
BUILDING SYSTEMS. 
 
 J 3 
 
 Other restrictions and usages also aid in protecting those who use 
 these houses ; they Cannot be built of wood, nor can any alley be 
 used for frontage ; no street less than thirty feet wide can be 
 opened or built upon. Under the protection of these general con¬ 
 ditions, building has made rapid progress since the inauguration of 
 the system, which scarcely dates before the year 1862. In 1867 it 
 began to be especially active, and since that time an average of 
 4,500 houses yearly has been erected, of which 2,500 have been two- 
 story, 2,000 three-story, and of dwellings not more than seventy 
 yearly of greater proportions. This rate of increase is much 
 greater than that of other cities of equal population. At New 
 York the annual increase of dwellings is not over 600, the most 
 of these, indeed, being costly structures erected for the private 
 residences of the wealthy. The number of new tenement-houses 
 erected is small, the greater movement in this direction being the 
 change from old buildings originally built and occupied for private 
 dwellings or as stores or warehouses. The Sanitary Survey of 
 1865 found thal: four-fifths of the tenement-houses then in use 
 were altered from other forms for this purpose. 
 
 In the conduct of house building, as of every other business, 
 there are many unsuccessful attempts, and many instances in which 
 the property changes hands before completion and occupancy. 
 But whatever the good or ill fortune of the intervening parties, the 
 contractor, the workman, or the furnisher of materials, the general 
 public only need to know that the houses are built and duly occupied 
 by owners or tenants. They pay a profit, on the whole, to each of 
 the necessary parties to their erection, and they represent a very 
 large and active employment of both capital and labor. Taking the 
 average value of the 4,500 houses annually built at not over $3,500 
 each, the total is $15,750,000 of value created yearly. 
 
 The capitalization of the land itself in the erection of these 
 buildings is a very important question in considering the applica¬ 
 tion of the system elsewhere. It is generally believed that land is 
 too valuable near New York and Boston, at least. To decide this 
 question it would be necessary to see what these houses would be 
 worth there. Those of two stories with four rooms are here worth 
 $1,200 to $2,500 each, with a rental of $11 to $18 per month. The 
 two story six-room house is worth $2,500 to $3,800 each, with a 
 rental of $16 to $25 per month. The three story eight-roomed 
 house is worth $3,000 to $5,000 each, with a rental of $20 to $35 
 
4 
 
 BUILDING SYSTEMS. 
 
 per month. Taking 1 the usual proportions of these three sizes 
 there may be, and actually have been, built upon a square 400 by 
 400 feet, with exterior streets 50 feet wide, 120 to 130 dwellings 
 on each square; and the land is capitalized at $100,000 to $125,000. 
 To this is often added an equal amount as advances, or as money 
 furnished by the owner of the land for building it up; and there 
 may be, also, a nearly equal sum representing the further cost in¬ 
 curred in finally completing the dwellings. The cost of a built-up 
 square, as thus made up, therefore varies from $300,000 to $325,000. 
 Often the salable value rises to $400,000 or $450,000. Converting 
 these items into their equivalents in cost per acre, it will be seen 
 that the land before being built upon represents $30,000 per acre, 
 nearly, which is certainly a full average value for suburban real 
 estate anywhere. 
 
 This distribution also admits an unexpected density of popula¬ 
 tion. In a square mile there might be 130 squares of this size— 
 400 by 400 feet; and with 120 houses on each square, the pop¬ 
 ulation would, at five persons each house, be 600 persons on a 
 square, and 78,000 on a square mile. This is not an unreasonable 
 dispersion, and in fact it much exceeds the average density in large 
 cities. 
 
 The principal object of this paper is to illustrate and to urge the 
 practical application of the single-house system of building in great 
 cities, and to propose it for New York and Boston particularly, as 
 an available substitute for the tenement-house system. If the land 
 used in building can be capitalized at a sufficiently high value; if 
 the houses can be built at a cost not exceeding twice the value of 
 the land, and the rental, when built, will pay a fair interest on all 
 the money and money value of the different elements of the in¬ 
 vestment, then there can be no insuperable difficulty. It cannot be 
 expected that either the single house or the tenement house shall 
 be built as charities ; certainly not if houses of a suitable character 
 can in any manner be obtained as paying matters of business. 
 There is no difficulty in that respect here, and no want of readi¬ 
 ness on the part of builders, who offer to erect houses wherever 
 they can find vacant ground, in reasonable proximity to ground 
 already built upon. For every year of the last ten, it has been 
 asserted that building was overdone, and that building would not 
 pay, yet each successive year has shown an actual record of build¬ 
 ings erected quite equal to its predecessor. As a rule, they are 
 
BUILDING SYSTEMS. 
 
 i5 
 
 erected by active men of moderate means, and not by capitalists; 
 the investment of fixed capital in them being chiefly in the ground 
 rents or mortgages. It is a system that has grown up by accident 
 rather than by design, and it finds so large an adaptation, and 
 meets so great a want on the part of the people, that it moves for¬ 
 ward with a steady and regular progress not likely soon to be 
 stopped. 
 
 The future of this expansion of cities we cannot undertake to pre¬ 
 dict. It is not necessary to assume anything definite in regard to 
 it, except this, that the greater cities must in some way provide for 
 much more than they now represent of surface expansion. New 
 York cannot attain to three millions of population within the limits 
 of the island of Manhattan, nor can Boston grow to two millions 
 without crossing the Back Bay. A radius of five miles from any 
 city’s centre affords a great sweep for expansion, and it is already 
 in perfectly successful use in more than one direction here. There 
 must be and will be prompt and easy transit devised for such mu¬ 
 nicipal areas, and if this is done, the singlehouse system, with its 
 vast benefits and powerful social ameliorations, will last us yet for 
 half a century. 
 
 OWNERSHIP AND OCCUPANCY OF HOUSES. 
 
 A further question is presented in the conditions of occupation 
 and ownership of these single houses when built. It might be in¬ 
 ferred that so large a number of dwellings could not be built year 
 after year, if they were not called for and occupied; but whether 
 they are taken as investments by persons who rent to others, or 
 whether they are purchased directly by those who are to live in 
 them, is an important distinction. 
 
 The facts are that chiefly through the fortunate agency of Build¬ 
 ing Associations much the larger share of all these buildings are, 
 within two years after their erection, bought by those who live in 
 them. An extended examination of a district near the southern 
 border of the city, conducted by me at intervals during the past 
 year, shows that three-fourths of the dwellings erected two years 
 or more, are owned by those who reside in them, and nearly half 
 of those which are properly and carefully built are purchased 
 during the first year. In a space less than a mile square, centrally 
 situated, but reaching to the southern limit of the built-up area, 
 more than 4,000 dwellings were examined recently. Of these the 
 proportion vacant was less than two per cent., and while some 
 
i6 
 
 BUILDING SYSTEMS. 
 
 blocks were carelessly erected, and remained for a year or more 
 unfinished, all were ultimately well-finished and fully occupied. 
 The condition in regard to personal ownership was not so easy to 
 ascertain; certainly more than half were owned by their occupants, 
 and often entire blocks, of thirty or forty houses each, would show 
 not ten per cent, rented. 
 
 These statements are given simply to represent the average con¬ 
 dition, and they would be substantially the same for any section 
 of the city near its outer limit. The fact that several blocks on 
 the section examined were erected by persons unable themselves 
 to finish them, and, therefore, most likely to represent the worst 
 phase of the single-house system, appeared to require that the 
 facts should be ascertained. The result fully sustains the system, 
 and shows that even in unskilled hands it cannot be a failure. 
 
 The agency of Building Associations in enabling persons, what¬ 
 ever their employment, to purchase these houses, is undoubtedly 
 of the first importance. The facility for creating what may be 
 called mortgages payable by monthly installments, secured by the 
 house in which the mortgagor, or member of the association lives, 
 is the greatest of all possible facilities for house-buying. It secures 
 the principal and makes payment easy; both conditions being indis¬ 
 pensable to any great extension of individual ownership. The 
 
 almost universal division of the principal sum of cost in the erec¬ 
 tion of buildings, so as to create a first obligation, representing 
 the value of the ground and called a ground rent, is also 
 a very great facility. These ground rents, which are usually 
 one-third, or less, of the value of the house and lot as fin¬ 
 ished, are the most desirable of investments for retired citi¬ 
 zens, trusts, or estate funds. The proceeds are easy and certain 
 of collection, not like ordinary house rents, or tenement rents par¬ 
 ticularly. It may be estimated that perhaps one-fourth to one- 
 third of the value of the lands annually built upon, is capitalized 
 as ground rent, and remains a fixed investment, the ownership of 
 which may pass from one investor to another almost as an United 
 States bond. Just now the insecurity of railroad and other stocks is 
 inducing a much greater inquiry than usual for well-secured ground 
 rents and first mortgages on dwellings. Taking the average of 
 mortgages and ground rents together, it may be stated that half 
 the cost of erecting dwellings of the classes below $6,000 in value, 
 and particularly of two-story dwellings valued at $1,500 to $3,000 
 
BUILDING SYSTEMS. 
 
 i7 
 
 each, is carried easily from the outset in permanent negotiable 
 investments in this form. As soon as dwellings attain advance¬ 
 ment in the course of erection, the ground rent becomes a security, 
 and when completed and capable of occupation, a mortgage of 
 one-third or more of the value is a negotiable security. 
 
 The business machinery of these building operations is some¬ 
 what difficult to explain, though simple and easy in actual opera¬ 
 tion. The land is “ taken up on ground rent,” by the builder 
 usually, who pays for the ground itself on ground rents or first 
 mortgages, contracting to build the dwelling in a specific time, in 
 order to make, or as the means of making, those obligations secure. 
 The land-owner is relieved from taxes, and {he value placed upon 
 his land becomes a productive security, bearing six per cent, in¬ 
 terest, payable semi-annually. If the owner furnishes the money 
 to build with, called advances, he takes securities of the same class. 
 The land constituting a square of 400 feet or more, between prin¬ 
 cipal streets, may, as has before been explained, be capitalized 
 in this way at say $75,000 to $100,000, to which, if advances 
 are made, an equal amount is added, making $150,000 to 
 $200,000 in ground rents or first mortgages, for 75 to 125 dwell¬ 
 ings. The builder requires from one-fourth to one-third the total 
 cost of the dwellings beyond this to enable him to finish them, and 
 his share of the transaction is the value the whole may have above 
 the ground rents or mortgages. To our own citizens all this is, of 
 course, familiar, but it is an essential part of the single-house system, 
 and capable of introduction in any and every other city. It must, in 
 some form, be introduced, in order to unite the interests of the land- 
 owner, the capitalist who makes the advances in money, and the 
 builder and final occupier of the dwelling built. When this is 
 duly arranged, it will be found that the cost of the ground, even if 
 large, is no obstruction to the introduction of the system. The 
 necessity only is that this cost shall be capitalized in a way to en¬ 
 able the final occupier to carry it easily. It is also an essential 
 point to afford time for the erection of dwellings, and to defer the 
 commencement of interest on the several obligations a few months 
 —three, four, or sometimes six months—in order to avoid ob¬ 
 structing the sale and occupation of the finished dwellings by ac¬ 
 cumulations of accrued interest. 
 
 The first statement printed in the appendix gives the result of a 
 survey, made as this paper is prepared, of a section of the city of 
 
i8 
 
 BUILDING SYSTEMS. 
 
 Philadelphia, which fairly illustrates the single-house system as it 
 exists here. The district stretches southward from the southern 
 border, as built under the previous irregular systems, a mile in 
 length by half a mile in width, two-thirds of it having been built 
 up within five years. All the streets in this area are represented, 
 and all the dwellings are classified. Factories and shops not used 
 in any part as dwellings are not counted, but buildings used at the 
 lower story front as stores or shops are counted, if also used as 
 dwellings. 
 
 As there would be 5,000 dwellings on this area if all the spaces 
 were built up, it may be fairly assumed that a square mile would 
 afford 8,000 to 10,000 dwellings under this system, yet still be con¬ 
 spicuously open and well ventilated, with no street less than thirty 
 feet in width. 
 
 Of these 4,252 dwellings, residents of general acquaintance with 
 the facts estimate that two-thirds are owned by those who reside 
 in them—in some localities, a half; in others as high as four-fifths. 
 This very important fact has been verified by many visitors to the 
 district during the past year. 
 
 On the west of Broad street in the south-western part of the city 
 a very much larger district is built up in a similar manner, affording 
 fully 6,000 dwellings of this class. In the northern sections of the 
 city, there are still larger areas built up in the same manner, the 
 northwestern districts being built up with three-story dwellings 
 chiefly, but on the north and northeastern border the predominating 
 form is of two-stories. All are brick or stone; none in any case 
 being of wood. 
 
 In conclusion, it is proper to say that much more of explanation 
 and elucidation is due the subject than is possible in this paper. 
 It should be shown how the details of building are carried on; 
 how the space is divided in dwellings of the various classes, and in 
 what way further improvements are possible to be attained. The 
 system cannot assume to be developed in all its beneficial relations, 
 but it is remarkable that so much should be attained by efforts not 
 directed in any especial degree to other than the usual objects of 
 business. 
 
 It is often the subject of severe criticism that building operations 
 of this class are undertaken by persons of insufficient skill, or of 
 little capital; yet the remarkable feature is, that after much prelim¬ 
 inary failure they are always made complete in the end. 
 
BLILDING SYSTEMS. 
 
 *9 
 
 I shall be amply rewarded if this peculiar feature of building 
 progress and its striking social benefits receive the attention of 
 thoughtful and benevolent men, who may see their way to apply 
 and improve upon them in other cities. Lorin Blodget. 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 Buildings Erected and Occupied within Ten Years, Representing the 
 Single-House System in Philadelphia. 
 
 2-Story. 3-Story. Vacant. 
 
 Streets. 
 
 Wharton, Broad to Thirteenth. 
 
 “ Thirteenth to Twelfth. 
 
 “ Twelfth to Eleventh (Public) 
 
 “ Eleventh to Tenth . 
 
 “ Tenth to Ninth. 
 
 Watts, Wharton to Reed. 
 
 “ Reed to Dickinson.. 
 
 “ Dickinson to Tasker. 
 
 Clarion, Federal to Wharton. 
 
 “ Wharton to Reed. 
 
 “ Reed to Dickinson. 
 
 “ Dickinson to Tasker. 
 
 Reed, Broad to Thirteenth. 
 
 (Thirteenth to Tenth, Public). 
 
 “ Tenth to Ninth. 
 
 “ Eighth to Seventh. 
 
 “ Seventh to Sixth. 
 
 Alexander, above Wharton. 
 
 Lentz, Thirteenth to Twelfth. 
 
 “ Twelfth to Eleventh. 
 
 Parade, Twelfth to Eleventh. 
 
 Austin, Wharton to Reed. 
 
 Dean, Federal to Wharton. 
 
 “ Dickinson to Tasker. 
 
 “ Tasker to Morris. 
 
 “ Mifflin to McKean. 
 
 Sevbert, North of Wharton. 
 
 Ashland, North of Wharton. 
 
 Thirteenth, Federal to Wharton. 
 
 “ Wharton to Reed. 
 
 “ Reed to Dickinson. 
 
 “ Dickinson to Tasker. 
 
 “ Moore to Mifflin. 
 
 Twelfth. Federal to Wharton. 
 
 “ (Wharton to Reed, Public). 
 
 “ Reed to Dickinson. 
 
 “ Dickinson to Tasker. 
 
 “ Tasker to Morris. 
 
 “ Morris to Moore. 
 
 “ Moore to Mifflin. 
 
 “ Mifflin to McKean. 
 
 Eleventh, Wharton to Federal. 
 
 “ (Wharton to Dickinson, Public)... 
 
 “ Dickinson to Tasker. 
 
 “ Tasker to Morris. 
 
 “ Morris to Moore. 
 
 “ Moore to Mifflin. 
 
 “ Mifflin to McKean. 
 
 “ McKean to Snyder. 
 
 Tenth, Federal to Wharton. 
 
 “ Wharton to Reed. 
 
 “ Reed to Dickinson. 
 
 “ Dickinson to Tasker. 
 
 “ Tasker to Morris. 
 
 “ Morris to Moore. 
 
 “ Moore to Mifflin. 
 
 “ Mifflin to McKean. 
 
 “ McKean to Snyder. 
 
 Ninth, Wharton to Reed. 
 
 “ Reed to Dickinson.. 
 
 “ Dickinson to Tasker. . 
 
 “ Tasker to Morris.. 
 
 “ Morris to Moore. 
 
 “ Moore to Mifflin.. 
 
 •Unfinished. 
 
20 
 
 BUILDING SYSTEMS. 
 
 Streets. 
 
 Eighth, Tasker to Morris. 
 
 “ Morris to Moore.. 
 
 “ Moore to Mifflin. 
 
 Seventh, Dickinson to Tasker. 
 
 " Tasker to Morris. 
 
 “ Morris to Moore. 
 
 “ (Moore to Mifflin not open.).... 
 
 “ Mifflin to McKean. 
 
 Sixth, Moore to Mifflin. 
 
 “ Mifflin to McKean. 
 
 Dickinson, Broad to Thirteenth. 
 
 “ Thirteenth to Twelfth. 
 
 “ Twelfth to Eleventh. 
 
 “ Eleventh to Tenth. 
 
 “ Tenth to Ninth. 
 
 “ Ninth to Eighth. 
 
 Tasker, Broad to Thirteenth. 
 
 “ Thirteenth to Twelfth. 
 
 “ Twelfth to Eleventh. 
 
 “ Eleventh to Tenth. 
 
 “ Tenth to Ninth. 
 
 “ Ninth to Eighth. 
 
 “ Eighth to Seventh. 
 
 “ Seventh to Sixth. 
 
 Crumback, Thirteenth to Twelfth. 
 
 Moseley, Thirteenth to Twelfth. 
 
 Aman, Twelfth to Eleventh. 
 
 Guirey, Twelfth to Eleventh. 
 
 Pallas, Dickinson to Tasker. 
 
 “ Tasker to Morris. 
 
 “ Moore to Mifflin. 
 
 “ Mifflin to McKean. 
 
 Morris, Thirteenth to Twelfth. 
 
 “ Twelfth to Eleventh. 
 
 “ Eleventh to Tenth. 
 
 " Tenth to Ninth. 
 
 *' Ninth to Eighth. 
 
 “ Eighth to Seventh.. 
 
 “ Seventh to Sixth. 
 
 Taylor, Eleventh to Tenth. 
 
 “ Tenth to Ninth.... 
 
 " Ninth to Eighth.'.. 
 
 Cross, Eleventh to Tenth. 
 
 " Tenth to Ninth. 
 
 “ Ninth to Eighth. 
 
 Fernon, Eleventh to Tenth. 
 
 “ Tenth to Ninth... 
 
 “ Ninth to Eighth. 
 
 Fisher, Seventh to Sixth. 
 
 Sylvester, Seventh to Sixth. 
 
 Mountain, Eleventh to Tenth. 
 
 " Tenth to Ninth. 
 
 " Ninth to Eighth. 
 
 " Eighth to Seventh. 
 
 Watkins, Twelfth to Eleventh. 
 
 “ Eleventh to Tenth. 
 
 “ Tenth to Ninth. 
 
 “ Ninth to Eighth. 
 
 “ Eighth to Seventh. 
 
 " Seventh to Sixth. 
 
 Pierce, Twelfth to Eleventh. 
 
 “ Eleventh to Tenth (not open).... 
 
 “ Tenth to Ninth. 
 
 “ Ninth to Eighth. 
 
 “ Eighth to Seventh. 
 
 “ Seventh to Sixth. 
 
 Moore, Thirteenth to Twelfth. 
 
 “ Twelfth to Eleventh. 
 
 “ Eleventh to Tenth (not open).... 
 
 “ Tenth to Ninth. 
 
 '* Ninth to Eighth. 
 
 “ Eighth to Seventh. 
 
 " Seventh to Sixth.. 
 
 McClellan, Tenth to Ninth. 
 
 “ Ninth to Eighth. 
 
 “ Eighth to Seventh. 
 
 Grant, Tenth to Ninth. 
 
 Siegel, Eighth to Seventh. 
 
 Mifflin, Broad to Thirteenth. 
 
 “ Thirteenth to Twelfth. 
 
 “ Twelfth to Eleventh. 
 
 2-Story. 
 
 3-Story. 
 
 Vacant. 
 
 3 
 
 8 
 
 0 
 
 30 
 
 7 
 
 1 
 
 32 
 
 7 
 
 1 
 
 IO 
 
 17 
 
 0 
 
 35 
 
 3 
 
 0 
 
 9 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 16 
 
 17 
 
 X 
 
 0 
 
 8 
 
 1 
 
 i5 
 
 *7 
 
 0 
 
 18 
 
 5 
 
 12* 
 
 10 
 
 O 
 
 0 
 
 23 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 25 
 
 4 
 
 X 
 
 8 
 
 3 
 
 0 
 
 22 
 
 9 
 
 I 
 
 0 
 
 18 
 
 I 
 
 6 
 
 4 
 
 0 
 
 *4 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 *5 
 
 23 
 
 4 
 
 
 13 
 
 
 26 
 
 9 
 
 0 
 
 19 
 
 9 
 
 0 
 
 26 
 
 z 
 
 0 
 
 29 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 40 
 
 0 
 
 
 3° 
 
 0 
 
 
 21 
 
 0 
 
 3 
 
 34 
 
 0 
 
 6 
 
 4i 
 
 1 
 
 
 47 
 
 0 
 
 3 
 
 10 
 
 5 
 
 X 
 
 25 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 34 
 
 2 
 
 
 37 
 
 5 
 
 1 
 
 8 
 
 xo 
 
 0 
 
 38 
 
 4 
 
 0 
 
 36 
 
 2 
 
 0 
 
 3 
 
 * 
 
 0 
 
 »4 
 
 4 
 
 X 
 
 16 
 
 X 
 
 I* 
 
 15 
 
 2 
 
 0 
 
 34 
 
 4 
 
 0 
 
 
 X 
 
 0 
 
 35 
 
 X 
 
 I 
 
 26 
 
 X 
 
 I 
 
 16 
 
 8 
 
 0 
 
 48 
 
 4 
 
 0 
 
 38 
 
 2 
 
 I 
 
 28 
 
 1 
 
 0 
 
 27 
 
 2 
 
 I 
 
 15 
 
 8 
 
 I 
 
 14 
 
 X 
 
 0 
 
 39 
 
 X 
 
 
 26 
 
 1 
 
 0 
 
 33 
 
 0 
 
 1 
 
 25 
 
 0 
 
 1 
 
 47 
 
 1 
 
 0 
 
 38 
 
 2 
 
 X 
 
 36 
 
 0 
 
 2 
 
 38 
 
 X 
 
 I 
 
 38 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 39 
 
 X 
 
 0 
 
 28 
 
 2 
 
 x 
 
 10 
 
 5 
 
 I 
 
 14 
 
 X 
 
 0 
 
 38 
 
 0 
 
 X 
 
 37 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 3i 
 
 0 
 
 4 
 
 7 
 
 10 
 
 0 
 
 24 
 
 0 
 
 0 
 
 36 
 
 3 
 
 0 
 
 38 
 
 2 
 
 0 
 
 
 x 
 
 0 
 
 38 
 
 4 
 
 i 
 
 
 0 
 
 4* 
 
 26 
 
 2 
 
 
 *9 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 'Unfinished. 
 
BUILDING SYSTEMS. 
 
 2-Story. 3-Story. Vacant. 
 
 Streets. 
 
 Mifflin, Eleventh to Tenth... 
 
 “ Tenth to Ninth (to Eighth not open). 
 
 “ Eighth to Seventh. 
 
 “ Seventh to Sixth.. 
 
 Hoffman, Tenth to Ninth.. 
 
 “ Eighth to Seventh. 
 
 “ Seventh to Sixth. 
 
 Blackburn, Moore to Mifflin. 
 
 Bancroft, Mifflin to McKean. 
 
 Farrell, Mifflin to McKean. 
 
 Gerhard, McKean to Snyder. 
 
 Passyunk, Ninth to Tenth.. 
 
 “ Eleventh to Twelfth. 
 
 11 Moore to Mifflin. 
 
 “ Mifflin to McKean. 
 
 Canal, above Thirteenth. 
 
 Conroy, above Thirteenth. 
 
 Totals....,. 3,295 959 8 7 
 
 In all, 4,252, of which 87 are vacant and finished, or 2 per cent, only—132, vacant and unfinished. 
 
 Statistical Summary of the Tenant-Houses and Cellars, and the Dis¬ 
 tribution and Statistics of their Population, etc., in the city of New 
 York, at the close of the year 1864. 
 
 ( From, the Sanitary Survey of New York, 1865.) 
 
 WARDS. 
 
 Total No. of Tenant- 
 Houses. 
 
 Total No. of Families in 
 Tenant-Houses. 
 
 Average No. of Families 1 
 
 in each House. 
 
 Total Population in Ten¬ 
 ant-Houses. 
 
 Average Population in 
 each House. 
 
 Total Cellar Population.. 
 
 Total population in Cel¬ 
 lars and Tenant-Houses. 
 
 Total No. of Tenant- 
 Houses without Sewers. 
 
 Total Population in Un¬ 
 sewered Houses. 
 
 First. 
 
 250 
 
 2,181 
 
 8^ 
 
 8,564 
 
 34X+ 
 
 § 498 
 
 9,062 
 
 89 
 
 2,606 
 
 Third. 
 
 54 
 
 3 IQ 
 
 SA 
 
 1,248 
 
 24J4 
 
 57 
 
 1,305 
 
 28 
 
 640 
 
 Fourth. 
 
 486 
 
 3,636 
 
 rA 
 
 17,611 
 
 35X + 
 
 346 
 
 17,597 
 
 151 
 
 4,473 
 
 Fifth. 
 
 462 
 
 2,597 
 
 $'A 
 
 10,370 
 
 24%+ 
 
 836 
 
 11,206 
 
 293 
 
 5,796 
 
 Sixth. 
 
 605 
 
 4,406 
 
 7 A 
 
 22,401 
 
 34 X— 
 
 496 
 
 22,897 
 
 214 
 
 6,612 
 
 Seventh. 
 
 627 
 
 4,586 
 
 rA 
 
 19,293 
 
 3°t 
 
 1,233 
 
 20,526 
 
 409 
 
 io,953 
 
 Eighth. 
 
 625 
 
 3,977 
 
 6 X 
 
 15,630 
 
 25+ 
 
 1,258 
 
 16,888 
 
 302 
 
 6,530 
 
 Ninth .. 
 
 596 
 
 3,836 
 
 r / 2 
 
 14,955 
 
 2 5 tV 
 
 217 
 
 15,172 
 
 208 
 
 4,485 
 
 Tenth. 
 
 534 
 
 4,487 
 
 9 
 
 18,140 
 
 34— 
 
 453 
 
 18,583 
 
 no 
 
 2,953 
 
 Eleventh. 
 
 2,049 
 
 13,433 
 
 6 X 
 
 64,254 
 
 3 i T 5 * 
 
 1,366 
 
 65,620 
 
 403 
 
 10,026 
 
 Thirteenth. 
 
 540 
 
 3,729 
 
 6 X 
 
 14,997 
 
 271 
 
 939 
 
 15,936 
 
 215 
 
 5,089 
 
 Fourteenth. 
 
 546 
 
 4,5°9 
 
 8^ 
 
 20,008 
 
 36X 
 
 4i7 
 
 20,425 
 
 207 
 
 6,202 
 
 Fifteenth. 
 
 197 
 
 i ,358 
 
 7 
 
 4,970 
 
 25— 
 
 235 
 
 5,205 
 
 72 
 
 1,237 
 
 Sixteenth... 
 
 1,257 
 
 7,088 
 
 5K 
 
 31,500 
 
 25+ 
 
 2,150 
 
 33,650 
 
 300 
 
 7,107 
 
 Seventeenth . 
 
 1,890 
 
 15,974 
 
 8/4 
 
 63,766 
 
 34/4+ 
 
 2,441 
 
 66,207 
 
 155 
 
 4,596 
 
 Eighteenth. 
 
 836 
 
 7,267 
 
 8X 
 
 35,869 
 
 4 2 \ 
 
 230 
 
 36,099 
 
 98 
 
 3,766 
 
 Nineteenth.. 
 
 57i 
 
 3,632 
 
 6 y 2 
 
 16,067 
 
 287+ 
 
 205 
 
 16,272 
 
 81 
 
 1,912 
 
 Twentieth.. 
 
 1,162 
 
 8,344 
 
 rA 
 
 32,205 
 
 27* 
 
 1,013 
 
 33,218 
 
 291 
 
 7,968 
 
 Twenty-First. 
 
 1,026 
 
 7,299 
 
 7 
 
 36,675 
 
 35f— 
 
 135 
 
 36,870 
 
 144 
 
 4,49i 
 
 Twenty-Second. 
 
 996 
 
 7,7i4 
 
 rA 
 
 31,845 
 
 32— 
 
 699 
 
 32,544 
 
 162 
 
 3,233 
 
 This table presents the Statistics of Tenant-Houses, as reported by the Sanitary 
 Inspectors of the Council of Hygiene, and verified in a recent inspection by the Metro¬ 
 politan Police. 
 
 The total number of tenant-houses, none of which contain less than three families, 
 
 Unfinished. 
 
22 
 
 BUILDING SYSTEMS. 
 
 who hire their apartments by monthly or very brief periods of rental, is 15,511. This 
 exceeds, by 202, the number which the Council of Hygiene, as well as the Metropoli¬ 
 tan Police, has elsewhere given. 
 
 The total population of these tenant-houses at the time of last inspection was 486,000 
 
 The total population in cellars was... 15,224 
 
 Total in tenant-houses and cellars. 501,224 
 
 Note.— The Sanitary Inspectors of the Twelfth Ward report that there are 202 
 tenant-houses of the larger class (averaging more than six families in a house) in that 
 Ward. In the same Ward there are 643 inhabited shanties , and 710 other tenements 
 of a poor class, but not having three families each, consequently not counted in the sta¬ 
 tistics of tenant-houses.