SEYMOUR DURST When you leave, please leave this hook Because it has heen said "Sver'thing comes t' him who waits Except a loaned hook." OLD YORK LIBRARY — OLD YORK FOUNDATION Avery Architectural and Fine Arts Library Gift of Seymour B. Durst Old York Library Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2013 http://archive.org/details/problemofgreaterOObrea Photo, by Edwin Levick, A'. Y. THE SITE OF NEW YORK'S ORIGINAL SETTLEMENT View of the lower end of Manhattan Island, showmg the extraordinary grouping of office buildings as seen from the Woolworth Tower. The Upper Bay in Uie distance. THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK AND ITS SOLUTION By HARRY CHASE BREARLEY WITH A SUPPLEMENTARY CHAPTER BY DR. ELMER L. CORTHELL MAPS. DIAGRAMS. ILLUSTRATIONS, AN APPENDIX OF VALUABLE CIVIC DATA. AND AN ANALYTICAL INDEX PUBLISHED UNDER THE AUSPICES OF THE COMMITTEE ON INDUSTRL\L ADVANCEMENT OF THE BROOKLYN LEAGUE BY THE SEARCH-LIGHT BOOK CORPORATION 450 FOURTH AVENUE, NEW YORK CITY 1914 THE REM ESTATE-BOARD OF m YORK. IHC. Committee on Industrial Advancement of the Brooklyn League WILLIAM LIEBERMANN, Chairman FRANK BAILEY JACOB C. KLINCK Title Guarantee and Trust Company Williams burgh Trust Company EUGENE F. BARNES A. L. LANGDON East Brooklyn Savings Bank Traffic Manager, i.nd Gen'l Fgt. Agt.. L. I. R. R. Co. JOSEPH BARONDESS WOODRUFF LEEMING SAMUEL BLOCK NATHANIEL H. LEVI CHARLES A. BOODY The "Berlin" Peoples Xrust Cornpiiny LEWIS H. LOSEK FREDERICK BRUCKBAUER Ltiwvor > i illt' Iiisurniicc cUid l^rust (?o. ICQoctlie Bros. & f o. JOHN McMULLEN MATTHEW J. CARROLL Atlantic, Gulf & Pacific Co. Briidst r6ct HORACE I. MOVER THOMAS E. CLARK Moyer Engineering and Construction Co. Brooklyn City Stifc Deposit C/Oiiipuiiy CHRISTOPHER C. MOLLENHAUER FRANK W. CONN Brooklyn Board of Real Estate Brokers New York Telephone Company BENJAMIN H. NAMM M. MAURICE DIMOND A.I. Namm & Company A. D. Matthews Sons JOSEPH A. NACH ERNST F. DISTLER Bush Terminal Company Ferdinand Munch Brewery CHARLES JONES PEABODY GEORGE DRESSLER Spencer Trask & Company Dressier Terminal Company HERBERT L. PRATT JOHN W. F. EHLERS Frederick Loe-scr & Comi)any FREDERICK H. EVANS C. S. RINDFOOS The Foundation Company XJ. S. Titlt? Insunuicc Coiiipanv SIMON F. ROTHSCHILD Abraham & Straus LOUIS L. FIRUSKI Pioneer Storage Warehouses J. F. RYDENE D., L. & W. R. R. Company HENRY B. SEAMAN CHARLES H. FULLER MAURICK S SKKLMAN. JR. President The Brooklyn League Edison Electiic Illuminnting Company WILLIAM M. GREVE THEODORE P. SHONTS Realty As -(.ciates Interboro Rapid Transit Company J. WM. HAVILAND, JR. ANDREW T. SULLIVAN Tebo Yacht Basin Company Mecl'.anics Bank GEORGE JULIAN HOUTAIN W. WINTHROP TAYLOR NATHAN S. JONAS WALTER F. WELLS Citizens' Trust Company Edison Electric Illuminating Company FRANKLIN B. JOURDAN TIMOTHY S. WILLIAMS Brooklyn Union Gas Company Brooklyn Rapid Traii.^t Company JOHN F. GEIS, Secretary Copyright, 1914, by Harry Chase Brearley Preface THIS book is the result of an investigation into a problem that vitally concerns every person wlio Hves, works, or owns property in the City of Nevv' York. The following i)ages set forth conditions wliich recjuire an unbiased judgment and a wise decision, for upon the wisdom of this decision depends, in some measure, the future commercial and industrial welfare of New York. It is a plain exposition of facts that bear directly upon the cost of doing business, the scale of wages, and the improvement of living conditions. These are of interest alike to the employer and the employe, the tax-payer and the tenant, the seller and the consumer; they should be, in short, of paramount interest to (^very thoughtful citizen. The preliminary investigation has extended over a con- siderable period and has included an examination of records and docinnents in the City archives as well as consultations with City officials and other authorities, supplemented by interview's with the leading civic organizations and commis- sions. The conclusions presented are also based upon studies of the State and Federal records and an investigation into nninicipal conditions in important American and foreign cities. ^J^lns oj)portunity is taken to acknowledge the courtesies extended by the Chamber of Commerce, the Merchants' Asso- ciation, the Produce Exchange, the New York City Depart- ment of Docks and Ferries, the Corporation Counsel's Office, the Chief Engineer of the Board of Estimate and Apportion- ment, the Office of the Borough President of Brooklyn, the Bureau of INIunicipal Jlesearch, the Committee on the Pre- vention of Tuberculosis, and the Tenement House Department of the Charity Organization Society, the Federation of Churches, the United States x\rmy Board of Engineers, the United States Department of Commerce, the New Jersey Harbor Commis- sion, the New York Boat Owners Association and many indi- vidual authorities. Conclusions founded upon these authorities are embodied in this volume, which is an endeavor to set forth concisely and accurately" Greater New York's present commercial and indus- trial situation, and to arrive at a just solution of the problem it presents. Contents Page Preface 5 The Problem 7 (Part One-The Problem) Chapter I. The Challenge to New York's Commercial Supremacy 9 Chapter II. Why New York Gains Industries and Why It Loses Them 19 Chapter III. How Congestion Affects Living Conditions . 25 (Part Two— The Solution) Chapter IV. " Part-way " Measures of Relief .... 31 Chapter V. A Great Auxiliary Harbor Within the City Limits 39 Chapter VL The Key to the Industrial Future of Greater New York 47 (Part Three — The Program) Chapter VII. How to Create Municipal Wealth While Solv- ing the City's Problem 53 Chapter VIII. The Balance Sheet — A Statement of Profits 57 Chapter IX. The Future in the Hands of the Present . . 67 The Greater Port of Greater New York. By Dr. Elmer L. Corthell 69 The Appendix 79 List of Illustrations 129 Index 130 The Problem New York's harbor and the rivers which flow into it have made this City the metropoUs of the Western Hemisphere. New York has been justly accused of neglecting the adequate development of this great chief asset. — From "Greater New York" (official bulletin of Merchants' Association), February 9, 1914. THE PROBLEM of Greater New York is the harbor problem — - The citizens of New York have many problems, changing in form and degree with each new generation, but the City, which con- tains the citizens and outlasts the generations, must ever deal with the one fundamental factor of its existence; New York is a sea-port. New York's original site was fixed by its harbor; its growth has been dependent upon its harbor. Could New York be conceived as losing its harbor, it would straightway dwindle to a second- or third-rate city. While no such danger can ever menace New York, it is no less true that any limitation of its harbor facilities strikes a serious blow at the welfare of the City — which is to say, at the welfare of the citizens. We purpose to show that such a limitation now exists, that it is rapidly becoming menacing and that with it are closely associated some of our most serious civic problems. T 11 E P R O li L E M O F G R E A T E R X E W Y O R K _V__^"iGkT EG7TKD LIOTS 5KCV CITl^ UMITS of GREATER NEW YORK, ROUMD DOTTED L1NL5 SHOW ;irEVVDEK HARBOR LIMITS. / 'J.' ji? nevAk . CBAJfWEIJL TAELS. SHOVING DIRECT VATE-R FRONT ofKXV YORK CITY ini tKe PERCENTAGE PUBLICLY OWKED BJSOJ^JC RICHMOND 226.000 ^t.Z •»El,30O 73. a 1,043,800 2:-.'l. .5 .1,039,300 190 & .. 30;.500 57. 1 3.053.300 , 578.4 He 29^ 24 7 14 4 577 N' <.-: y\\VL% PIJBUCLY OWKX J THE PORT AND THE HARBOR OF NEW YORK* This distinction is important since the Port inchides a portion of the New Jersey shore (see map) and is used in figures of foreign trade. Ambrose Channel Lightship marks the technical limit of the Harbor, but the latter word is used in this book as referring to the shore-line of Greater New York. * From "'Commerce of the Ports of the World," bvR. A. C. Smith. Xew York City Commissioner of Docks. 8 T 11 E (' () M M K K ( I A L C H A L L K X (i K (PA R r X E— T HE PROBLEM > CHAPTER I The Challenge to New York's Com- mercial Supremacy Greater New York is in the position of a giant })onnd ])y iron bands. (3ur limited port and terminal facilities will not permit the full use of our limbs any longer. Nothing before the business men of New York should have closer attention than practical measures for the increase of our port and ter- minal facilities. — Marcus M. Marks, President of the Bor- ough of ^lanhattan, at Hotel Astor, March '■25, 1014. WE are facing a new commercial era to which former standards will not apply. The wonderful age of railroad development is about to be superseded by a new age of shipping expansion. This is the hand-writing upon the wall as it is being read by far-sighted communities and great are the preparations in progress."^ At the point where goods break hulk a city must rise. ^Vhen young America w^as dependent upon Europe for manu- factured articles, these goods were discharged at seaports in order to reach the interior. Thus the harbors of the coast formed settlements where shi])pers and traders might operate. Eacli settlement supplied its own back-country, and the richer the back-country, the more prosperous became the settlement. New Y^ork, having the Hudson River at its back, was able to serve a large territory and thus grew in importance, although for some time outranked by Boston and Philadel- phia, each of w^hich enjoyed special advantages. Eventually, when the sagacity of DeWitt Clinton opened for New York the commerce of the vast Lake Region through the Erie Canal, New York already first, became ])re-eniinent. Pre-eminent, be it noted, because of commerce. The City now drew to itself the interior trade of Canada and of the rich region that stretches to the Mississippi. "Y\an- kee clipper'' ships from Xew York carried the American flag and foreign goods into every port of the world. Xew York waxed great and became one of the world's large cities. * The outbreak of the European war, since the writing of these words, gives them an added emphasis. It is universally recognized that a superlative opportunity for the expansion of American trade and shipping has thus been created. ** New York City did not pass Boston in population until after the year 1760 and did not pass Philadelphia (including suburbs) until the year 18'-20. — United States Census Statistics. THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK Then came the railroad era. Trunk-Hnes were forced to seek tide- water at points where they would meet the ocean carriers; New York became a railroad center. Its prosperity grew apace, and this prosperity was founded upon the harbor. Then New York acquired the complacency that so often ac- companies prosperity. It began to feel that its greatness was by Divine right and unshakeable. No greater mistake can be made by either men or cities. Virtually, this is the situation to-day, save that recently certain disquieting signs have appeared. Imagine, then, the original Manhattan germ of the City in the process of providing for the shipping which gave it life. For the small, infrequent sailing craft of early days a few small wharves were sufficient; more and larger wharves were easily built as fast as increasing demands were made. When the community grew northward through Greenwich and Chelsea, these sections of the waterfront, as well, became sites for piers. 43.2Mi. 57.IMi. 7a6Mi. l96.8Mi. 201.5 Mi Total length of waterfront 578.4 Miles. MANHATTAN HAS THE SMALLEST WATERFRONT This seven and one-half per cent is forced to provide for sixty-seven per cent, of the City's total shipping (see page 14). At last, a limit was reached — anybody could have foreseen it. One rather small island does not present an unlimited amount of available waterfront. If steady growth continues, there must come a time when this waterfront is filled, then crowded, then congested. Nothing could be simpler, nor more inevitable, but it seems to have come to New York City as a rude surprise. One would suppose that the descendents of the far-sighted men who planned the Erie Canal would have foreseen the time when New York's growing commerce would require auxiliary harbor facilities, and that, years in advance, such facilities comprehensively planned, would await the call to service. This is the way important European ports deal with their 10 THE COMMERCIAL CHALLENGE shipping*, and other American cities have shown themselves able to rise to heights of real efficiency when occasion required. Nothing, however, seems to have been farther from the thoughts of the City fathers, and this state of mind was due to one of the strangest of reasons — the Manhattan Tradition. In other words the Island of Manhattan was at one time the whole City of New York, therefore it must for all time be the whole City of New York; complacency abhors change. True it had joined to itself other boroughs and now contained but seven per cent of the City's total area**, but this fact was negligible; the real worth and greatness of New York City, its primal essence, must ever be bounded by the Hudson, East and Harlem Rivers and Spuyten Duyvil Creek — "as it was in the beginning." Foreign Commerce of United States. — ■— — I Port of New York 44.73% Rest of United States 55.^7% Money Expended by Federal Government on Channels Port OF New YoRK-^ 21. 2,01. 633 — Restof United States •^731 ,843,740 Although the Port of New York transacts 44.73% of this Country's Foreign Commerce , it receives only 2 .68 % of the Federal Government's Channel Expenditure. Foreign commerce figures are for year ending June 30, 1914. It followed, then, that "New York Harbor" was practi- cally s^^nonymous with "Manhattan waterfront," and that the way to relieve shipping congestion was to pull down Manhattan piers and build longer Manhattan piers upon the same sites.*** This was expensive, but it was consistent. It was also strictly logical — when once you admit the premises. Unfortunately, this sort of progress encountered an obstacle in the Federal Government. The Department of ^yar is re- sponsible for the main channel, w^hich may not be too much encroached upon. After years of hard-wrung concessions, the * See Appendix ( Xotes 36, 37 and 38 — pa£?es 11-2-115). ** The Engineer's Office of the Board of Estimate and Apportionment gives the areas of the boroughs in acres, as follows- Manhattan. 14,038; Brooklyn, 45,327; Bronx, ae.o^S; Queens, 75,111; Richmond, 36,600; Total for Greater New York, 197,599. *** There have been, of course, some waterfront improvements in other boroughs, as will later appear , but these have in no wise affected the principle under discussion. 11 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK Photo, by Edwin Levick, .V. 1'. THE ISLAND S CROWDED WATER FRONT "Manifcstl.N the congestion of traffic must at the present time be acute and extremely ominous." — Barge Canal Terminal Commission (see page 108). City found that it coiikl push out its pierheads no farther, and in a condition of real extremity it began that recent project of desperation and prodigious expense — the extending of piers and sHps inhmd into Manhattan waterfront — the most vahiable land in the world. This project, as well as other temporary relief measures at various points, will be more fully considered in a later chapter, but for the present the attention of every citizen should be directed to two great compelling facts — one of them negative, and the other positive. First — Greater Xew York's present welfare is dangerously threatened by its harbor limitation. Second — Three new events, now in pre])aration, will afford to the City commercial op])ortunity, rich beyond all precedent — if the City be prepared to grasp it. Let us examine the first i)oint — the present limitation: Here are two pregnant statements which bear upon it. The first is from the ^Merchants' Association, an organization of 3,500 of Xew^ York City's most active business men: 12 T II K (" () M M K R ( I A L (HALL K X (; E Photo, by Paul Thompson C()X(iESTI()X OF TRI CKS AT THE PIERS "The lower streets of the ("ity arc now nearly impassable, due to tiie enormous number of these trucks constantly iiaulin^' parts of cargoes." — Hrifj.-dieu. (i. L. (jillespie (see page 87). The commerce of the Port lias far out^irown its facihties. The City is constantly compelled to deny application for dock facili- ties, thus driving commerce to other j)orts. — "(ireater New York" (the official bulletin of the Merchants" Association), February 0. 1914. That is the warning of a friend: now note the observation of a trade rival: Owing to the fact that the shipping facilities of New York Harbor have not kept pace with the country's growing commerce — much of the trade formerly going to that Port as a matter of habit and a matter of course will be seeking other outlets wherever offered. — George W. Xorris, Director of the Philadelj)hia Department of Wharves, Docks and Ferries: Annual Report for year end- ing December, \\)V2. Philadelphia, by-the-way, is planning to take advantage of the situation by providing abundantly for commerce that may be driven away from New York. The situation has been tersely summed up by Campbell W. Adams, former State Engineer of New York. In warning the City of its dangers, he says: THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK It may not be New England that we need fear again but the commercial conqueror of New York may be in the South — or in the West. So we see, commerce has no hard and fast abiding place. It is as mobile as the water that floats it. This is a fact never to be lost sight of. — 1897 Report. These opinions, which might be indefinitely supplemented, are based upon the following facts: Greater New York with 578 miles of waterfront has developed but 103 miles.* Its 224 miles of wharfage is insuflicient to conduct its daily business, a condition which is continually aggravated by the ill-advised policy of concentrating commerce upon the limited shores of Manhattan, which contain but seven and one half per cent of the waterfront of the City of New York. This small fraction was forced to provide, in 1913, for 58,000,000 tons, or sixty- seven per cent of the total shipping, as against 28,000,000 tons, thirty-three per cent, for all the other boroughs combined with their ninety-two and one-half per cent of the waterfront.** In no other harbor in the world is there so much lightering done as in New York. Countless craft of every sort ply the waters of the North and East Rivers. Each of the great rail- roads maintains its ow^n floating equipment, and there are many independent companies engaged in the traflfic. The approxi- mate number of New Y^ork's regular "harbor craft," as distin- guished from those making voyages from New York, is 3,000.*** The foreign and domestic steamship services each use but thirteen per cent of the available river frontage, whereas the railroads have twenty-one per cent and the balance is devoted to various public and private uses. All are urgently pressing for greater accommodations. Daily there are from 1,500 to 2,000 railroad cars on floats**** congesting the waterfront be- tween the Battery and Perry Street, a distance of two miles. So great is the pier hunger that the Lehigh Valley Railroad in 1910 made a ten-year contract with the City to rent the surface and but one side of pier No. 34, together w^ith seventy- five feet of bulkhead at the end of the slip, at an annual charge of $65,000. This is a characteristic case. Now note a most astonishing comparison. Sixteen years ago (in 1898) the Governor of the State appointed a commission to "look into" New York's harbor problem and to seek some *See Appendix (Note 17 — page 96). ** New York Chamber of Commerce, 55th Annual Report. *** Estimated by New York Boat Owners' Association. ****New Jersey Harbor Commission, 4th Preliminary Report (Page 171). 14 THE COMMERCIAL CHALLENGE means for relieving the congestion of freight traffic. And this is the valuable result: While the foreign commerce of the Port of New York from 1898 to 1913 increased 131^, the wharfage accommoda- tion of the City was increased by but 22%.* Is it to be wondered at that, in the words of The Merchants' Association, "the City is constantly compelled to deny appli- cations for dock facilities thus driving commerce to other ports?" And is it at all astonishing that some of New York's citizens and some of its tax-payers regard with dismay a con- tinuation of the hit-or-miss, emergency-relief policy, bound by the costly bands of an outworn Manhattan Tradition while hundreds of miles of City waterfront remain unoccupied? There also is that other phase: If the City cannot provide for its present needs how shall it grasp a remarkable oppor- tunity for increase of commerce? Foreign Commerce of New York. 1898 IHHHH^H^aH $8^1,136.844- 1913 m^ma^mmmmmm^^^^mm^^^m s /, 366,256,6i 7 Increase, in 15 a. rs , 1 3 1 °/o Wharfage of New York 1898 immm\\m^^^^^ 97n .^F;nFFFT 1313 tm\m\\\mmm^^^^ i,iQ2,720 Feet Increase, in IS Yeaks Only £Z% HOW NEW YORK PROVIDES FOR ITS COMMERCE Even in 1898 the harbor was considered congested (see page 14). By strange coincidence, three epoch-making events are progressing together. These are the Panama Canal, the Intra- Coastal Waterway, and the New York State Barge Canal. The total cost of these three will exceed 8600,000,000. ]\Iany who are interested in the spectacular features of the Panama Canal fail to realize its enormous commercial importance. It will invert many previous conditions, open new markets, both at home and abroad, to Xew York shippers, and cause a general re-adjustment of the world's trade routes. New York City will be the chief beneficiary of these new conditions — or it will be the principal sufferer. At a hearing before the Foreign Trade Committee of the Merchants' Association (^lay 14, 1914) this w^arning was given See Appendix (Note 35 — page 110). 15 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK "COUNTLESS CRAFT OF EVERY SORT' by Ex-Congressman William Harris Douglas, one of our fore- most export merchants:* Conditions are changing rapidl}^ While circumstances have favored us thus far, we can no longer depend on good luck to keep us to the front, and our people must at once take action to protect their interests. The cities of Boston, Philadelphia, Savan- nah, Newport News, New Orleans, Montreal and others to the north are making great strides to our detriment and several of them are spending large amounts of money to place themselves in a position to rival us in advantages and shipping facilities. The opening of the Panama Canal is to a large extent responsible for this activity. It will unquestionably bring to this country an expansion of shipping interests and a vast extension and increase in our foreign trade. There is no reason why we should not arouse ourselves to a realization of the situation so that we may place our Port in a position that will enable us still to command a large share of America's foreign commerce. Here is a statement from another student of the subject, Mr. Willard C. Brinton, in the ''Review of Reviews."** The construction of the Panama Canal has caused a world-wide interest in harbor development and harbor management. New York, the world's leading seaj^ort, should, because of its com- manding geographical position, receive a greater benefit than any other world port. Though the Harbor of New York is almost perfect in those facilities provided by nature, the hit-or-miss management of the harbor is stunting the growth of commerce for the City and for the nation. The superior management of European harbors will give the European seaports the greater benefit unless immediate action is taken in New York. The Merchants' Association of New Y^ork publishes the estimate that a total of nearly one billion dollars is being now expended in port develo])ment throughout the world, largely in anticipation of the Panama Canal. (''Greater New Y^ork,'' March 2, 1914.) * See Appendix (Note 40 — page IIG). ** May, 1914. 16 T HE COM M E R (' I A L (• H A L L E X (1 E Here is another most interesting side of the subject as shown in the following interview in the "New York Times:" G. W. Luce of San Francisco, assistant to the President of the Southern Pacific, is at the Belmont and leaves to-day for the Pacific Coast. He has been in Washington looking after the interests of his company in the lemon rate case. As the director of all freight traffic over the Southern Pacific lines in California, Mr. Luce is regarded in Western business circles as an authority on rates, and his opinion upon the effect of the opening of the Panama Canal is of interest just at this moment, for his company is a keen competitor of the canal for transcontinental freight. "We know," said he to a "Times" reporter last night, "that the Canal is going to hit us pretty hard, in a way. We will lose freight. It means that the S^ew York manufacturers will be able to quote practically New York prices to San Francisco consumers. Jobbers on the Coast will lose business. "This result is so far-reaching that even j)rominent business men of the Pacific Coast have failed to realize its importance. This thing is only two years away. Oriental goods will come direct to New York, instead of transshi})j)ing to rail at San Francisco and Seattle. This will greatly increase New York's trade. The ships will all go back, again, too, with American goods. "So vast is the trade movement already started now in the shape of tangible negotiations such as numufacturers' agencies, that Hong Kong, San Francisco and New York will form a chain to interdependent markets, so linked together that they will form a dominant factor in world trade. Photo, by Paul Thompson DOCKING THE IMPERATOR IX THE NORTH RIVER 17 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK "Under an apparently quiet surface this gigantic movement has made such headway that when its actual operation sets in motion the business world will be astonished." Still one wonders how these benefits can redound to a city which cannot even provide for its present commerce. The Barge Canal and the Intra-Coastal Waterway also are undertakings so vast that, were they not overshadowed by the Isthmian achievements, they would fill the public eye. The former will cost more than $150,000,000 and will make it possible for 1500-ton barges to proceed from ports on the great lakes to tide- water at Xew^ York. Since goods can be carried by water, for far less than the cost of carrying by rail, the resulting stimulation of exchange betw^een this City and the interior of the continent can hardly be imagined. The old days of the Erie Canal boom will doubtless seem insignificant by contrast. The harbor demands upon New York undoubtedly will be tremendous. But New York cannot provide for its present harbor needs. The Intra-Coastal Waterway has attracted, strangely, little attention. It is almost unknown to the majority of New Yorkers, and yet there is an inspiring magnitude about an undertaking that will make it possible to proceed continuously from Boston through a canal into Long Island Sound and to New York, and from New York, in turn, through canals, rivers, bays and sounds, down the entire Atlantic Coast, around Florida, skirting the margin of the Gulf, to reach the mouth of the Rio Grande at the Mexican border; and in all this time — mark this — scarcely to have left the protection of completely land-locked waters. Here again is a situation whose commer- cial importance to New York can hardly be imagined. It will cost a total of more than $100,000,000 and will stimulate a coastal commerce of an entirely new kind that will require harbor facilities in many cities to correspond. But New York cannot even make provision for its needs of to-day; it "is constantly compelled to deny applications for dock facilities, thus driving commerce to other ports." Obviously, then. New York has a commercial problem for which complacency cannot suffice. Still the solution seems simple enough. Since the 103 miles of developed waterfront is insufficient, why may not the City develop more of its 578 miles ; why may it not develop this where it may be done most easily and efficiently ; and — w^hy need there be any delay ? 18 INDUSTRIAL GAINS AND LOSSES (PART ONE— THE PROBLEM; CHAPTER II Why New York Gains Industries and Why It Loses Them Most persons — even those living in New York — think of the City as the leading financial and commercial metropolis of the country. Comparatively few know that it is also the most important manufacturing center in the United States. New York has held its industrial supremacy during the past ten years in spite of the aggressive competition of its rivals, East and West — in spite of all the adverse forces both natural and artificial. — New York Chamber of Commerce. NEW Y^ORK is a great trade magnet. It draws to itself the products of every quarter of the earth. The source of this attractive power we have seen to lie in the harbor. Indirectly, but actually, this harbor has made New York the chief manufacturing center of the nation and one of the greatest markets of the world. From this fact arises the industrial phase of the problem and it becomes appropriate to inquire why New Y^ork gains industries and why it loses them. One person out of every seven in New York City is directly employed in manufacture; probably one out of every three is supported by factory wages.* The capital invested in the City's manufacturing establishments could far more than pay the national debt;** eighteen months' product could purchase all the real estate of Manhattan Island (unimproved)*** and the number of industrial establishments exceeds the com- bined number of Chicago, Philadelphia, Boston and St. Louis, the next four cities in rank.**** This manufacturing supremacy is founded upon several cogent reasons: First — Greater New York, w^ith more than 5,000,000 peo- ple and suburbs of 2,000,000 more, represents the largest and most concentrated buying power in America. * The United States Census for 1910 gives the following New York City manufacturing statistics: Population, 4,766,883; number of establishments, 25,938; total number of their employes, 680,510; annual output, $2,026,692,576; capital invested, $1,364,352,683; annual wages and salaries, $445,771,857. ** National debt (1911-12) $1,028,344,000 according to figures furnished by United States Depart- ment of Commerce. ***See Appendix (Note 14 — page 93). ****The United States Census for 1910 gives the number of manufacturing establishments in these cities as follows: New York City, 25,938; Chicago, 9,656; Philadelphia, 8,379; Boston, 3,155; St. Louis, S.667. 19 T H E P R O 15 L E M OF G R E A T E R X E W Y () R K Second — New York Harbor is the chief gateway for the export of American-made goods. Third — New York's size, its shipping, and its far-reaching raih'oad connections have made it a great distributing center for l)oth imported and domestic goods throughout the country. These advantages, together with its inexhaustible labor supply, its banking facilities, and its business prestige, seem to afford such solid foundation for industrial supremacy that a little civic self-satisfaction would appear, this time, to be par- donable. Unfortunately, investigation reveals two serious flaws. In the first place, Xew York's steady gain is partially off- set by an equally steady drain. Dr. Edward Ewing Pratt, ^Manager of the Industrial Bureau of the Merchants' Association, has this to say: The situation is complicated by the fact that along with the growth and expansion of industries in Manhattan and the in- flux of enterprises from a distance industrial companies are making every effort to get away from Xew York. Indeed there is a continuous movement away from the City. Thus there are to-day no iron foundries in Manhattan, and the metal and machine industry is in decay. A few of the old time-honored concerns remain. The young, strong, virile concerns have left Manhattan or, perceiving the difficulties, have located elsewhere.* The second difficulty lies in Xew York's inability to compete for many of the most valuable new industries. The manu- facture of automobiles, for example, has been the chief factor in increasing Detroit's population from 300,000 to 600,000 within a few years, and has brought to that city and to others abundant prosperity while imperial Xew York City possesses but a minute fraction of the industry. It is interesting to cross the Hudson and find suburban Xew Jersey studded with great factories of a type hardly to be found in Greater X^ew York. Clustering thickly along the railroads and waterways leading to this City, they are located to command the City's market while paying taxes and bringing l)rosperity to the people of another state. These factories are monuments to Xew York's lost oppor- tunities. They tell of concerns forced out of Xew York or of those that would have come here had conditions permitted. They represent hundreds of millions of capital and scores of * From "Industrial Causes of Congestion of Population in New York City," by Edward Ewing Pratt, Ph. D. 20 INDUSTRIAL GAINS AND L f) S S E S Courtesy B. T. Babbitt LEAVIN(; NEW YORK IN ORDER TO EXPAND Small picture shows the old plant of H. T. Babbitt, occupying less than one city block; large picture shows the present New Jersey plant, covering twenty acres, >nth an adflitional sixty-one acres for expansion. thousands of hands. They aiv a direct k)ss to the revenues of the entire City. Newark is j)roseeuting a great harbor and iiuhistrial project for the })urpose of providing factory sites adjoining deep water. It is also anticipated that the recently created New Jersey Har})or Commission will devote much of its energy to similar projects on the Jersey meadows, to the increasing industrial loss of New York. If New York's authorities l)iit realized how attractive to the ears of her manufacturers is New Jersey's siren song: "Chejxp lands, room for expansion, light and air, water and railroads, low taxes" — these authori- ties would take account of their own city's industrial resources, its thousands of fallow acres close to neglected waterfront — enormous, potential, undeveloped. Let it then be realized that New York is not an "all round" manufacturing city — it might l)e, but it is not; New York is highly specialized. Dr. Albert J. Nock in the "American Mag- azine" has this to say: New York keeps her industrial supremacy by tlie inuneuse vol- ume of her light-manufacturing. Millinery, cigars, clothes, wraps, made by a myriad of little concerns of small invested capital. It is the aggregate value of this product that makes New York 21 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK the leading manufacturing center in the country. The heavy manufacturing is done in New Jersey. He then touches upon the exodus from New York: New York used to have heavy industries, too, but they have all moved away. In 1870 there were enough heavy factories along the river frontage of Manhattan to employ 100,000 skilled work- men. Gradually they disappeared and went over to New Jersey. The Singer Sewing Machine Company was the first to go — it moved to Elizabeth, New Jersey. The Colgate Soap Company, which has been operating in New York since 1806, and the Loril- lard Tobacco Company, in New York since 1760, moved to Jersey City. The only original settler left on the shores of Man- hattan was the printing-press factory of R. Hoe and Company at Grand Street, which is still there. This list might be extended to include approximately fifty large manufacturing concerns that have left Manhattan Island because of the congested and costly conditions. Some highly instructive tables and quotations will be found in the Appendix (notes 42 to 49) . They will repay study, and this study will be found to be practical, not academic. It is easy to lose the individual in the mass; to feel that what is everybody's business is nobody's business. This is short- sighted. Not onl}^ is it bad municipal business; it is bad per- sonal business. It must never be forgotten that the welfare of the City is the welfare of its citizens. Civic prosperity means lower taxes, more efificient administration, broader op- portunities and more comfortable conditions to millions of those who rarely give a thought to the huge Municipal Busi- ness Enterprise in which they are stockholders. It is time for them to consider their dividends, in the light of those gen- eral questions which affect the prosperity of the metropolis. It may, then, be admitted that industrial conditions do not present the acute crisis that is found in the harbor. In- dustrially New York is great, it is growing and it exhibits a surface prosperity. But somehow its glory seems rather tar- nished when one considers how much of its supremac}^ is founded upon sweat-shop conditions, and how great a propor- tion of its workers must live in congested tenements. The feeling of dissatisfaction is further increased when one watches expanding concerns compelled to build their new factories across the river to enjoy advantages which New York might easily give — but does not; and when one sees industries drawn from other points by the mighty pull of New York's 22 INDUSTRIAL GAINS AND LOSSES Courtesy Bush Terminal Courtesy Charity Organization Society THE GOOD AND THE BAD Large picture shows a well-lighted, well-ventilated, fire-proof, waterfront factory work-room ; small picture shows a typical New York "sweatshop." magnet, only to search the City for the conditions they require and finally invest their capital in another state. An inquiry has been made into the causes for such results. Manufacturers who have left the City give these reasons: 1. Need of room for expansion. 2. Loss of time between the factories, and the homes of the workers. 3. High cost of land. 4. High rents. 5. Congested streets and trucking delaj'^s. 6. Expense of re-handling as compared with loading and unloading direct. 7. Inadequacy of rail and water facilities. 8. xVpparent negligence in relieving these conditions. The conclusion is clear — one cannot blame the manufac- turer; if he finds that he cannot produce in New York and deliver to customers as cheaply as can his competitors in other cities — ^he also must go to another city or else go out of busi- ness. Necessity knows no law. But is it Necessity? President William A. Marble of the Merchants' Association lays down four requisites for an ideal manufacturing community, as follows:* • "Greater New York," February 9, 1914. 23 T II E P R () H L E M F G R E A T E R X E ^V Y R K (a) Cheap lands for industrial sites and low rental charges. (b) Close proximity and easy access to rail or water carriage. (c) Reasonable proximity to labor markets and homes, and easy access thereto for cartage. (d) Readily and always obtainable food supplies with economical facilities for distribution. The problem now begins to assume definiteness. Greater New York has at its disposal every one of these advantages but has neglected to make them available. It has more than seventy thousand acres* of unoccupied land. It has four hun- dred and seventy-five miles of undeveloped waterfront. It has more room for growth than any other city in the United States. It has more labor of greater variety than any other city. It can offer not only the inducements of other cities but also the three unequalled advantages already stated. But it does not make them available. It is like the indolent farmer with unplowed fields, envying his neighbor's crops. The situation is trenchantly summed up by Calvin Tom- kins, ex-Commissioner of Docks for New York City. With a full appreciation of the gravity of the situation he made, in 1912, the following statement: The industrial development of the Port — that is factory develop- ment — is of far greater importance than is the Port commerce since it brings po})ulation and fixed capital with it ... . (New York's) business is yearly increasing by leaps and bounds, in spite of the fact that industries and commerce which would otherwise locate here are being directed to other cities as the result of our lack of provision for them here. An immense im- petus will ])e given to the Port's trade on the opening of the Erie and Panama Canals, and when the rush comes it will be almost impossible, in the face of the congestion which will ensue, to carry on intelligently the needed re-organizations and improve- ments — that is, unless a beginning shall be made now. New York's paramount industrial need, therefore, at the present moment is a practical plan upon which to organize its natural resources, to distribute its j^opulation, and trade, and to develop its neglected land into new industrial centers — in short to take fuller advantage of unparalleled opportunities. What this plan may be — and how it may be efficiently organized for immediate service will soon receive attention. * Accordiiif^ to the Report of the Commissioner of Taxes and Assessments for 1913 (page 67), 35.8% of the total number of land parcels in the city are vacant. This percentage of the City's 197,599 acres would be 70,840 acres, which figure probably is far below the truth, since parcels of unoccupied land will average of larger size than parcels of occupied land. 24 C () N E S T I () N A N D L I ^' I X G (' O X I) I T I X S (PART O N E — r H E PROBLEM) CHAPTER III How Congestion Affects Living Conditions The conditions in New York are without parallel in the civi- lized world — In no other city is the mass of the working popu- lation housed as it is in New York — In no other city are there the same appalling conditions with regard to lack of light and air in the homes of the poor. In no other city is there so great congestion and overcrowding — In no other city are the conditions of life so complex; nowhere are the problems so difficult of solution. — Report of New York City Commission on Congestion of Population (1911). THE foreign traveler, coming up New York Bay for the first time, receives a strange impression. He has l)een accustomed to cities occupying the ground, but here he finds one filling the air. He has always thought of crow^ds as touching elbows, he now sees them piled in layers. If he is polite he tells the reporters that it is ''won- derful," but meanwhile he may be thinking, ''absurd." What the astonished traveler sees is the concrete embodi- ment of the ^Manhattan Tradition, with its material splendor, its economic waste, and its sociological horror. Here are the most magnificent business structures that the world has ever seen, and here also are more than 100,000 interior rooms with little light or ventilation.* Here is almost incredible concentration of wealth and here also are single blocks in which all of the inhabitants could not find room to stand in the street at one time. These facts (piickly translate themselves into dollars and cents to the citizens of New Y^ork; and indirectly, too, but certainly, they are the outgrowth of those harbor conditions which first led New York to believe that it must concentrate all of its civic activities upon a single narrow island. It is this attemj)t that has led, ({uite naturally and inevitably, to loss of time, to elevated railroad, subway and bridge crushes, to con- gested streets, high rents, high taxes, cramj^ed quarters, increased cost of living and doing business, and all the other evils, physical, mental and moral, which must result from i)lacing artificial limitation upon the expansion of a metropolis. * 23,788 rooms without wliulows and 78,115 rooms insufficiently lighted. See Municipal Year Rook for 1913 (page 115). 25 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK 1, Courtesy Charity Organization Society; 2 and 3, Photo by Edwin Levick, N. Y, STUDIES IN NEW YORK CONGESTION 1. Scene in Hester Street (see Tuberculosis Map). 2. A West Side Market. 3. Crowded street traffic; note storing of goods on the sidewalk. Here is a statement from a report in the Mayor's Office, signed by the Committee on Transit, Docks and Ferries (1911): The awful congestion of population in the Borough of Manhattan has attracted the attention of lawmakers and reformers for about fifty years — It seems to be about time for a united and determined effort to make for the interests of the City at large, and of its people, to over-ride the great special interests, to the end that this metropolis, with its natural advantages and ac- 26 CONGESTION AND LIVING CONDITIONS ^ I !:n( OF hi: r Lo s I s K->o 1- - ! yn - : Conrirsij Charity Organization Society ONE OF THE RESULTS OF OVERCROWDING This picture shows conditions that breed tuberculosis; a family of seven people living in one room and a closet. quired wealth, may become a fit place for men of limited means to live and bring up their families. In very truth New York is not now such "a fit place." But why.^ It embraces about 200,000 acres. Its population is 5,300,000 people. It might give two acres to every fifty-three people. Instead it is crowding one thousand people on one acre in its most congested areas. 27 THE P R O B L E IVr OF GREATER N E W Y () R K Note - Each dot represents ten people Population iqoo to the acre in new york city's most congested district located on the lower EAST SIDE OF MANHATTAN BOROUGH Average population LESS THAN 30 TO THE ACRE IF NEW YORK CITY'S PRESENT POPULATION WERE EVENLY DISTRIBUTEDOVER THE FIVE BOROUGHS . Why should it be necessary for one-sixth of all the City's population to live below 14th Street upon one eighty-second* of its area? Why must there be crowded into this space also the factories that employ one-half of all New York's factory workers? And why, in addition to these occupants must there be piled upon this same small area a considerable proportion of the office buildings of the metropolis? Why? Because it started that way. Manhattan has an- nexed the other boroughs })olitically ; by bridge and tunnel it has annexed them physically; but it has never annexed them industrially and comniercially. The City has preserved the ^Nlanhat t an Trad it ion . Mr. Lawrence Veiller, of the Tenement House Committee, a well-known authority, wrote in 1905:** No conception of the existing conditions can be obtained from any general statements. To say that the lower East Side of New York is the most densely populated spot in the habitable globe gives no adequate idea of the real conditions. To say that in one section of the City, the density is 1,000 to the acre and that the greatest density of population in the most densely po])u- lated part of Bombay is but 759 to the acre, in Prague 485 to the acre, in Paris 434, in London 365, in Glasgow 350, in Calcutta 204, gives one no adequate realization of the state of affairs. No more does it to say that in many city blocks on the P^ast Side there is often a population of 2,000 to 3,000 persons, a population equal to that of a good-sized village. The only way that one can understand the real conditions is to go down into the streets of these districts and see the thousands of persons thronging them and making them impassable. So congested have become the * There are approximately 2,400 acres in Manhatt **Quoted in the Report of the New York City Cum tn below 14th Street. lission on Congestion of Population (1911), page 5. 28 C () X G E S T I X A XI) L I V I X G (' () X I) I T I X S NEW YORK BOMBAY PRAGUE PARIS 1000 TOTHEACRE 759 TO THE ACRE 485 TO THE ACRE 434T0THEACRE Note — Each dot represents ten people LONDON GLASGOW CALCUTTA 36ST0THEACRE 350 TOTHEACRE 204T0 THE ACRE Population of the Most Congested Districts IN Seven Large Cities conditions of some of the (juarters of the City that it is not an exaggeration to say that there are more people living there than the land or the atmosphere can with safety snstain. The limits have not only been reached but have long been passed. This is substantiated by a report from the New York City Coniniissiou on Congestion (1911), which says: The Island of Manhattan is the site for the greatest concentra- tions of factories and offices in the world. Many })uildings, occupied almost entirely by factories, are from 1'2 to 18 stories in height, and the mere fact that nearly half of the total number of workers in factories in this City are occui)ied in factories located in the '2,717 acres below 14th Street and up to ^Oth Street on the west side of ^lanhattan, would necessarily, with the present long hours of work, even with better wages than tliose now paid, produce congestion of ])opulation, or the massing of many })e()ple u])on very limited areas. For, with the present hours of labor the factory workers must live near their work. The full significance of this statement is not realized until one finds tliis ex])lanation in the same report: The most marked effects of congestion of population are upon rent and wages. The mere i)resence of a large population in certain sections on account of the increased demand for housing accommodations, has the natural result of increasing the rent which is demanded, and of diminishing the wages in so far as tlie amount of work for which wages are j)aid does not increase. The high rents and the low wages have the effect of forcing the poi)ulation to live in more and more congested conditions. Rents are so high and wages so low in the congested districts of the City that it is these districts that are (piite commonly taking in lodgers or boarders in order to enable them to pay the rents which are demanded. 29 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK All this is wrong because it is unnecessary. In 1898, New York made itself Greater New York by annexing vast outlying districts, including Brooklyn and Queens, and yet it has con- tinued the attempt to conduct the business of the greater city within the confines of the outgrown city. These conditions have borne heavily upon the merchants and the manufacturers, the tax-payers and the rent-payers. They have everywhere produced a fictitious high level of costs by virtue of which all must pay tribute in time, money and com- fort to unnatural and unnecessary conditions. The time for "relief measures" has passed. The only way to cure congestion, and at the same time to provide for more people, more factories and more business, is to provide more land and to effect a proper distribution. New York City has the land. How shall it effect the distribution.^ We have noted the causes and some of the results of New York's great problem. We have seen how New York developed originally upon Manhattan Island and leaped into prosperity as the gateway of the nation; how the growth of the country, coupled with the extraordinary advantages of Manhattan waterfront, caused a concentration of commerce, industry and population upon this island until congestion resulted; and how this congestion now tends to drive commerce and industry to other cities. We have seen that in the opinion of many thoughtful and impartial authorities a crisis now exists; and that this problem, commercial, industrial and sociological, is fundamentally trace- able to the failure to relieve an outgrown harbor. We have seen how these conditions directly affect the health, morals and living conditions of 5,300,000 people; how they increase the operating expenses of nearly 140,000 mer- chants;* how they place excessive burdens upon 26,000 manufacturers; and how they are charged up on the bills of 400,000 taxpayers;** and in all this we have seen how they affect the present and future welfare of Greater New York. Such is the Problem; we must now seek the solution. * According to United States Census figures the City contained, in 1910, 122,890 merchants; an increase proportionate to the increase in population would make the present number nearlj' 140,000. ** This is an unofficial estimate based upon the fact that there are 545,094 parcels of land on the 1914 tax bst. 30 P A R T - W A Y MEASURES (PART TWO — THE SOLUTION) CHAPTER IV "Part- Way" Measures of Relief The leading commercial interests of the community are seek- ing a solution that will retain to the City its supremacy as the leading port of the country. — Report of the Public Service Commission. SINCE the problem primarily concerns the harbor, the first step tow^ard a solution must also concern the har- bor. Hence an inventory seems in order. Greater New- York, as already stated, possesses extraordinary resources. Its 308 square miles of land are so divided and indented by nearly 175 square miles of water as to give it a total w^aterfront of 578 miles, within the City limits; 578 miles in a straight line from New York would reach as far as Indiana. New York's tidal variation is only five feet.* The natural channels are deep ; the anchorages are good; the currents, ex- cept in the East River, are moderate. This surely is princely harbor wealth. Only 103** miles of the 578 are developed. This is the crux of the Problem — 475 miles still remain undeveloped. Does not this in itself suggest the solution.^ But it is first in order to inquire as to the steps already being taken toward the desired end. To this Problem there have been devoted during the last few years, much thought and many words. How, then, have these words fulfilled themselves in action.^ Where is there a comprehensive harbor plan for New York like that of London, Liverpool, Antwerp or Hamburg? The metropolis has show^n that it can deal in a large way with some of its problems. Its $375,000,000*** rapid transit plan is genuinely magnificent, its $176,000,000**** Catskill w^ater sys- tem is an engineering triumph; its bridges are monumental. All of these represent civic might conquering great difficulties. But in contemplating New^ York's harbor policy this virile picture vanishes, and there is seen instead the ineffectual figure * Liverpool has an extreme tidal range of 31 feet. See Appendix (Note 30). Many of the other Euro- pean ports must also contend with heavy tidal ranges. **See Appendix (Note 17). *** The present subway system is estimated at $50,000,000 and the proposed extensions at $325,000,000 additional. **** The original estimate of $161,800,000 was increased by $15,000,000 by change in plan. 31 T HE P R B L E M () F G R E A T E R X E W Y () R K Photo, hij Keller THE SITE OF THE NEW PIER DEVELOPMENT Showing piers that are being removed to make room for the new structures. of one so pampered by fortune as to have been rob})e(l of all resourcefulness — helpless in the face of opportunity. AYhile other cities have been compelled to create great harbors imder adverse conditions, Xew York has always en- joyed the advantage of natural deep water at its Manhattan wharves, and cannot yet realize that this has been ftdly occtipied. It has not learned to think in any other terms. It is the victim of its own good fortune. Xew York has generally met the in- creasing pressure of commerce with spasmodic, inco-ordinated, hit-or-miss measures of temporary relief, forgetting that relief soon calls for more relief, becoming in the end more expensive than the ctire. This will become evident from a brief stirvey. The City of Xew York has expended $115,000,000 upon its wharves and piers since 1870, principally upon Manhattan Island which has but seven and one-half per cent of the total waterfront. In general the plan has been to remove old piers and to replace them with longer ones upon the same sites. This adds some feet of wharfage btit leaves the total length of improved waterfront exactly as it was before. It is like the farmer who increases his ctiltivation by plowing one field a little deeper and leaving his other fields in weed; then he wonders at his troubles. 32 P A R T - A Y M E A S 1 R E S J Drawing by Brigden THE "COSTLY SACRIFICE " ^VHEX COMPLETED Ultimate plans call for eight of these enormously expensive structures. A conspicuous example of this "intensive" method is now in progress on the North River front near 44th Street. AYhen the ^Yar Department finally said, "Thus far and no farther" to the policy of extending piers there seemed to the authorities no recourse but that of gaining longer piers by pushing inland — of course, on Manhattan. This meant the purchase of immensely valuable real estate; it meant the excavation of solid rock involving the construction of a 8500,000 cofferdam; it meant in short, an expenditure of about 83,000,000 for each 1,000-foot pier. This amount, elsewhere applied in this City, would, as hereafter will be shown, go far toward solving permanently the whole harbor problem but, unfortunately, it would be — elsewhere. Three million dollars seems a costly sacrifice to lay upon the altar of the Manhattan Tradition, but when did true wor- ship ever count the cost.^ It is conceded that these piers will not pay. The City must meet interest of four per cent upon the money borrowed to construct them, while the piers may yield, net, three per cent on their cost. Greater New York is therefore paying a subsidy to keep up Manhattan's congestion. Upon this project the New Jersey Harbor Commission in its 4th Preliminary Report remarks : THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK The City of New York has now embarked upon a project for buildmg long piers between 44th and 59th Streets. These will unquestionably be very expensive and scarcely give promise of being self-sustaining. The "Engineering Record" (July 18, 1914) is more specific. It says: The central metropolitan location of these piers, so quickly and easily accessible from the great passenger terminals and hotels of the City, will undoubtedly be a convenience to passengers and an advantage of the steamship lines which is more pronounced because so much superior to that of most other great seaports. It is, however, to be seriously questioned whether these advan- tages, which are certainly not vital ones, are commensurate with the great cost of the undertaking which will materially add to the City's enormous liabilities and interest burden. There are other objections^ — the obstruction of the public highway of the river, none too wide at the best; encroachment upon the valu- able space at the land end; and finally the positive increment which will be added to the congestion of city traffic rather than the relief that might be obtained if the piers were located on Long Island or on Staten Island where they could be constructed much more cheaply, quickly and advantageously, could have unlimited space, and w^ould still be thoroughly convenient and much nearer, both in point of time and distance, than are the steamship piers of many other large cities to their civic centers. A broad gauge policy for New York that would classify railroad, steamship, industrial and warehouse interests and establish them with ample provision for perfection and future extension in districts where they could be advantageously constructed and properly connected with the center of the City, would be far more economical and result in much greater progress, prosperity, convenience and beauty for the City than the unbalanced crowd- ing of new constructions adding new business to the intensely congested area of Manhattan Island. Worst of all, this project belongs, generically, to the family of Part- way Measures. There are several minor projects in contemplation or process along the North River. Where some extension of the pierhead limit is still permissible, a few feet will be gained by lengthening various piers. Several railroads are being persuaded to invest their own capital in rebuilding their piers on a 41-year lease privilege; these piers ultimately w^ll revert to the City. Both of the above are obviously relief measures. To the east of Manhattan Island they are having a historic struggle with that rock-bound, current-vexed tidal strait, the East River. This contest has cost already $5,426,230.94, and 34 PART - WAY MEASURES there will be required $3,374,479.16 more. There has lately been adopted by the Federal Government a new project calling for $13,398,519 for the purpose of increasing the depth of the main channel to thirty-five feet.* The depths along the East River pierhead lines now vary from thirty feet to less than thirteen feet, making much of this waterfront unavailable for larger craft. In spite of the great expense the execution of this project may be desirable because of the importance of the East River as a through route between the Sound and the Lower Harbor. The removal of the reefs and the deepening of the channel cannot, however, entirely eliminate the powerful tidal currents which have always proved a menace to navigation. It has been officially recorded by the authorities of the United States Navy Yard in Brooklyn that the existence of these cur- rents has made the movement of battleships to and from the Navy Yard a matter of difficulty and danger. The Harbor of New York is notoriously deficient in dry dock facilities. There is under consideration a combination dry and wet dock to be constructed on the South Brooklyn waterfront which is to be sufficiently long to accommodate the largest ships. The plans call for a dock 1,100 feet long which, when not in use for dry dock purposes, can be flooded and used as an ordinary commercial pier. SOUTH BROOKLYN MARGINAL RAILROAD Planned to connect the existing terminals at points marked 1 and 2, thereby effect- ing, through the transfer bridges shown, a close connection between the New Jersey railroad terminals, the steamships, and the industrial and storage facilities along its route. This plan shows the municipal project known as the South Brooklyn Improvement." It contemplates a marginal elevated freight railway from Fulton Ferry to 65th Street. It w^ill con- nect the terminal properties of the New York Dock Company * "Commerce of the Ports of the World," by R. A. C, Smith, New York City Commissioner of Docks. 35 THE PROBLEM OF G R E A T E R X E W Y O R K and the Bush Terminal, which it is proposed, shall be bought by the City, and will provide for the construction of terminal yards and accessories. The need for such a co-ordination of these important terminal units has been long apparent. The plan provides for an elevated through line from which branches are to be taken off at intervals; these branches will give access through a system of ramps to the necessary industrial sidings and waterfront connections. In addition to facilitating the handling of freight on an extensive scale, the Marginal Railroad will open the district along its line to the commercial development for which it is well adapted. An ultimate extension of the railroad to the north, beyond Brooklyn Bridge, is also contemplated. As at present planned, it is estimated that this project will cost the City $13,500,000. The correctness of the principle underlying the improvement is generally conceded, and the Greater City as well as Brooklyn Borough will share in the great benefits of its operation. Several private enterprises must be numbered among the "part-w^ay" measures for the solution of Xew York's harbor problem. On the Brooklyn side of the Upper Bay is an im- provement known as the Bush Terminal, planned, built and operated by private capital. It consists of a series of long piers immediately adjacent to extensive concrete buildings for manu- facturing and warehousing purposes, all of them joined together by a terminal railroad which has float connection with the trunk lines terminating in New York. The success of this enterprise has been due to the practical application of intelligent Courtesy S'eic York Dork Covipanij A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION New York Dock Company's new model factories on Atlantic Basin Vaterfront. 30 P A R T - W A V M E A S 1 R 1-: S Coiirtrsy Bush Tcnniitdl W arcliuu.sc C otnpanij THE FAMOUS BUSH TERMLXAL An admirable co-ordination of piers, factories, warehouses and railroad connections. foresight in co-ordinating the niantifactnring, warelioiising and transportation functions, l)ut its growth is naturally circum- scribed by the liigh value of the land surrounding it. It is a pocket edition of a model ])ort. A somewhat similar development is that of the Xew York Dock Comi)aiiy, which occupies a long stretch of Brooklyn's East River waterfront and also maintains piers, bulkheads, railroads and warehouses, upon land of high value. The same general considerations apply to the Jay Street Terminal, and the Brooklyn Eastern District Terminal. An- other private company is constructing a terminal at large expense on the Bronx shore of the East River. This will follow the general character of the Bush Terminal, but its location makes its success somewhat more problematical. I^pon the north- eastern corner of St at en Island, the American Dock Company has also developed a system of docks and buildings of fair extent. These organizations of private capital are valuable adjuncts to the City, but all of them combined cannot be considered in any way as the solution of the harbor problem. 37 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK These, with the comprehensive plans being prepared by the New Jersey Harbor Commission, include practically all of the promising projects for harbor relief, with one conspicuous exception to be reserved for discussion in a separate chapter. Each has value, individually great, but in the aggregate they are in no way commensurate with the problem offered by the pressing needs of the nation's principal seaport, nor with the remarkable opportunities lying before it. Having reviewed the activities of New York Harbor admin- istration, let us cross the ocean and gaze at the refreshing vigor of European methods. Note, for example, the manner in which the city of Antwerp is dealing w^ith its harbor problem.* Hav- ing outgrown its present facilities this aggressive Belgian city, whose population of 291,000** is but six per cent of that of Greater New York (scarcely equal to two years' grow^th), has planned and is beginning to construct an extension to its harbor at a total cost of $55,000,000. It is a plan of surprising boldness, in the light of our own temporizing methods. It involves creating a new channel for the river Scheldt, cutting off seven miles of the present river, thus removing two sharp curves and providing a tideless anchorage basin, six miles long. Parallel to the new channel a comprehensive system of basins is to be constructed. The total plan, already completely worked out, will provide for the needs of many generations, but it is being built in sections only as rapidly as required by commerce. What is the result.^ The first section (3^^ mile of wharfage) was crowded with ships and barges before it was finished, and arrangements were at once made to complete the next section consisting of two slips and a turning basin.*** This is really scientific, constructive, harbor planning. Someone has said that a "blind man could administer such a harbor," nothing being necessary but to construct each new section, as required by commerce and upon plans already laid down. Thus each section becomes a part of a coherent whole — the ultimate harbor of Antwerp. Antwerp's problem is definitely solved. Where, then, and when, shall New York adopt the same comprehensive methods and find its solution.? * The outbreak of war has, of course, put a temporary check upon this development. ** Population in 1905. ***See Appendix (Note 37— page 113). 38 THE AUXILIARY HARBOR (PART TWO — THE SOLUTION) CHAPTER V A Great Auxiliary Harbor Within the City Limits Good and sufficient harborage is not purely a local matter; it is of moment to the whole country .... It is of national im- portance — indeed of international importance. — William G. Ford, Jamaica Bay Commissioner.* THE solution of New^ York City's harbor problem is a matter of too great moment for "part-way" measures and temporary relief. It must be ap- proached in a far-sighted, broad-minded spirit, and solved adequately and permanently, in the spirit of European harbor planning. The time for temporizing is past. Greater New^ York requires a modern, auxiliary harbor com- mensurate with the needs of the City and nation; a harbor where- in grow^th may be stimulated and not hampered, and w^herein provision may be made in advance for the demands of the future. Since existing projects are inadequate, it is in order to consider undeveloped resources heretofore neglected. A glance at the map of Greater New^ York reveals a remarkable feature. At the gateway to its harbor, at the very entrance from the Atlantic Ocean, there lies a considerable body of water — en- closed wdthin the City's limits. Its shape suggests a land- locked harbor wdth a narrow inlet leading to the highway of travel in Ambrose Channel. It bears the name of Jamaica Bay. This is the largest bay wdiolly w^ithin Greater New York. Its thirty-tw^o square miles of area** could contain all of Manhattan Island wath 7,000 acres to spare. Its islands aggre- gate 4,200 acres, far exceeding the total area of several of the Cit^^'s largest parks. Most of these islands, like the parks, are the property of New^ York City. The size of Jamaica Bay can hardly be conceived without view^ing its expanse. The indentations along its shoreline are such that it presents a waterfront of more than twenty -five miles*** w^hich, wath the usual piers, could be developed to one hundred and fifty miles. From Canarsie to the center of * 1909 Report (Page 90). ** Total area of bay, including islands. See 1907 Report of Jamaica Bay Improvement Commission (Page 13). *** This does not include the hummocks in the Bay. 39 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK Rockaway is approximately five miles — nearly as great a dis- tance as that between the Battery and St. George, on Staten Island — and yet this is one of the Bay's narrow dimensions. Its length from inlet to head is equal to the distance from the Battery to Grant's Tomb. The waterfront of Jamaica Bay is about fifty per cent longer than the waterfront of the whole harbor of Baltimore.* It is nearly twice as long as that afforded on Manhattan by the Hudson River from the Battery to 135th Street and the East River from the Battery to Hell Gate combined. Thus Jamaica Bay is a physical fact of compelling propor- tions; it is one of the dominating geographical features of Greater New York. Its size and location make it impossible to ignore; its proper use is obviously of great importance. Two immediate questions, therefore, arise: (1) Can Ja- maica Bay be made a solution to the harbor problem of Greater New York.^ (2) If so, what is the City doing to take advantage of this solution? Testing Jamaica Bay by the requirements of an adequate harbor we find: Mi/e3 from Ambrose Channel 5 10 15 25 Canarsie Landing Bush Piers Chelsea Piers New 44^^51 Pier |— ^—^—^—i^ A SAVING IN DISTANCE AND TIME Although four miles within the Bay's entrance, Canarsie Landing is much nearer to Atlantic connnerce than are the North River piers First — A harbor must be conveniently located with refer- ence to commerce — Jamaica Bay stands at New York's ''front door" on the Atlantic. It is adjacent to the regular path of foreign commerce and domestic coastal trade. All craft enter- ing the Port of New York from the ocean must pass close to its entrance. It is but four miles distant from Ambrose Channel and within a mile of the "four-fathom curve." Piers in Jamaica Bay would })e from ten to twelve miles nearer to ocean traffic than are those in the North River. * Col. Lansing H. Beach, Corps of Kngineors of the Baltimore, Md., District, gives the waterfront of the City of Baltimore, suitable for dockage purposes, as eighteen miles. 40 T H K A II X I L I A R Y H A R B () R LIVERPOOL DOCKS THE VAST SIZE OF THE "AUXILIARY HARBOR " These drawings, all made to the same scale, show some of the world's chief har- bors in comparison with Jamaica Bay. Areas in black indicate channels, slips and basins. A steamer approaching Ambrose Channel from the sea woukl travel 8^^ miles to Canarsie Landing, VSf/g miles to the Bush Piers and ISj/g miles to the new City piers in the Chelsea district. — 1907 Report of the Jamaica Bay Improvement Commission. Second — A harbor should be commodious — Few harbors can compare with Jamaica Bay in magnitude; many of the • most important are but a fraction of its size. Here is the testimony of a commercial rival — the New Jersey Harbor Commission. — 4th Preliminary Report. There is ample room to lay out a very complete harbor in Jamaica Bay; its physical expanse is so great that there is room within its limits to place the principal portions of the harbors of Liver- pool, Antwerp, Hamburg, and Rotterdam, as they are now constituted, without undue crowding. This is substantiated by the Jamaica Bay Improvement Commission, 1907 Report: The amount of wharf room available would be close to one hundred miles not taking into account the additional amount secured by the erection of suitable piers. . . . 41 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK Another attractive feature of this section is that here the water- ways in Jamaica Bay are very wide, so that piers of maximum length can be erected when necessary. With sufficient water in the channels leading to them, the longest steamers that would be built in the next forty years might find accommodation without the least trouble.— Same Report. Still another witness, William G. Ford, of the Jamaica Bay Improvement Commission, says: Jamaica Bay is capable of adding to the harbor of New York over one hundred and fifty miles of wharfage. (Note — This estimate includes the use of piers.) Third — A harbor should afford weather protection to shipping; the ideal harbor is land-locked — Jamaica Bay is not only shore-enclosed, but vestibuled as well. The long arm of Rockaway Peninsula protects it so thoroughly from the ocean that while a heavy surf may be thundering at the beach, the surface of the bay is scarcely rippled. The frailest craft may thus secure safe shelter. Fourth — ^A harbor should have an easy entrance — Jamaica Bay has an easy natural entrance. Rockaway Inlet has been scoured by tidal action to a considerable depth, which for much of its length exceeds forty feet. It may be easily dredged and cheaply maintained. After an investigation extending over a number of years, the United States Army Engineers reported plans for the main- tenance of the inlet and recommended that the work be executed and maintained by the Government. This the Government formally agreed to do and enacted its agreement into law, be- sides making its first appropriation in 1910 for the purpose.* Fifth — A harbor should serve the needs of an important region — Besides serving the City, State and nation as an integral part of New York Harbor, Jamaica Bay would be closely related to the 188 square miles of Brooklyn and Queens, containing nearly 2,200,000** population. In this respect, also, few har- bors in the world are to be compared with it. Note this statement from a well informed authority: Already the growth of the City is impinging upon its confines (Jamaica Bay) and improved transit facilities will soon make it as accessible from City Hall as the rest of Queens, the Bronx, and Staten Island. — Former New York City Commissioner of Docks, Calvin Tomkins. * See Appendix (Notes 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 — pages 86-S8). **The United States Bureau of the Census (Bulletin 122) estimates the combined population of Brooklyn and Queens in 1914 as 2,173,582. 42 THE AUXILIARY HARBOR Photo, by Paul Thompson BROOKLYN'S TWO WATERFRONTS This photograph from the Woohvorth Tower shows the close approach of Jamaica Bay's great area to the geographical center of the borough. The I3ay is seen in the background to the right. There is now about the Bay a directly tributary district of ninety-three square miles,* the needs of whose 600,000** in- habitants would naturally be supplied from this waterfront. It has been calculated that a local commerce of at least 3,200,000 tons*** already awaits the opening of the Bay and that this considerable population is at present compelled to pay excess cartage of more than 30 cents per ton ($960,000 per year) through lack of its legitimate harbor. Sixth — harbor should furnish opportunity to co-ordinate rail and water transportation — This is plain with a moment's reflection. It frequently costs more to deliver goods than to produce them; this may be largely a question of handling. If merchandise must be trucked through miles of congested streets to car and lighters, and by lighters from terminals to ships, this economic waste must be added to the cost of the goods. The cost of men, trucks, horses, lighters and tugs must be added to the selling price. The con- *See Chart (Page 51). **See Appendix (Note 16— page 94). , *** See Footnote (Page 58). 43 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER XE^Y YORK sumer pays it, and at this port it amounts to several million dollars a month. If, on the other hand, the railroad terminal is alongside wharfage, transfers may be made from car to ship without the expense of trucks or lighters. This condition may be worked out with marked simplicity on the shores of Jamaica Bay, where it is possible to provide efficiently and inexpensively for an almost unlimited develop- ment of freight transfer between rail and water commerce. Note the testimony of these expert witnesses: The Port of New York needs piers where modern freight and passenger steamships may be brought directly alongside of rail- road cars. — New Jersey Harbor Commission, 4th Preliminary Report. The Jamaica Bay district is as adaptable for railroad terminal and industrial purposes as for a frontal harbor for the Port, and the essential point at present to keep in mind is the desirability of imposing upon this whole district a comprehensive develop- ment plan. — Former New York City Commissioner of Docks, Calvin Tomkins. The possibility of Jamaica Bay as a great terminal center for freight has been variously discussed, and the practicability of maintaining a channel from the ocean into the Bay was regularly passed upon by United States Army engineers a year ago. The tracks of the Pennsylvania's connecting railroad pass so close to the Bay that track access may be had to New England and the ^yest. The opportunities for building extensive piers and docks for ocean steamers here are great, and the importer and exporter would thus meet on a common ground in a terminal reached directly by a railroad trunk line and ocean steamers. The development of Jamaica Bay into a great basin for the docking of ocean steamers, where deep-sea freight can be trans- ferred directly to cars, would undoubtedly eliminate many of the evils which congest the City and river fronts of to-day. — George Ethelbert Walsh in "Cassiers Magazine." (A technical magazine of authority.) At the head of the basin (at Jamaica Bay) immediate contact is to be had with the connecting railroad, giving an outlet by means of the Pennsylvania and New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroads, to all parts of the United States. — Report of Jamaica Bay Improvement Commission. In reference to the above quotations attention is called to the natural interdependence of the Connecting Railroad and the harbor develoi)ment at Jamaica Bay. This high grade, four-track railroad, the joint enterprise of the New York, New Haven & Hartford, and the Pennsylvania systems, has been 44 T II E A r X I L I A R Y II A K B O R constructed for the purpose of providing an all-rail connection for freight traffic, and for the purpose of developing the indus- trial territory along its lines in southeastern Brooklyn. With the completion of the Hell Gate Bridge it will be possible to bring freight trains from the East, the West, the North or the South to this district. The necessary complement to such unsurpassed railroad facilities is the provision of equally efficient water transportation facilities; these can be furnished only by Jamaica Bay. Seventh — An adequate harbor must include sufficient up- land adjoining its waterfront. — In the words of the New Jersey Harbor Commission, "a series of piers without sufficient upland cannot be made into a proper marine terminal." Jamaica Bay can supply this upland most economically as will be shown in detail in a later chapter. Furthermore this land will be cheap, a requirement essential for harbor purposes. Eighth — A harbor should, if possible, be easy to develop. — This consideration is usually of minor importance, since rival cities are spending immense sums to secure adequate harbors. Even New York ])ours out large sums for merely fractional results. In this respect, however, Jamaica Bay presents advan- tages as profitable to the City as they are unusual. The material to be excavated for the channels is suitable for the creation of new lands which will !)ecome the property of the City. This feature will not only pay the total City cost of developing the harbor, but will also produce a large profit. This matter will be fully set forth with detailed facts and figures in a later chapter. The solution of the harbor problem of Greater New York appears, therefore, to be simply a matter of utilizing what has been hitherto neglected; to undertake a project that engineers agree to be simple and economical — and one that can be made to pay for itself as it progresses. This, however, is not a new suggestion. It is the judgment of eminent authorities, and the decision of the Army engineers, that the true solution to the problem lies only in Jamaica Bay. In reference to this matter the following decisive statement of so eminent an engineer as Dr. Elmer L. Corthell cannot suc- cessfully be disputed: The harbor solution for Greater New York is in Jamaica Bay. In any European country it would be eagerly occupied for com- mercial purposes when as near to existing ports and as accessi- ble as this is to New York. 45 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK Again he states: From my personal knowledge Mr. Calvin Tomkins, former Commissioner of Docks, was correct when he stated "The ports of Antwerp, Manchester, Liverpool and Hamburg have been developed in the face of natural adverse conditions much more dijBBcult to adapt to modern commercial needs, than are those existing at Jamaica Bay." And he might have included many other important ports of the world. The judgment of Col. John G. D. Knight, of the United States Army Board of Engineers, who investigated and re- ported on the project for the United States Government, is equally decisive. He says:* It is thought that in ten years available waterfront for wharfage along Manhattan and in Upper New York will be exhausted. Provision for additional frontage must be made, which provision should be on New York Bay, if practicable, and Jamaica Bay affords the only site for such addition. This general conclusion has been supported time and again by official investigators. It is the judgment of numerous civic and trade organizations in the City of New York. It is endorsed by official boards of the City, State and National Govern- ments.** Condensing into a few lines a statement of facts which are all matters of official record and subject to easy verification, we find that the Jamaica Bay Improvement Commission, appointed by the Mayor in 1906, spent several years in studying the situation and urgently recommended that the City improve Jamaica Bay for a harbor (Reports of 1907 and 1909); that the United States Board of Engineers after a thorough inves- tigation recommended that the Government develop the main interior channel of Jamaica Bay as far as Cornell Creek; that Congress authorized an ultimate expenditure of $7,430,000 for this purpose upon condition that the City construct the neces- sary dock and basins; that Congress has made preliminary appropriations of over $850,000; that the New York City Government appropriated $1,000,000 to begin its part of the work three years ago; that the State of New York in 1909 endorsed the project and co-operated by enacting the Sargent Law which ceded to the City all its rights to the lands lying in and about Jamaica Bay; and that a section of the channel, including the entrance, was actually dredged by the Federal Government in 1913. ♦Congressional Record, February 24, 1910 (Page 2318). ** See Appendix (Notes 1 to 12— pages 81-90). 46 THE INDUSTRIAL KEY (PART TWO — THE SOLUTION) CHAPTER VI The Key to the Industrial Future of Greater New York It is to be remembered that industrial development of factory construction is of more importance locally to the City than is its commercial development; railroad sidings to factory sites on the back lands near the waterfront are at least as essential to successful municipal progress as is commercial development atthew^aterfront. — Ex-Commissioner of Docks Calvin Tomkins. y^"^ CORES of cities throughout the United States are push- ing aggressive campaigns to attract new industries. These campaigns are well-planned and make up in k^^^ enthusiasm what they lack in modesty. If a city has water-power, natural gas, oil, coal, shipping facilities, iron ore, hardwood supplies, an agricultural basis or even a "climate," the Administration or the Board of Trade capitalizes its resource to the utmost extent and begins a vigorous canvass for manu- facturers. What can be thus accomplished w^as shown by Detroit in the automobile industry, of which New- York could doubtless have had a large share had it exerted itself. Until recently, how^ever, such organized effort has rarely characterized New York for the great City has been almost wholl}^ lacking in self-consciousness, save at the emotional crises of some of its campaigns. Then it has been seen to emerge for a moment, only to disappear again in the disinte- grated multitude of busy New^ Yorkers — each intent upon his individual affairs. Greater New York w^ith matchless resources to attract new industries is only beginning, through the public-spirited efforts of the Merchants' Association, the Chamber of Commerce, and similar bodies, to consider how these resources may be available. That the CitV should have continued to gain, indus- trially, in the face of such inertia proves its natural attractiveness. The first requisite, of course, is to find the resources and then organize them. Mr. William A. Marble, President of the Merchants' ^Association, recognized this necessity when he said: With perhaps one exception in previous plans made for the development of specific localities, little or no attempt has been made to co-ordinate rail and w^ater traffic, to minimize cartage, 47 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK and no general application of economic and engineering princi- ples has been applied to the general terminal facilities and rail or water transportation interests.* Then he laid down, as already quoted, the four main essentials of an ideal community, viz: (a) Cheap lands for industrial sites and low rental charges. (b) Close proximity and easy access to rail or water carriage. (c) Reasonable proximity to labor markets and homes, and easy access thereto for cartage. (d) Readily and always obtainable food supplies with eco- nomical facilities for distribution. These conditions cannot be found upon Manhattan Island. Really, this statement is too self-evident to need argument, but there was a highly interesting suggestion, made in 1911 by the Committee of Factories of the New York City Commission on Congestion, that will justify a moment's pause: The Committee feels (says the report) that the only way to prevent the location of more factories in Manhattan is abso- lutely to prohibit their location in the Borough or in certain sections of the Borough, where, as has been shown by the pre- ceding statement, their presence either constitutes a menace to the health of the workers in the factories or puts upon them and ultimately upon the consumers of the goods a heavy and unnecessary cost of carfare, truckage and breaking bulk. On the basis of municipal economy the report continues: Factories in the center of Manhattan involve a tremendous cost also to the City in the wear and tear upon the streets and in delaying traffic, and from this point of view a direct injury to the City itself. The prohibition of factories in certain districts has ample precedents in foreign countries. Many cities in Ger- many, Austria, France and Switzerland have laws which abso- lutely prohibit the locating of factories except in districts designated by the City. At this point it is evident that the industrial and congestion problems are so closely knit that the solution of one will lead to the solution of the other. This solution will hardly be found in any drastic prohibition, but rather in a constructive plan for encouraging new industries to occupy the present unproductive lands in the neglected parts of Greater New York, thereby increasing the producing power, the earning power, the spend- ing power, and the civic health of the whole City. Manhattan, the heart of the City, must remain for all time the financial, administrative, office, shopping, and travel headquarters for Greater New York, but it does not hold and cannot desire to * See Appendix (Note 42 — page 119). 48 THE INDUS T R I A L K E Y ^HiliiiiAifJi&A'iiif^^HHiMRi^J "CLOSE PROXIMITY TO WATER CARRIAGE ' A light-draft boat lanrling raw material at a waterfront factory on Mill Basin (Jamaica Bay). A slight expenditure would make it possible to bring ocean cargo vessels into the heart of Brooklyn and Queens. hold the sohition of the industrial problem. It has more im- portant functions to perform. Overcrowded, overhurried Man- hattan needs nothing so much as Relief. Its ultimate j^ros- perity must be materially enhanced by a fair division with its sister boroughs of the civic responsibility. President Marble's solution, therefore, must be sought in the other boroughs in each of which may be discovered one or two of the qualifications. Brooklyn, for examjile, j^resents twelve different centers of varying size and adaptability, which are enumerated in a recent publication of the Brooklyn League.* In the whole City, however, there is one location where all four of the established requirements may l)e found in a pre-eminent degree; one location where a sufficiently large industrial de- velopment may be planned upon ''low priced lands adjacent to adequate and cheaply obtainable harbor facilities"; where the expense of first cost and operation of terminals and factories may be reduced to a minimum; and where the heavy tariff of trucking expense may be eliminated. This location for "an ideal industrial city" adjoins the bay in which we have already found the solution to the harbor problem — Jamaica Bay. This is the way it squares up with President Marble's four requirements: (a) Cheap lands for industrial sites and low rental charges — There are 9,000 acres of unreclaimed land lying adjacent to Jamaica Bay, with an average valuation to-day of approxi- mately $1,000 per acre. This land may be reclaimed for about $2,000 per acre, making a total cost of $3,000 per acre. Land at this price near deep water within New York City is undeniabl}^ "cheap land"; a 10% rental rate would be but $25 per month per acre which is certainly a "low rental charge." * "Brooklyn, a National Center of Commerce and Industry" (1914). 49 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK (b) Close proximity and easy access to rail and water carriage — The development of an industrial harbor, more fully dis- cussed in the next chapter, will make it possible for cargo steamers from all parts of the world to find wharfage immedi- ately adjacent to factories here established. This will make easy and inexpensive the receipt of supplies and the shipment of the finished products. These advantages for concerns doing an export business will be very great. The Connecting Railway and its extensions will afford a rail outlet to the whole of the United States and Canada. (c) Reasonable proximity to labor markets and homes and easy access thereto for cartage — New York Cit}^ contains a plentiful supply of every kind of labor. Jamaica Bay projects into Brooklyn and Queens, two boroughs forming a geographical unit. They contain between them 61% of the City's area, 68% of its waterfront, and 40% of its population. Their population is nearly 2,200,000, or about equal to that of Chicago and closely approaching the population of Manhattan. Moreover, they are growing at a tremendous rate. According to the estimate made by the Board of Water Supply their population will equal that of Manhattan in little more than a decade and will exceed it b}^ 50% in 1940. But note that their combined area is 120,000 acres, which is nine times that of Manhattan Island. This means that these bor- oughs are capable of sustaining a population of 12,000,000 with a comfortable distribution of but 100 persons to an acre. The Jamaica Bay district alone exceeds ninety-three square miles in area, which is more than four times as large as ^Manhattan, and more than twice as large as the Bronx. The rapid transit sys- tem is now being extended into this district which abounds in desirable home sites. It will be possible for thousands of workers to live under comfortable and healthful conditions, without congestion, and within walking distance of employment. (d) Readily and always obtainable food supplies with eco- nomical facilities for distribution — The construction of basins as planned by the City's en- gineers and as fully discussed in the next chapter, will enable supplies to be brought by water into the interior of the two boroughs of Brooklyn and Queens. This will provide the most economical of all means for the receipt of food and other sup- plies.* Near at hand, also, are extensive truck gardens. * See Footnote (Page 58). 50 THE INDUSTRIAL KEY A GREAT CITY WITH AX IDLE HARBOR* The 26th, 29th, 31st and 32nd wards of Brooklyn, and the 4th and 5th wards of Queens lie in a semi-circle around Jamaica Bay. They are bounded on the west, north and east by the heavy line on the above map, and on the south by Jamaica Bay. The population in this territory in 1910 was 378,609. The rate of increase from 1900 to 1910 was 146%. Using this rate for estimate from 1910 to 1914, the present popula- tion would be 599,716. The building operations in 1913 amounted to approximately $20,000,000. The real estate taxes paid by these wards in 1914 exceeded $8,400,000. This district, in itself a great city, is unjustly deprived of its natural harbor. At pres- ent its suppHes (estimated at 3,200,000 tons annually) must be trucked from the distant waterfront of the East River or Upper Bay, or else brought in by railroad under heavy tariff. The district is thus put to an unnecessary transportation expense of at least $960,000 per annum through the city's failure to carry out its agreement to de- velop Jamaica Bay. (See pages 43 and 48.) Here, then, in Jamaica Bay, we find the solution to our commercial problem and to our industrial problem; here we find an unparalleled opportunity to plan a comprehensive indus- trial district many miles in extent, on a vast industrial harbor, where factories of any magnitude may be built upon lands of * Note Map of Borough of Brooklyn in accompanying folder. 51 THE P R O B L E IVI OF G R E A T E R N E W Y () R K trifling cost and have direct access to rail and water transpor- tation; where trucking and lightering may be practically elimi- nated, and export trade may be cultivated with unprecedented facility. It has already been recognized that the islands in Jamaica Bay afford an ideal site for the much discussed "Free Port,"* such as that which has brought great prosperity to the City of Hamburg. Now add to these advantages an unlimited supply of every kind of labor; adjacent home sites where hundreds of thousands of workers may live in freedom from tenement-bred evils; access to the richest market on the continent; the commercial and financial prestige of a New York City location — all avail- able within the limits of New York City — and it is scarcely reasonable to doubt that the City's industrial problem is solved. It appears certain that with advantages such as these the eyes of manufacturing America will be directed toward New York's industrial harbor, and that the resulting influx of capital and enterprise will exceed all precedent. This development should ultimately return to the City many of the long-banished heavy industrial lines, requiring extensive ground space and employing armies of workers. It will provide opportunity for the expansion of those essentially New York City industries the growth of which has been limited heretofore by the excessive cost of adequate facilities. It will afford much needed space for warehouses and elevators upon a large scale — a development in itself of considerable importance. It will be, in fact, the broad- est manufacturing opportunity that has ever been made avail- able in the history of American trade. That these will be the natural results of the opening of thousands of acres of low-priced land in the Jamaica Bay dis- trict to water transportation is shown by the experience of other cities. In England, for exam])le, the opening of the INIanchester Ship Canal was followed by a remarkable influx of large indus- tries, all eager to obtain sites adjoining deep water. Thus, not only are the four keys to the industrial situation in Greater New York to be found in Jamaica Bay — but it is the master-key that unlocks unlimited opportunities. Were its facilities made available. Greater New York would rapidly attain a many-sided industrial prosperity beyond precedent. * See Appendix (Notes 40 and 41). 52 C R E A T I N G :M U X I C I P A L W E A L T H (PART THREE — THE PR0GRA:M) CHAPTER VII How to Create Municipal Wealth While Solving the City's Problem The City is dealing with a big project, and while proceeding with caution and due regard for reasonable economy, it should remember that the money devoted to this project is an invest- ment for the City rather than an exi)enditure. — Ex-Congress- man Charles B. Law, in a si)eech upon Jamaica Bay in the House of Representatives, Eebruary 14, 1910. WE have discussed the three fold aspect of New York's Problem — its coinniercial needs, its indus- trial needs, and its congestion evil, and have dis- covered a solution for it. But in considering any business project, public or private, it always is necessary to count the cost; to strike a balance between the promised advan- tage and the rec{uired outlay. At this point there appears a seeming ])aradox — a condi- tion so strange and imexpected that at first it seems incredible. THERE IS XO EXPENSE TO THE CITY I There is, to be sure, a slight civic investment, at an imme- diate and somewhat startling profit, but there is no expense whatever. And, as with most paradoxes, the explanation is elementally simple; it is merely this: a — Xew York owns Jamaica Bay — a potential harl)or that needs but the dredging of channels and basins to give it value. b — There are thousands of acres of marsh and shoal about the Bay that need the dredged soil to give them value, c — The new land thus created will be City property. The program therefore merely resolves itself into taking the soil from the Bay where it is not needed, and putting it on the land where it is needed. And an immediate result — a "by-product" of the improv- ment, will be the saving each year of hundreds of thousands of dollars of unnecessary present expense to the six hundred thousand New Yorkers living adjacent to Jamaica Bay. All of which remains to be demonstrated. Consider, then, that under ordinary dredging conditions, as for example, in the X orth and East Rivers, it is necessary to load the excavated material into scows, to be towed out to sea and 53 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK Courtesy The Brooklyn Eagle OPENING THE BAY'S MAIN CHANNEL A hydraulic dredge at work in Jamaica Bay, in 1913, upon a section of the main channel. The soil raised from the bottom is forced through the pipe shown in the foreground. discharged. The cost of transportation constitutes substantially fifty per cent of the cost of the improvement. The situation at Jamaica Bay, however, eliminates this waste and replaces it with profits. For here, adjacent to the surveyed channels and basins, are shoals and marshes that need the soil as greatly as the chan- nels need to be free of it. Every cubic yard of soil, therefore, may be deposited on the shore, and thereby accomplish a two- fold purpose. The City may build a harbor and create new, publicly-owned, harbor front property in one simple operation. It therefore is pertinent to inquire: What will be the cost of this dredging, and what will be the value of the land it will create? In short; what are to be the profits? The figures to be presented in answering this question have been worked out with care by conservative engineers. It is a project that may be developed as slowly or as rapidly as the needs of the City demand. It would be unreasonable to assume — and no one with a knowledge of the conditions would suggest — that the whole harbor project should be developed immediately. This would far exceed necessity; it would be equally ridiculous to advocate the immediate opening of all the streets laid down upon the City maps or to urge the immediate construction of all the subwa^^s which have been approved and incorporated in the rapid transit map. Jamaica Bay stands on the same footing as any other constructive enterprise. It is necessary only to make a beginning, and then let the expansion meet the require- ments step by step, during a period of years, under intelligent direction and upon a comprehensive basis. 54 CREATING MUNICIPAL WEALTH Courtesy The Brooklyn Eagle MUNICIPAL WEALTH AS A BY-PRODUCT The discharge from the pipe in process of creating new, city-owned, waterfront land. Water formerly covered the site where the men are standing. The first step, therefore, is to organize a scientific plan that will adapt itself to the immediate needs of Greater New York and provide for generations of steady expansion, somewhat as is being done in the harbor of Antwerp. A draft of such a plan is here suggested (see next page). It will be seen on this map that the plan to develop Jamaica Bay consists of a series of progressive steps; that each step is complete in itself, and need be taken only when conditions re- quire it. It will now be seen that each of these developments will pay for itself, and that the money for the first investment is already available. First — The Money — Not one dollar in new appropriations is at present required. The funds are ready and waiting. The United States Government has agreed to provide the entrance and to pay the entire cost of dredging the main channel; the State has ceded its title to all the lands under water; and the City possesses the funds necessary to build the basins, which funds, having been appropriated for this specific purpose, can be used for no other. A detailed statement of these funds is exhibited on page 82. The financial situation, then, is this: The Government has adopted a program calling for the ultimate expenditure on its part of $7,430,000. Upon this program it has already made appropriations of $850,500, of which $695,720 is still un-ex- pended. The City has appropriated $1,000,000, of which $923,220 remains unexpended, a total balance of $1,618,940. Second — The Results — The preliminary work already done proves the practicability of the project. The United States 55 THE P R O B L E M O E G R E A T E R X E ^\ Y R K THE FIRST TWO STEPS The partial development of Mill and Fresh Creek Basins fsee also pages 59 and 61) will meet the most imperative needs without exceeding funds now in hand. Instead of being temporary relief measures, they will be progressive steps upon a constructive harbor plan. Government in its preliminary dredging upon the main interior channel has completed 8,000 feet, 18 feet deep, and 500 feet wide. This has cost but $135,000. It also has expended $19,780 upon the entrance channel, or a total of $154,780. New York City in this same preliminary work spent but $26,779.02 of its appropriation in engineering and incidental expenses. The soil was dredged from the channel at Federal expense and discharged back of a bulkhead, with the result that it immediately created a strip of new land 700 feet wide and 7,000 feet long, or about 112 acres in area. Stopping here to summarize the situation, before proceed- ing to a detailed examination of the plan, it is seen that the expenditure of $135,000 by the Federal Government upon this stretch of channel has incidentalh^ given to the Cit}^ 112 acres of new land of some immediate and of great future value. This was accomplished at an expense to the Cit}^ of only $26,779, which under ordinary circumstances would all have been charged up to the cost of the harbor development. An inventory, then, shows as a present result of the pre- liminary work: 8,000 feet of main channel. 112 acres of new land, the property of the City. $1,618,940 still in hand (includ- ing $923,220 of New York City's appropriation). T II K 15 A L A N C E S H E E T (PART T H R E E — T H E PR O G R A M CHAPTER VIII The Balance Sheet — A Statement of Profits Had this recommendation of the Harbor Board been approved, it would have given a working capital large enough, not only to take care of the immediate needs of the shippers, but would have further enabled the City to l)uy unimproved water- front })ro})erty, construct bulkheads and reclaim large areas of land, admirably located for manufacturing and industrial pur- poses. — From Re])ort of Oscar F. Lackey, Chief Engineer of Harbor of Baltimore. IT appears that a cash balance of $1,618,940 is now availal)lc for the next steps to be taken in this project. How shall this amount be used to get the largest benefits.^ The closest scrutiny of the following discussion is invited. Necessity has required estimates of values and costs, but in all cases these are the result of careful investigation and are believed to be uniformly conservative. The reader, if he desire, may make independent calculations using his own estimates of value. This may make a slight relative difference in individual figures but it cannot affect the conclusions. If the reader will turn to the map on page 56, he w^ill find that by a comprehensive plan fsimilar in principle to that of Antwerp) the harbor develo})ment at Jamaica Bay is divided into several progressive steps, })ut one of which need be con- sidered at a time. First Progressive Step — The first step is simple and eco- nomical. It involves improving the section extending from the harl)or entrance to and inclusive of the first basin, known as Mill Basin. This basin extends inland from the main channel for approximately two miles. The main channel has already been dredged as far as the entrance to this basin at the expense of the Federal Government. By the expenditure of $236,500 of the funds available, it is possible to dredge and bulkhead this basin where necessary, and to erect 500 linear feet of wharf at its head. This will make it immediately feasible to bring supplies by water to the foot of Flatbush Avenue, in the vicinity of an important and raj)idly growing section of Brooklyn, which already has a i)opulation of approximately 160,000. Now note the returns from the expenditure of $236,500. 57 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK Mill Basin should be handling freight of more than 800,000 tons* within a year from the time of its completion. At a saving of but 30 cents per ton** over the cost of methods of transportation now in use this would amount to $240,000 annu- ally, or an annual return to the community of more than 100% upon the expenditure of the City in this one item, the elimi- nation of unnecessary transportation expense. In dredging this basin, the City will reclaim approximately fifty acres of public land directly on the channel (see map on opposite page). At 17,500 per acre, the assessed valuation of waterfront on Barren Island, it will be worth $375,000. The extension of this channel will also give some value to the one hundred and twelve acres of Cit}^ land already reclaimed by the excavation of the main channel, as it will at once provide deep water at one end of the strip. At the moderate average value of $2,000 per acre, this fill will be worth $224,000. The continued improvement of Mill Basin will involve the extension of the wharf around its margin as required. The rental of this wharfage will yield at once a considerable revenue, as it should be built only as rapidly as may be justified by the demand. The first expenditure provides for only 500 feet as indicated, and from applications already filed it is probably that this will be immediately occupied. It appears, then, that by the expenditure of $236,500 of present funds, it is possible to develop resources that will give real estate worth $599,000 to the City and will save $240,000 annually, in expense, to the residents of Brooklyn. * This is based upon an allowance for all materials of 5.37 tons per capita annually, as assumed by the Jamaica Bay Improvement Commission who examined and reported upon the project in behalf of the City. ** "Of the three methods of transportation, it is estimated that the relative cost under present con- ditions is six-tenths of a mill per ton mile for water, four mills per ton mile for railway and fifty cents per ton mile for wagon transportation. "It is clear that water transportation should be used wherever possible, and wagon transportation as little as possible." — Preliminary Report to the Mayor and Aldermen of Chicago by the Chicago Municipal Markets Commission, April 27, 1914, Page 19. Wm. J. Wilgus formerly Vice-President of the New York Central and Hudson River Railroad states that "the average cost of hauling from waterfront on Manhattan Island to consignee is eighty cents per ton." The average haul is between one and two miles; say 1 14 miles. This gives fifty-three cents per ton mile. Mr. Wilgus also states as follows: "This cost is found to vary from as low as 40 cents per ton for short hauls of heavy merchandise under favorable conditions, to as high as ten dollars per ton for isolated shipments for long distances." A contracting firm which does much trucking in New York City states: "the average cost of hauling is thirty-fire cents per ton mile." _ The cost of hauling in city streets varies, according to these several authorities, from thirty-five to fifty cents per ton mile. The use of the Jamaica Bay waterfront would effect for the tributary district an average saving in haul of two miles. This means at the conservative figure of thirty cents per ton mile a saving of sixty cents per ton. On many materials such as lumber and brick and other clay products brought in via the Amboys. this sixty cents per ton represents a net saving, for they may be landed on Jamaica Bay waterfront as easily and economically as at any other point in New York Harbor; some, however, must be lightered from the Upper Bay to Jamaica Bay. This operation may be performed for thirty cents per ton, leaving a net saving to the tributary district of at least thirty cents per ton. ^ Although this figure as will be seen from the above is a minimum we have used it throughout the discussion. 58 THE BALANCE SHEET This may be stated in another way: An expenditure at Jamaica Bay of less money than the City will pay for two years' interest upon the funds used in building one new pier at 44th Street, will pay New York an immediate profit of 150% and will save New York citizens an additional 100% per year! This will consume but a small part of the present available funds, and the second step may follow at once. 59 T H E r 11 O B L E M O E G R E A T E 11 N E W Y () K K Second Progressive Step — The second step is probably the most important and the most profitable now in contemphi- tion. It is the opening of Fresh Creek Basin, from a point 2}^ miles beyond Mill Basin. This will provide water transporta- tion facilities to the already densely populated Brownsville district with its 250,000 inhabitants, a city in itself larger than Providence, R. I. According to the plan which has been pre- pared, this basin can be extended to Avenue E, a distance of nearly two miles from the channel, and 1,000 feet of wharf can be built at its head for $571,272, allowing the development of more extensive wharfage to await the demand of commerce. In the meantime the Federal Government will have ex- tended its main channel as far as the entrance to the basin, and the City will need to provide a spoil area for this dredging, con- sisting of marsh land upon which to deposit the soil dredged from the channel. This will require an outlay of aj^proxiniately $107,160 and make the total expense to the city, $678,432. The results will be remarkable. A densely populated dis- trict with active business and building operations will then re- ceive supplies at its door by water instead of having to truck them for miles from the East River waterfront, as is the pres- ent method. This will mean commerce of about 1,350,000 tons annually, which at a saving of 30 cents per ton over ])resent methods of transportation, means an annual saving of $405,000.* The City land reclaimed by the dredging of the main channel, at Federal expense, will amount to approximately 290 acres, worth at least $5,000 per acre, or a total value of $1,450,000, with a probable ultimate value of at least four times this amount. The excavation of the basin will reclaim 130 acres along its margin directly upon navigable water. At a valuation of $20,000 per acre, or one half the average value of lands along the Gowanus Canal, this will aggregate $2,600,000. The second stage of the work will cost the City $678,432, will give it new land worth $4,050,000 (see map on opposite page), and will save to its citizens $405,000 annually. This amounts to almost 600% profit, plus a saving (virtu- ally an income) of 60% per year ! These results, while startling, are consequent on this great economic cause: Brooklyn and Queens constitute one geo- * An idea of the value of basin tonnage may be f,'aine(l from the fact that traffic on Newtown Creek (virtually a basin) increased in eight years from '■2,G7.5,()"2,5 tons to 5,990,266 tons, at which point it exceeded the entire tonnage of the Mississippi River from New Orleans to St. Paul, (K) T H E B A L A X (' E S H E E T graphical unit of nearly 2,200,000 population, whose growth is the growth of New York's five millions. This territory has two sides, two waterfronts, and uses only one. It is starving for the want of the other. 61 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK Brooklyn and Queens must grow farther and farther from the East River. The greater they become, the greater demand do they make on this waterfront, their sole present source of supply; the less able does it become to serve them, both on account of its remoteness, and its congestion; difficulties which increase in compound ratio. Brooklyn and Queens are growing away from a totally inadequate base towards an ade- quate one that nature has prepared for their use. The plan here proposed is that this latter base be used. That is the economic reason for the success of the project. It has only capi- talized a portion of the cost of ''carrying coals to Newcastle." At the completion of the second stage the City will have spent 1914,932 of the funds now in hand. It will have received, not including increased taxes from increased values, or any of the incidental benefits from the establishment of new industries, etc., new land worth at once almost $5,000,000 (and ulti- mately many times this amount) and it will have saved its citizens more than $645,000 annually. The necessary funds are now in hand; they are already appropriated and can be spent for nothing else. The foregoing plan does not mean complete development. This will come in time and will pay for itself many -fold as it is carried out. It does mean, however, that vessels of all kinds up to 18-foot draft can penetrate for miles into the heart of Brooklyn at two separate points contiguous to highly improved property. It means far more than this. Greater New York will have been given another waterfront. The first step will have been taken towards relieving New York Harbor of the demands made upon it by light draft shipping — New York Harbor is not crowded with Imperators; it is crowded with barges, coasters and cargo steamers. The first step here proposed makes a place for such craft. It makes a place for the industrial estab- lishments that need their cargoes, and it makes a place for the homes of the people who work in those establishments. In short, it begins the correct solution of the three-fold problem of Greater New York. The continuation of the improvement suggests itself. As business increases the other basins already surveyed will be dredged by the City, more channel will be dredged by the National Government, and more free land thus will be made for the City, to be leased or otherwise used to advantage. No 62 THE BALANCE SHEET manufacturer would need be turned away or sent to a twelfth stor}^ loft three miles from the dock. He could be accommo- dated on New York's industrial harbor cheaper than at any other point in the country, and at a profit to the City of New York. New York's present harbor, relieved of the burden of its light draft shipping, would have abundant space for its leviathans for years to come. The 18-foot main channels in Jamaica Bay will be found inadequate in course of time. They then may be easily deepened to 25 feet, or to 30 feet, and, in years to come, to 35 feet. Piers can be built and large ships accommodated there. There is nothing to prevent this. When piers are needed, they can be built here, built cheaply and at a profit. The Harbor of New York can grow in Jamaica Bay for generations to come, as it can grow nowhere else. Let it de- velop upon a comprehensive plan, so that when it arrives at maturity it will not be the product of chance, nor a marvel of inconvenience, but the reverse — a place designed to do business in. Given this opportunity Jamaica Bay will not only relieve New York's business situation, but it will stimulate New York's business as it has not been stimulated since Governor Clinton opened the Erie Canal. It will pay its own way in direct returns to the City Govern- ment, and to the citizens of Greater New York it will bring the world's business of the future. The Federal Government is now pledged to carry the main channel to Cornell Basin at its own expense. When this channel shall have been completed, Jamaica Bay will have over eight miles of main channel, 500 feet wide and 18 feet deep, and by this time the City will have opened basins, aggregating eleven miles in length, which will pierce Brooklyn and Queens in various directions, bringing the advantages of deep water well into the heart of the City in seven districts. Up to this point the wharfage referred to has consisted of platforms upon the basins. The ultimate development of Jamaica Bay will also include piers. It will be recalled that the fill from the main channel ex- cavation is to be deposited behind a bulkhead at a distance of 1,000 feet from the edge of the channel. The intervening space is left for the construction of piers and slips. There will be no immediate necessity for the construction of these piers because 63 T II K P II () li L E M F (i R E A T E R X E W YORK TWO SCENES IX BUSY " BROWXSVILLE ' 1. Sutter Avenue and Junius Street, only eight blocks from proposed Fresh Creek Basin, and more than three and one-half miles from the nearest frontage on tide-water at present navigaljle. 2. Extensive building operations four and one-half blocks from proposed Fresh Creek Basin and characteristic of «>ntire Brownsville district. Materials must now be trucked four miles from nearest developed waterfront. 64 THE BALANCE SHEET iiiiiiiiirflr^-if Til 1 THE CITY IMPINGING UPON THE BAY 1. Easily reclaimable waste land, and houses crowding down to the water's edge. 2. Public School No. 109, six blocks from Fresh Creek. 3. Head of Fresh Creek (to the right j and the closelj' adjacent city. Careful in- spection shows solid blocks of buildings partially obscured by the railroad embankment. The use of funds, now available, u-ill bring cargo steamers to this point. This picture was taken from the track of the Pennsylvania-New Haven Connecting Railroad. 65 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK the many thousand feet of new wharfage available upon the basins will serve an extensive commerce. But when the time does come, the favorable conditions surrounding the construc- tion of the piers and the dredging of the slips assure the City a handsome profit upon the investment. Either before or during such development, an increase in the depth of water in the main channel will be under way; again make the City the beneficiary of the Federal Government by placing at New York's disposal millions of yards of additional excavated material to be used as it may deem wise. While it cannot be foretold w^ith certainty, it now seems probable that the City should extend inland the strip of City owned land along the waterfront thus reclaiming more low grade land and increasing the area of City owned industrial property. A saga- cious and proficient handling of this spoil disposal should reap for the City an incalculable profit, as by that time development in this district will have increased land values to a large degree. The time is sure to come, although in the distant future, when the channels, piers, and basins will be completely devel- oped entirely around the shore of the Bay. This, however, is no part of the present project, and as has been pointed out in the preceding chapter, no reasonable person could propose such an extravagant procedure. When the development does come it will be in response to expanding needs, and it will pay its own way as it develops. Besides the foregoing sources of municipal profit, there are thousands of acres of privately owned marsh land about the Bay whose reclamation will be greatly stimulated by the harbor development. These have an average assessed valuation of less than 11,000 per acre. Their reclamation will increase the assessment at least ten-fold,* thus adding enormously to the tax income of the City. Nothing need be said here about those much larger indi- rect returns which will pay New York millions of dollars a year through increased tax income because of increased values in the entire district with its ninety-three square miles. These are part of the considerations in every wise municipal improvement, and they will react beneficially upon the tax-rate and upon all the property throughout the Greater City. * The reclamation of one piece of land adjoining Mill Basin increased its assessed valuation 15H times between 1906 and 1911, and an adjoining piece was increased 2'2 times during the same period. 66 THE FUTURE AND THE PRESENT (PART THREE — THE PROGRAM) CHAPTER IX The Future in the Hands of the Present That New York is indifferent is a matter of comment in other seaports, where achievement follows upon achievement, while New York sleeps. — New York State Commerce Com- mission. A WELL-DEFINED proposition waits for action. The National, State and City Governments have individually approved this solution of New^ Y^ork's great problem. Each has given to the development its independent consideration; each has taken official action ex- tending unqualified endorsement backed by legislative enact- ment. Plans have been completed by able engineers. For years the money has been in the City treasury, duly appropriated for this purpose, and unavailable for any other. Eight thousand feet of channel have actually been dredged. And then The vast inertia of a ponderous organism has settled quietly into inaction. While giant liners cause havoc* in an overcrowded harbor; while rival seaports comment with satisfaction upon New Y'ork's inability to handle its commerce; while the Dock Department is forced to deny valuable applications for wharfage; w^hile congestion is repelling wealth-producing industries, and while the people of the five boroughs are taxed by unnatural condi- tions — the foremost measure for removing these civic disabili- ties is at a standstill. It seems almost incredible that the interests of five and one- third million people, backed by the commercial needs of a nation, can be so long disregarded when relief is simple and near at hand. One cannot avoid contrasting this delay with the vigorous methods by which foreign ports are seizing opportuni- ties when they present themselves — and are creating them when they do not exist. Even other American ports seem able to rise to heights of efficiency when dealing with vital interests. New Y ork is facing commercial and industrial opportunities such as have never been offered to any other city; it needs an awakened public consciousness that will force action. * See daily papers of May 2-2 and '26, 1914. 67 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK New York to-day presents an extraordinary spectacle; its greatest dormant asset is neglected; a length of new channel "beginning nowhere and ending nowhere" lies under the water; one hundred and twelve acres of City owned real estate stand useless; thousands of acres of low-priced industrial sites that would serve to restore to New York its former lines of manu- facture are desolate, and meanwhile the old, familiar three-fold problem of commerce — industry — congestion — grows daily more burdensome to the world's second city. It is the figure of a hand filled by the gifts of fortune with coveted riches, neglecting to close its fingers. It is a spectacle worthy of the attention of civic psychologists; it would be a case for civic alienists, if such might be. We have been dealing with present-day facts — now look for a moment into the future. It is this ability to look into the future and to provide wisely for it that forms the foundation of every business; it constitutes the success of the business man; it is the searchlight upon the road ahead. It was this foresight that developed the West by pushing railroads into the wilder- ness; and it was this foresight that created the Panama Canal. It was this foresight that gave New York its location ; that brought it to its present world-commanding position; and it is a lack of exactly this foresight that is to-da}^ costing the great City hundreds of millions of dollars through failure to recognize at its door a simple, easy solution to its burdensome problems. We stand at the threshold of a new era, the possibilities of which are unbounded. History records instances of monarchs having created cities at a stroke, but there is no record of a huge community of New York's intense vitality having enjoyed the opportunity of creating a vast harbor and an industrial development of such staggering proportions as that which awaits in Jamaica Bay. Here may the channel, basins, piers, bulkheads, factories, warehouses, residences, streets, railroad terminals and trans- portation lines all be co-ordinated at will into one great organism of epoch-making efficiency. This problem and its solution, which will contribute more materially than any other factor to give Greater New York its second five million people, must engage the profound thought of the City's wisest minds. Never has American genius been confronted by a task more worthy of its powers. 68 THE GREATER PORT OF GREATER NEW YORK By Elmer L. Corthell, Dr. Sc. Civil and Consulting Engineer A Supplementary Chapter written especially for this book by one of the foremost harbor engineers of the world. THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK Elmer Lawrence Gorthell Civil Engineer; Phillips Exeter (N. H.) Academy, graduated 1858; in Civil War; returned to Brown University, 1865, graduated A.B. (Phi Beta Kappa), 1867, A.M., 1868, honorary Sc.D., 1894; division engineer in loca- tion and construction Hannibal & Central Missouri R.R., 1869; chief assist- ant engineer in construction of bridge over Mississippi at Hannibal, Mo., 1870-1871; chief engineer Sny Island Levee, on east bank of Mississippi River in Illinois, 1871-1874; chief engineer of construction of bridge over Mississippi River at Louisiana, Mo., for Chicago & Alton R.R., 1873-1874; in charge for Capt. James B. Eads of engineering and construction of jetties at mouth of Mississippi, 1875-1879; associated with Capt. Eads in surveys for the ship railway; Isthmus of Tehuantepec, 1880-1881; chief engineer in construction of N. Y., West Shore & Buffalo R.R. and N. Y., Ont. & West- ern R.R., and their terminals at New York City, 1881-1884; engineer build- ing steel railway bridges over Mississippi, Missouri, Ohio and other rivers, 1887-1889; chief engineer of jetties at mouth of Brazos River, Texas; in building Merchants Bridge over Mississippi River at St. Louis, and con- sulting engineer of waterways, railways, etc., until 1894. 1900-1902 was con- sulting engineer for national public works for the Argentine Government; appointed Feb., 1904, by Governor of New York State, and some years member Advisory Board of Consulting Engineers to build barge canals of state; consulting engineer Cape Cod Ship Canal; Advisory Board Trans- Alaska Siberian R.R., now director of Company; chief engineer in charge of construction of modern port at Para, Brazil, mouth of Amazon, and chief engineer constructing port at Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. Chairman Com- mittee, International Engineering Congress, Chicago, 1893; United States delegate and Vice President to International Navigation Congress, Brus- sels, 1898; delegate of Argentine Government to International Navigation Congress, Dusseldorf, 1902; United States Government member Permanent Committee of International Navigation Congress. Life member International Road Congress; member and twice Vice-President American Society of Civil Engineers; member and ex-President Western Society of Engineers; member Canadian Society of Civil Engineers, Institute of Civil Engineers, Great Brit- ain; Honorary and Corresponding Member French Society of Civil Engineers, Mexican Association of Civil Engineers, Boston Society of Civil Engineers, Fellow A.A.A.S., Royal Geographical Society, London; honorary member Portuguese Society of Civil Engineers. Author: History of Mississippi Jet- ties, 1880; Report of Brussels Navigation Congress, 1898; Maritime Com- merce, Past, Present and Future, 1898; Some Ports of the World (Paris Navigation Congress), 1901; paper on Size of Vessels and Ports (Milan Con- gress of Navigation), 1905; Report to International Navigation Congress, Philadelphia, 1912; Maritime Canals; also articles in Johnson's Cyclopedia, and many technical papers. — From ' ' Who 's Who in New York. ' ' (Dr. Corthell has had responsible charge of work costing $180,000,000.) 70 THE GRE ATER PORT The Greater Port of Greater New York By Elmer L. Corthell, Dr. Sc., Civil and Consulting Engineer. The writer of this Chapter desires to bring to the Civic Asso- ciations of Greater New York, which are earnestly striving to influence towards harmonious and unrestricted growth the Com- mercial and Industrial elements that go to make up the prosperity of the now one united municipality, facts that will bear potently upon the commanding problems before the public. The writer has never been professionally employed by, or con- nected with, the Municipal Interests of New York City, but several professional works on which he has been engaged since the year 1880 have drawn his attention to this the greatest port of the World. In 1881-1885, as Chief Engineer of the New York West Shore and Buffalo Railway, he had charge of the construction of the ter- minals at Weehawken and in Manhattan. In 1899 he made a thorough investigation of the volume of traffic, maritime, coastwise and interior, of the port of Greater New York, for his Report to the International Congress of Navi- gation, held at Paris in 1900, on the general subject of the harbors of the World. His figures upon the Port of New York became later, in 1906-1909, the basis of the predictions of the New York City- Jamaica Bay Commission and of the U. S. Government Engineers upon the future Commerce of the Port of Greater New York. In 1903-1905, he was a member of the Advisory Board of Consulting Engineers of the Barge Canals of New York State. Then and later, in 1906, he urged upon the State Authorities the location and con- struction of suitable and adequate harbors along the route of the Canals and of extensive terminal facilities at New York City and particularly at Flushing and Jamaica Bay. From all of this study he finds many conditions that should be considered at the present moment. The most important feature of the situation and of command- ing importance, is the extraordinary, it may be said phenomenal, growth of the City and port. This chapter will be read by many who have known the city many more years than it has been the writer's privilege to know it, but he can well remember how it appeared, when on the steamer "Kill van Kull", he with the troops of which he was then a private, sailed from Providence, R. I., one day in the early part of June, 1861, bound for Perth Amboy, N. J., en-route for Washington via the Camden and Amboy railroad, passing around New York City via the Sound, East River, the upper Bay and the channels through the Jersey marshes, the city in view as now viewed daily by the passengers on the Colonial Express as it passes around the southern end of the city on the steamer "Maryland." 71 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK The younger generation who read this chapter can hardly appreciate the changes which fifty-three years have wrought in the population, commerce, industry and the general metropolitan character of now Greater New York. In the half century previous to 1850, the population had in- creased from 80,000 to 696,000. At the time of the writer's first visit, referred to above, it was 1,170,000, and since then, by the writer's own figures presented to the American Association for the Advancement of Science at Washington, D. C, January, 1903, in a paper entitled "Population of Great Cities, Growth and Den- sity" and now extended to cover the period since 1903, the mag- nitude has assumed extraordinary proportions. The Metropolitan District is still the metropolis of the New World, and an extract from that Report of the writer covering the following cities. Greater London, Greater New York, Greater Paris, Greater Berlin, Greater Chicago, Philadelphia, St. Petersburg and Vienna, all cities that had over 1,000,000 population in 1895 when the writer's first paper was presented on this subject, will be of interest at the present time. "Greater New York." The curve of growth of this great city of the United States is interesting, first by its comparison with its neighbor, Philadelphia. The curves show that they kept pace with each other very closely from the year 1700 to 1830, when, under the influence of the Erie Canal, population in New York began to grow with rapid strides, and has continued to do so up to the present time (1903), the ratio of increase being greater than that of any other large city in the world except Chicago. The total population (1900) was 3,833,999. The present ratio of increase per decade is 37 per cent." The writer, as in the case of the large ships of the world, after careful study of the past and considering the limitations of the fu- ture, has had the courage to predict future growth and he has the satisfaction in both studies, ships and cities, to find that his pre- dictions, while often considered extravagant at the moment, have been confirmed as time goes on, in fact the growth of ships has gone beyond his predicted figures, and as to cities, the actual and predicted have been very close. He therefore presents these for Greater New York in this chapter, it being noted that the figures refer to the population embraced in the port area and include a part of the New Jersey population that may properly be considered a part of the metro- politan population. Let us see what population we have to pro- vide facilities for: 1920, 6,200,000; 1930, 8,100,000; 1940, 10,- 500,000; 1950, 13,600,000. The largest city in the world at present time is Greater London. Its population in 1911 was 7,252,903, the writer's estimate pub- lished in 1895 for 1910, was 7,490,400, so that he exceeded the actual number somewhat; his estimate for 1920 was 8,516,256. He now estimates, from the studv of all the conditions, the following: 1930, 9,783,000; 1940, 11,140^00; 1950, 12,800,000. 72 THE GREATER PORT The estimate in each case is conservative and fair, and it shows that in 1950, Greater New York will be the largest City in the World. The rate in both cases is considered to be less than the present rate, but still not cut down excessively, for in each case, there is room for expansion, the greatest area for this extension in the case of Greater New York being Brooklyn and Queens. This being the population for which must be provided com- mercial and industrial room and facilities in the next generation period, it behooves all municipal interests to combine their efforts and thought upon how to meet the extraordinary conditions that are before them from now on. One of the first questions to ask is, where the population is Hkely to find its location. This is largely determined by physical conditions and accessibility to water. A city growing as this is growing and will grow must have room. It is like the congested areas of population of some countries, they have no room in their immediate areas so must seek even distant continents for their increasing populations to provide room for them and their commerce. Applying the same motives to New York, what do we find.^ First, as to areas for occupation and expansion:* Manhattan Island has an area of 13,226 acres; The Bronx 26,522.8 acres; Richmond 36,600 acres; Brooklyn and Queens 120,697.8 acres; and the percentages of the total area of Greater New York — 197,- 046.6 acres, are as follows: Manhattan 6.8% The Bronx 13.4% Richmond 18.6% Brooklyn and Queens 61 . 2% The following diagram will present these facts to the eye more clearly than is possible })y figures. RICHMOND BROOKLYN &. QUEENS Areas of the several boroughs of NEW YORK CITY NANHATTAN AREA. tN ACRES 13,2X6.0 % OF WHOLE 6.8% BROOKLYN &, QUEENS 120,697.6 612% BRONX 26,522.6 13^% RICHMOND 36,600.0 lfi.6% TOTAJL ACREAGE 197,046.6 100% * Compare with note on page 11. There is some discrepancy between the several methods of computing the City's area. 73 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK These figures and this diagram show by comparison of areas that the population would likely go to the area nearest to Man- hattan, and to the largest, the accessibility being equal; and this is what is happening. The building of the four bridges over the East River to Brook- lyn and Queens and the subways and now the new subways, and in the near future the New York Connecting Railroad for freight purposes, and in the not distant future the New Jersey-Brooklyn freight tunnels under the Narrows (all to this greatest area of the diagram) are producing an exodus from Manhattan's congested area to those larger areas. The exodus includes both population and industries. It may be well to examine the statistics to ascertain what has taken place even with past and present means of transport and from these data to form a reliable estimate of what the new trans- portation facilities will accomplish. An interesting diagram (see opposite page) will show that the ratio of the population movement, as between the Manhattan area and the area of Brooklyn and Queens, is quite uniform between 1830 and 1910, a steady increase in the latter's ratio and a steady decline in the former's. The diagram shows that in 1840 Manhat- tan had 80% of the population of Greater New York, and Brooklyn and Queens, 16%; in 1880, the percentage had changed to 60% and 30%, and in 1910 to 49% and 40%. This ratio of increase of population in Brooklyn and Queens will in the future be acceler- ated, because of increasing means of transportation of persons and goods. It is not easy to predict what the relations of populations will be in the future as between Manhattan and the Brooklyn and Queens area, but taking into account the coming transportation facilities and increasing accessibility of Brooklyn and Queens we may reasonably expect over 4,000,000 population in the latter area in 1940 and 3,500,000 in Manhattan and the rest of the 10,500,000 in the Bronx and Richmond. Further, in reference to the population, it is interesting to ascer- tain where in Brooklyn and Queens this great and increasing pop- ulation is now found and to be found in the future. As might be expected, it is growing in the direction of open, unoccupied areas, and there is no physical obstruction in the way of this movement, as the ground is practically high and level and suitable for a great population. As the areas near East River and opposite Manhattan become filled up and as subways and street railways advance eastward, the population, moving along lines of least resistance, will go in that direction. It appears now to be occupying those wards that are around and towards that great inland body of shallow water connected with the Lower Bay at Rockaway Inlet — Jamaica Bay, with its water area of over 25 square miles. 74 THE GREATER PORT P«r Cent. 100 1880 1810 1820 I830 1840 1850 I860 I870 I880 I8SO l900 1910 I Manhattan ■ Brooklyn QoQueeris Bronx Ricnmond POPULATION MOVEMENT IN GREATER NEW YORK Manhattan now contains less than half of the City's population and its proportion is annually decreasing There are 32 wards in Brooklyn ; the four wards around and near Jamaica Bay increased on the average in the 10 years — 1900 to 1910 — about 14% per annum, and all the other 27 wards 23/^%, and, as might be expected, the cost of building operations increased in about the same proportion, the total cost in the one year of 1911, was about $13,000,000 in these four wards. Greater New York is so great that figures of ward populations do not impress the mind but if now we select the four wards on the outskirts of Brooklyn lying east and southeast in the areas rapidly filling up around Jamaica Bay, the 26th, 29th, 31st and 32nd wards, and compare the population of this area in 1910 and its increase in the decade 1900-1910, with some of the growing cities of the coun- try, we will get an idea of the growth in the outlying wards of Brooklyn. The population in 1910 was close on to 300,000, the increase in the preceding decade 152%. Jersey City in 1910 had a population of 270,000 and an increase of 35% per decade. Kansas City . . .250,000 and an increase of 51% Providence . . . .225,000 and an increase of 26% Louisville 220,000 and an increase of 20% Rochester 215,000 and an increase of 35% Denver 210,000 and an increase of 52% Atlanta 160,000 and an increase of 70% There has already been given the land area of Manhattan, 13,000 acres. The area of Brooklyn is 40,000 acres. The conges- tion of population in Manhattan had raised in 1910 the assessed valuation to $222,562 per acre, while that of Brooklyn is only $13,000, and this leads us directly to the question of the effect of land values upon industries, and the importance of relieving them from the excessive burden now borne by transferring them to the cheaper lands of Brooklyn and Queens instead of sending them to distant cities where more room and cheaper land is to be found. 75 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK The Commerce of the Port of Greater New York, including, of course, that of the New Jersey part of the bay and North River in 1899, by careful investigation made by the writer for his report to the International Navigation Congress at Paris, was 79,544,000 tons, subdivided as follows: Coastwise, 39,250,000 tons; Interior, 25,093,000 tons; and foreign, 15,201,000 tons. In 1908, the foreign tonnage was 24,094,744. This shows an increase in the nine years of somewhat less than 5% per annum. No doubt the Coastwise and Interior tonnage increased in equal ratio. This would make the total tonnage in 1913, approximately 144,000,000 tons, subdivided as follows: Foreign entrances and clearances . . .29,000,000 tons Interior 45,000,000 tons Coastwise 20,000,000 tons There is nothing approaching this anywhere in the world. The completion of the two great canals, Panama and the Barge Canals of New York State, will increase rather than diminish the annual ratio of increase. Where and how will it be accommodated.'^ This is a question of vital importance to the Port of New York and to Greater New York itself. It is useless to shut our eyes to the facts. The water fronts of New Jersey, Manhattan and the East River front of Brooklyn are already occupied and generally in such a manner as to preclude acquiring much more room. It is not necessary to en- large upon this subject; it is too patent to require discussion. The writer is not filling up this chapter with quotations which are already in print, but there is one paragraph in the Report of Col. (now General) John G. D. Knight, Corps of U. S. Engineers, that is quite pertinent. This report was made in 1907. "We can say that this tonnage (of the Port of New York) will greatly increase and that it is thought that in ten years (seven of which are already passed) available water fronts for wharfage around Manhattan and in Upper New York Bay will be exhausted. Provision for additional frontage must be made, which provision should be on New York Bay, if practicable, and Jamaica Bay affords the only site for such addition." The writer, from many years of study of the subject, confirms this opinion, and there can be no other conclusion from the facts already brought forward. The additional water front is no longer to be found on Man- hattan Island. The water fronts developed in Manhattan by the Report of the New Jersey Commission dated February, 1914, is 72.58 miles long, Brooklyn 80.94 miles, Queens 37.06; length of water front measured around piers and shore line in Manhattan, 89 miles, that is remaining 16.42 miles only; Brooklyn 135 miles, remaining 54.06 miles; Queens 215 miles, remaining 117.94 miles; and this does not include Jamaica Bay, which by the plans made for its improvement, contains 100 miles of bulkhead, saying noth- ing of piers, slips and subsidiary channels. 76 THE GREATER PORT The area and the frontage of Jamaica Bay would take in, com- fortably, some of the largest ports in the World, and in any Euro- pean country would be eagerly occupied for commercial purposes when as near to existing ports and as accessible as this is to New York. It is just as important to ameliorate the industrial conditions as to furnish additional commercial facilities. It goes without saying that if industries can have, within a distance from the New Municipal Building of New York City no greater than from there to Central Park, large tracts of cheap land on a deep water front, available to ocean, interior and coastwise navigation and to railroad facilities, manufacturers will eagerly seek such a locality. The congestion of the water front, and of the streets leading to itjin Manhattan, is so notoriously great that it is necessary only to refer to it. This congestion has become at certain hours or on certain days a veritable "impasse", and every merchant, every railroad man and every drayman and car float man experiences the difficulties, annoyances and aggravating delays, and the merchants, manufacturers and the general public have to pay dearly for the costly privilege of doing business in Manhattan. Briefly, in summary of the conditions; there is no longer room in Manhattan for economical manufacturing, transportation and handling of goods; the conditions are growing worse daily and will continue to do so; these expensive and annoying conditions will drive and already are driving, manufacturers and other businesses into other cities. The rail, subway and bridge connections with Brooklyn and Queens open up a clear outlet greatly desired. The improvement of the Inlet to Jamaica Bay and of the main channel undertaken by the United States Government; the deed of the State to the City of all underwater areas in that vast inland basin of 25 square miles; the past appropriations of Congress now available and to be ex- tended; the appropriations of the Municipality of New York — all these preparations assure the installation of a great secondary port to the existing Port of New York, and an integral part of the Port of Greater New York. The writer, from many years of study of the subject and from a forty years' experience in harbor and port construction in many countries of the world, and from examination of over sixty ports and profound study of the best facilities for commerce, is pro- nounced in his opinion that the improvement of Jamaica Bay should be undertaken in earnest and without delay, and he is of the further opinion that it is the duty of every commercial organization in Greater New York to use its influence upon the authorities, — national, state and municipal — to work together for the realization of this important project so auspiciously begun and so unfortunately delayed. This improvement should certainly form an essential part of the comprehensive plan for the development of the Port of New York proposed recently by the "Merchants Association," for it 77 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK offers the "ideal conditions" named by this Association, viz.: "Cheap lands for industrial sites and low rental charges; close proximity and easy access to railroad and water carriage; reason- able proximity to labor market and homes and easy access thereto for cartage; readily and always obtainable food supplies with economic facilities for distribution." The writer was quite intimate with the development and legis- lation that led to the establishment of the "Port of London Author- ity", and his opinion was sought on some commercial questions connected with it. He also has knowledge of the recently organized "Port Directors of Boston," and he is in accord with the proposi- tion to establish "The Port of New York Commission," but not with its limitations proposed, but a real "Port of Greater New York Authority," like the "Port of London Authority" which shall have absolute control in reorganizing, rebuilding, co-ordinating and en- larging the commercial facilities of that Great Port, to the immense advantage of the World's Commerce and to the entire satisfaction of all concerned. $ z.ooo.oooooo 1600,000,000 veoo.o 00,000 1.400.000,000 1&00,000,000 1,000,000,000 &oo,ooo,ooo eoo.ooo.ooo 400.000,000 eoo.oooooo NEW YORK BOSTON PHILADELPHIA VALUE or IMPORTS AND EXPORTS OF MERCHANDISE AT THE PORTS OF NEW YORK.BOSTOri & PHILADELPHIA. 78 APPENDIX Consisting of extracts from official documents, opinions of prominent authorities, statis- tical tables, charts and diagrams. THE STATISTICAL APPENDIX Appendix (Note 1) Statement of Federal, State and Municipal Legislation Estab= fishing a Harbor at Jamaica Bay, March 6, 1906 — March 4, 1913, and Other Data The Board of Estimate and Apportionment of the City of New York, authorized Mayor McClellan to appoint the Jamaica Bay Commission March 6, 1906 The Mayor appointed the Jamaica Bay Commission and requested it to report before December 31, 1906 April 26, 1906 An extension of six months time was granted to the Commission Oct. 26, 1906 Congress directed the Secretary of War to make a sur- vey of the Bay and to co-operate with the City of New York, Section 3 of the Eiver and Harbor Act of March 2, 1907 Jamaica Bay Commission reported to the Board of Esti- mate and Apportionment and automatically went out of office May 31, 1907 Jamaica Bay Commission reappointed and directed to confer with Secretary of War relative to plan of improve- ments for Jamaica Bay June 7, 1907 Eeport of Col. John G. D. Knight, Corps of Engineers, on Preliminary Survey of Jamaica Bay, recommended addi- tional examination and survey Aug. 3, 1907 Eecommendation of Col. Knight having been approved by the Board of Engineers for Eivers and Harbors and by Brig.-Gen. Mackenzie, Chief of Engineers, U. S. A., the Acting Secretary of War, Eobert Shaw Oliver, ordered such an examination and survey Aug. 19, 1907 Final Eeport of Col. Knight approving the project and recommending Federal co-operation Jan. 30, 1909 This recommendation having been approved by the Board of Engineers for Eivers and Harbors and by the Chief of Engineers, the Secretary of War, Luke E. Wright, so reported to Congress Feb. 26, 1909 Congress instructed the Secretery of War to report when he was satisfied that the City of New York was pre- pared to proceed with its portion of the work — The Eiver and Harbor Act of March 3, 1909 The State of New York ceded to the City its title to Jamaica Bay lands under water by the enactment of the Sargent BiU May 29, 1909 The Board of Estimate and Apportionment appropri- ated on behalf of the City $50,000 for preliminary expenses June 3, 1910 81 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK Congress appropriated $250,500 for the entrance channel by the River and Harbor Act of June 25, 1910 Congress enacted a law permitting the closing to navi- gation of the interior streams of Jamaica Bay June 25, 1910 The Board of Estimate and Apportionment appropri- ated $950,000 Feb. 9, 1911 Congress appropriated $300,000 for dredging the inte- rior channel — River and Harbor Act of July 25, 1912 The City contracted for the dredging of about 1,800,000 yards ($135,000) from the main channel. The Federal Gov- ernment reimbursed the City for this expenditure, as per River and Harbor Act of July 25, 1912 Nov. 15, 1912 Congress appropriated $300,000 for dredging the inte- rior channel — River and Harbor Act March 4, 1913 (Note 2) Statement of Federal and Municipal Appropriations and Ex- penditures for the Construction of the Harbor at Jamaica Bay, October 8, 1913 June 3, 1910 City appropriation for preliminary expenses $50,000 Feb. 9, 1911 City appropriation for dredging, etc.. 950,000 Expended of City appropriation, for engineering expenses, real estate, etc $76,780 June 25, 1910 Federal appropriation for entrance channel 250,500 July 25, 1912 Federal appropriation for main inte- rior channel 300,000 March 4, 1913 Federal appropriation for main inte- rior channel 300,000 Expended of Federal appropriation for entrance channel 19,780 for interior channel 135,000 Total Appropriations $1,850,500 Total Expenditures $231,560 Unexpended City Appropriation $923,220 Unexpended Federal Appropriation... 695,720 Total Unexpended Balance $1,618,940 (Note 3) Extract from Majority Report of the Jamaica Bay Improve- ment Commission, December 27, 1909, The Board of Estimate and Apportionment, New York City, New York. Gentlemen: — We beg to submit herewith progress report of the Jamaica Bay Improvement Commission. 82 THE STATISTICAL APPENDIX The work of the Commission has not yet been completed, but enough has been done to enable them to fix with precision the harbor lines on the west and north shores of the bay which had previously been tentatively approved by the Board of Estimate and Apportionment and by the Federal Government. The Commission have likewise arrived at certain definite conclusions as to the method of treatment of the entire west and north shores of the bay, and are able to suggest a definite line of action upon which the City might proceed. A summary of the conclusions and recom- mendations follow: Conclusions First — That the growth of the Port of Xew York warrants and justifies a substantial improvement of Jamaica Bay. Second — That any such improvement of the bay should, however, be carried on cautiously until the success attending the Federal Engineers' effort to improve and maintain an entrance channel through Eockaway Inlet is assured. Third — That the improvements suggested herewith should be carried on at the same time and not before the dredging of the Inlet Channel. Fourth — That the real and substantial benefit to be derived during the first ten or fifteen years following the dredging of the preliminary inside channel will result from the means afforded of cheaply supplying building material and supplies to the territory immediately adjacent to the bay, and in this manner not merely assisting in, but actually promoting, its growth. Fifth — That growth in population thus stimulated will continue to increase at a rate much greater than the average, either for the City or the Borough of Brooklyn. Sixth — That manufacturing will increase in proportion to the growth in population and may possibly assist advances in this direction. Eespectfully submitted, PHILIP P. FARLEY, JOHN J. McLaughlin, Commissioners. (Note 4) Extract from Minority Report of the Jamaica Bay Improve- ment Commission (Signed by William Q. Ford), December 27, 1909 The Board of Estimate and Apportionment, New York City, New York. Gentlemen: — Supplementing the joint report of this Commission transmitted to your honorable Board, May 26, 1909 (which follows as Appendix), the writer has the honor to submit the following progress report upon the improvement and development of Jamaica Bay: Synopsis New York must make provision for extensive new harborage. Her present harbor is nearly fully developed and will not much longer afford space for new business. Jamaica Bay is the logical situs for the new harbor, on account of location and the readiness and cheapness with which the construction may be carried out. Its borders, while land is cheap, should become the property of the City, and the increment in values due to the development along the border should go to her. This land should be acquired as soon as practicable and should be held as the key to a great railroad terminal system to be worked in the highest accord with the future development of an effective wharfage equipment for all kinds of sea-going vessels. 83 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK A sufficient sum of money should be appropriated by the City to carry on the work incident to creating the preliminary channel from Barren Island to Cornell's Creek, for which the Federal Government proposes to reimburse the City at the rate of eight cents per cubic yard as the work goes on. The diagonal pier system should maintain from the beginning, both as to the ''main land" and interior sections. The interior of the Bay, already largely owned by the City, should afford a partial solution of the enlarged barge canal terminal problem, par- ticularly for shipments breaking bulk at New York between the Great Lake regions and foreign and domestic ports. The recommendation on the part of the War Department that the Federal Government should back the enterprise to the extent of approximately seven and one-half million dollars, and the very recent generous contribution on the part of the State of New York of whatever title she has to lands under water needed for the project (through Chapter 568, Laws of 1909, the "Sargent Bill"), are additional incentives for the City to begin at this time work of such importance to the City, State and Nation. The generosity of the State should be met by similar generosity by the City, and in the event of the State wishing to use part of Jamaica Bay in connection with the new barge canal, the City should co-operate to the greatest possible extent, placing at the disposal of the State, if necessary, sufficient land to accommodate an up-to-date and efficient terminal. During the progress of the physical development vested rights in Jamaica Bay should be fully safeguarded and protected, and all existing industries promoted, rather than retarded, at any rate until such time as it may be necessary to supplant them by others more important. That it should be the policy of the City to disturb as little as possible such communities as those about Old Mill Creek and similar districts until actually required, or at least until the City shall have offered full recompense to the land and home owners. The application of the Canarsie Oystermen Association (see Exhibit No. 4) for suitable facilities for the collection, storage and distribution of oysters is in entire accord with the spirit of Section 825 of the City charter, and should receive recognition. The creation of the exterior channel, the entrance to the Bay, will be a duty beyond the province of the City of New York. It will become a duty of the War Department, and will be executed by the Army Engineers, who alone will be responsible for it. The writer has entire confidence in their ability to keep the entrance open, and does not feel that the City of New York need halt in her develop- ment of the Bay simply through fear of their inability. The City should not specify and set apart some particular lands for special benefit and consideration, at the expense of the City, prior to their acquisition at normal values. The City should carry on the general development, the main channel, and later develop especially some desirable district where she may have succeeded in acquiring land at reasonably liberal, but not exorbitant, ex- penditures. Specific recommendations will conclude this report. Summary The following is a short outline of some of the conditions before us: 1. In a comparatively few years the natural increase in commerce will have brought into demand all the available waterfront of the present Port of New York. 2. Before this occurs the small supply of largely increased demand will send the prices of wharfage up beyond a reasonable rate. 3. This will drive some commerce away to ports which will answer the purpose, but where the charges are less. 84 THE STATISTICAL APPENDIX 4. In the meantime some new commerce will still come and pay the advanced rates, until finally all the room is not only used up, but some of it is doing double duty. 5. After that new commerce must go elsewhere. 6. Competing ports will take advantage of the situation and under the stimulus of great relative advance in commercial prosperity will be spurred on to making their localities so attractive that they will draw still further from New York commerce, 7. New York, having come to a standstill while the rest of the country is advancing, will lose prestige and in the course of time suffer very seriously in many ways. 8. If, however, through the forethought of the Federal and City Gov- ernments a place can be secured which will answer as a place for overflow commerce, the situation will be greatly relieved. If at the same time such a place should be capable of large ultimate development upon broad and progressive plans, the solution of the problem will be well in sight, and New York need have no fear of losing her supremacy for many years to come. 9. Jamaica Bay is capable of adding to the Harbor of New York over one hundred and fifty (150) miles of wharfage for vessels, as well as providing large areas for manufacturing, warehousing, storage, railroad truckage, etc. 10. It will be several hours nearer Europe than the present port. 11. It can have less dangerous channels, 12. It can be made in a large degree the terminus of the new 1,000-ton Barge Canal when completed. 13. It can become a center for certain kinds of trade and manufacture without disturbing the interests of the existing built-up sections of the Greater New York. 14. It is already within 40 minutes of downtown Manhattan, under ordinary every-day schedules. 15. The cost of construction will be less than usual about New York. 16. Its development will reclaim thousands of acres of low land, making them productive where they are now of little value. 17. The existence of a harbor in this vicinity will reduce the cost of many commodities within its immediate neighborhood. 18. It will, through the decreased freight rates, and hence reduced ultimate cost of building materials, result in a more rapid development of the adjoining interior. 19. It should reduce the cost of living. 20. It should also give active employment to many people. 21. It can, by proper arrangement of railroad systems in advance, be placed in direct touch with the interior of the United States, and there would be ample room for terminals. 22. The through-freight rates between the interior States and Jamaica Bay can most probably be as low as to any other part of New York City. 23. In some cases the shipments between it and the West can be even cheaper than where several haulings of goods are required, as now in par- ticular sections of New York City. 24. The development of Jamaica Bay section will provide a place for homes of very many thousands of people within a short radius from the central parts of New York City. 25. The development of the Bay can be made for many millions of dollars less for the advantages to be gained than would be required in any other available section of equal size. 26. Unless New York takes up this development of Jamaica Bay act- ively, New Jersey will forestall her in the development of the Newark Meadows, where several of the great railroads already have their termini. 27. The City of Newark proposes a vast development of the meadows adjacent to her. 28. She has already prepared a plan for a start, and has appropriated $1,000,000 to get it under way. 85 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK 29. Commerce once gained, if accompanied with inducements equal to those of other ports, generally stays through force of habit. 30. Commerce once lost is difficult to regain. 31. If New Jersey goes ahead of us she will get for her citizens the wealth and prosperity attendant upon increased commerce — which the citi- zens of New York might have had. (Note 5) Extract from Report of Colonel (now General) John G. D. Knight, to the Chief of Engineers, United States Army, January 30, 1909 I therefore recommend that the dredging of the main channel be re- quired of the City of New York, and that the City be reimbursed therefor at the rate of 10 cents per cubic yard place measurement for all material dredged within the limits of the main channel to the extent of $5,900,000 less cost to the Government of superintendence, surveying and inspecting. The main channel commences at the inner end of the 1,500 foot entrance channel, includes all widenings at angles, and terminates at the mouth of Cornell's Creek. Five million nine hundred thousand dollars is the estimated cost of dredging this channel to a depth of 30 feet. Any cost of dredging this channel in excess of this estimate reduced by cost of superintendence, etc., should be borne by the City. The City should not be reimbursed for any material dredged from below a depth of 30 feet below mean low water, as determined by the United States Engineer Survey of 1908. Summary. — The plan of improvement of the waters of Jamaica Bay, including entrance to said bay at Rockaway Inlet and those waters having their outlet in Dead Horse Inlet, as recommended, is to provide ultimately an entrance channel 1,500 feet wide and 30 feet deep through Rockaway Inlet to a main channel within the bay, which shall be 1,000 feet wide, except where widened at angles, and 30 feet deep; auxiliary interior chan- nels in general direction as indicated above; and if needed two stone jetties at the mouth of the entrance channel, one extending from the western end of Rockaway Beach, the other from the eastern half of Manhattan Beach, Coney Island. The order recommended of such improvement is, first, to dredge the entrance channel for a width of 500 feet to a depth of 18 feet, as outlined above in last paragraph of Section 9; second, to maintain this channel; third, widen and deepen this channel in proportion to the demands of commerce, ultimately to a 1,500 foot width and 30 feet depth; fourth, con- struct east jetty, when its necessity is determined; fifth, construct west jetty, as necessity is determined. The proposition of the cost to be borne by the City of New York which is recommended is the cost of dredging all auxiliary interior channels and basins, and any cost of dredging the main channel in excess of $5,900,000, which sum, less expense to the United States for superintendence, surveying and inspecting, is to be paid to the City for material actually dredged from the main channel within the prescribed limits, it being understood that the City shall dredge the main channel to the dimensions stated and shall receive no other reimbursement therefor from the United States except the sum stated. It is further recommended that Congress declare nonnavigable those waters which lie between the islands within Jamaica Bay, but do not lie within the limits of such waterways as may be improved by the City of New York, on plans recommended by the Chief of Engineers, and authorized by the Secretary of War. As above outlined, I believe the waters of Jamaica Bay, including entrance to said bay at Rockaway Inlet, and those waters having their 86 THE STATISTICAL APPENDIX outlet in Dead Horse Inlet, to be worthy of improvement by the General Government. Very respectfully, your obedient servant, JOHN G. D. KNIGHT, Colonel, Corps of Engineers. The Chief of Engineers, U. S. Army. (Note 6) Extract from Report of Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors, to the Chief of Engineers, United States Army, February 23, 1909 The Board further recommends that the 18-foot entrance channel should not be dredged until the Secretary of War is satisfied that the City of New York is prepared to undertake its part of the general plan of improve- ment outlined above. The estimated cost of this channel for first develop- ment of 18 feet is $250,500, and this is the amount of the first appropriation necessary under the conditions cited. The ultimate cost to the United States of the plan proposed for adop- tion will be as follows: (a) Main channel $4,720,000 (b) Dredging the 18-foot entrance channel 250,500 (c) Widening and deepening this channel 1,016,500 (d) East jetty 724,500 (e) West jetty 589,500 (f) Contingencies 129,050 Total • $7,430,050 The cost of annual maintenance of the 30-foot entrance channel is estimated at $55,600. It is to be noted that items (d) and (e) may not be necessary. For the Board: D. W. LOCKWOOD, Colonel, Corps of Engineers, Senior Member of Board. (Note 7) Extract from River and Harbor Bill of June 25, 191a An Act making appropriations for the construction, repair, and preser- vation of certain public works on rivers and harbors, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled. That the following sums of money be, and are hereby, appropriated, to be paid out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to be immediately available, and to be expended under the direction of the Secretary of War and the super- vision of the Chief of Engineers, for the construction, completion, repair, and preservation of the public works hereinafter named: Improving Jamaica Bay, New York, and entrance thereto in accordance with the report submitted in House Document Numbered Fourteen hundred and eighty-eight. Sixtieth Congress, second session, two hundred and fifty thousand five hundred dollars. Provided, That no part of this amount shall be expended until the Secretary of War is satisfied that the City of New York is prepared to undertake its part of the general plan for the improve- ment of Jamaica Bay, as outlined in the report cited above. 87 THE PROBLEISI OF GREATER NEW YORK (Note 8) Extract from River and Harbor Bill of July 25, 1912 An Act making appropriations for the construction, repair, and preser- vation of certain public works on rivers and harbors, and for other purpose Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the following sums of money be, and are hereby, appropriated, to be paid out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to be immediately available, and to be expended under the direction of the Secretary of War and the super- vision of the Chief of Engineers, for the construction, completion, repair, and preservation of the public works hereinafter named: Improving Jamaica Bay, New York, and entrance thereto in accordance with the report submitted in House Document Numbered Fourteen hundred and eighty-eight. Sixtieth Congress, second session, three hundred thousand dollars, from which amount the Secretary of War may reimburse the City of New York each month for the dredging and the disposition of dredged material of the preceding month at the actual unit price per cubic yard, place measurement. Provided, That such cost does not exceed eight cents per cubic yard. (Note 9) Extract from River and Harbor Bill of March 4, 1913 An Act making appropriations for the construction, repair, and preser- vation of certain public works on rivers and harbors, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled. That the following sums of money be, and are hereby, appropriated, to be paid out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to be immediately available, and to be expended under the direction of the Secretary of War and the super- vision of the Chief of Engineers, for the construction, completion, repair, and preservation of the public works hereinafter named: Improving Jamaica Bay, New York: Continuing improvement in ac- cordance with tlie report submitted in House Document Numbered Fourteen hundred and eiglit-eight. Sixtieth Congress, second session, three hundred thousand dollars, from which amount the Secretary of War may reimburse the City of New York each mouth for the dredging and the disposition of dredged material of the preceding month at the actual unit price per cubic yard, place measurement. Provided, That such cost shall not exceed eight cents per cubic yard. (Note 10) An Act to Grant to the City of New York Certain Lands Under Water in Jamaica Bay and Vicinity The People of the State of New York, represented in Senate and Assembly, do enact as follows: Section 1. To the end that the City of New York may co-operate with the Federal Government in the creation of a new harbor in and about Jamaica Bay, including the making of channels, basins, slips and other necessary adjuncts, through the excavation of the soil or lands under water, 88 THE STATISTICAL APPENDIX and otherwise, intended for the advancement of the commercial interests of the City, State and Nation, there is hereby granted for the purposes specified in this act, to the City of New York such right, title and interest as the State of New York may have in and to the land under water in Jamaica Bay and Rockaway Inlet, and the tributaries thereto which lie to the northward of latitude forty degrees thirty-three minutes north, and to the eastward of longitude seventy-three degrees fifty-six minutes west, as now interpreted, excluding, however, all lands under water included within the boundary of Nassau County. This grant shall become operative upon the United States Government making its first appropriation for the creation of the new harbor mentioned in this act, or upon the City of New York appropriating and setting aside a sum not less than one million dollars for the same purpose. Sec. 2. The grant shall not affect such land as may hereafter be granted by the Commissioners of the Land Ofiice under any application made prior to May twenty-ninth, nineteen hundred and nine, but if any such application be denied, the land covered thereby shall pass to the City of New York under the conditions of this act. Sec. 3. This act shall take effect immediately. (Note 11) Extract from Governor Hughes' Message of Approval State of New York, Executive Chamber, Albany, May 29, 1909. Memorandum filed with Assemby Bill No. 2354 (Senate reprint, No. 1633), entitled * ' An act to grant to the City of New York certain lands under water in Jamaica Bay and vicinity." Approved. This bill is designed to enable the City of New York to co-operate with the Federal Government in the creation of a new harbor in and about Jamaica Bay, including the making of channels, basins, slips, and other necessary adjuncts, and, as the bill recites, to secure ''the advancement of the commercial interest of the City, State and Nation.'' For this purpose the grant is made to the City of New York of such right, title, and interest as the State of New York may have in and to the land under water in Jamaica Bay and Eockaway Inlet, and the tributaries thereto, as stated. The bill provides that the grant ''shall become operative upon the United States Government making its first appropriation for the creation of the new harbor mentioned in this act or upon the City of New York appro- priating and setting aside a sum of not less than $1,000,000 for the same purpose. It is of manifest importance that provision be made for the proper protection of the public interest in and about the waters of New York, and that the necessary and important developments of the future should not be retarded or made more expensive to the community by failure at this time to take suitable steps to safeguard the public right. It may be regretted that the bill contains any exception to its operation. But this is not a reason for its disapproval, for further delay will permit still more numerous exceptions and detract from the public opportunity which should be provided. CHAELES E. HUGHES. 89 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK (Note 12) Report of Chief of Engineers, 1913 — Part II, Page 1698. Im= provement of Jamaica Bay, N. Y. — Operations During the Past Fiscal Year The U. S. dredge Atlantic began dredging in the entrance channel on August 13, 1912, and continued until December 6, 1912, when she was with- drawn for other work. In this period she worked 5411^ actual working hours, at cost of $25 per working hour, removing 180,641 cubic yards, mainly of sand, with about 20 per cent of shells and mud, the cost being 7.49 cents per yard. On account of shoal water the Atlantic could work in this channel only on rising tide or near high water, and she could not carry full loads. The work was confined to the inner 7,000 feet of the entrance channel (about 10,000 feet long), where the actual depths were from 10 to 18 feet, and the available depth was 13 feet in a narrow channel. This channel was deepened to 14i/^ feet available depth for 200 feet width, with varying depths either side. On November 15, 1912, the City of New York, through the Department of Docks and Ferries, entered into contract with the Atlantic, Gulf and Pacific Co. to dredge, to 18 feet deep and 500 feet wide, a section 8,000 feet long of the main interior channel of Jamaica Bay, at cost of 7.49 cents per cubic yard, measured in the cut, the total amount of excavation required being estimated at about 1,800,000 cubic yards. Under the terms of the adopted project and the special authority of the River and Harbor Act of 1912, the City of New York is to be reimbursed by the United States for the cost of this dredging at price not to exceed eight cents per cubic yard. Under this contract dredging was begun December 4, 1912, and up to June 30, 1913, 1,413,400 cubic yards of sand and mud had been dredged and dumped ashore back of the bulkhead line, a distance of 1,000 feet from the dredging. The channel had been completed to its full width for 6,500 feet of its length, and partly completed for an additional 1,200 feet. The work began first at the north end, at Mill Creek Basin; afterwards at the south end, opposite the upper part of Barren Island; the uncompleted part is nearly in the middle of the 8,000 feet. It is expected to resume work in the entrance channel with the United States dredges when existing leases terminate and the dredges can be spared from more urgent work. The contract with the City of Xew York should be completed in August or September. It is not known how soon the City will be ready to enter into another contract for extension of the interior channel. Certain dis- puted ownership or control of lands under water are causing delay. No additional funds are required for the year ending June 30, 1915. Proposed Operations Appropriations June 25, 1910 July 25, 1912 March 4, 1913 $250,500.00 300,000.00 300,000.00 Received from sale of maps 59.17 $850,559.17 90 THE STATISTICAL APPENDIX (Note 13) Extracts from the Report of the New York Harbor Line Board to Brig.=Qen. G. L. Gillespie, Chief of Engineers, Under Date of December 2, 1903, In the Matter of the Extension of the Pier= head Line of Manhattan Island, in the North River In order that some idea may be formed of the congestion along the waterfront of Manhattan Island, it may here be stated that the cargoes of all vessels must be carried to and from the vessels by trucks. The lower streets of the City are now nearly impassable, due to the enormous number of these trucks constantly hauling parts of cargoes. Vessels of 20,000 tons capacity or greater are now under construction, and it is argued by Mr. Whinery* that still larger vessels will seek dockage here. The trucks will not average over two tons, so that 10,000 trucks or more may be expected to visit the pier when loading, and a similar number in discharging a full cargo from a vessel, and there are many vessels along this front taking or discharging cargoes simultaneously. It is not known to the Board what proportion of the cargoes of vessels entering and leaving the Port of Xew York and docking along Manhattan Island originates upon Manhattan Island, or what part of cargoes arriving lodges there finally. All parts of these cargoes originating outside of Manhattan Island, or distributed throughout the United States from this island, must now be hauled again and again through the streets of New York, and much of it carried across a river also, and the argument now submitted by Mr. Whinery is that this tax should be continued, and even increased, at the expense and inconvenience of the public. If this freight, or articles of commerce, be distributed by rail, it must be by means of two systems entering Manhattan Island, seven with termini in New Jersey, and one with terminus on Long Island. The hauling of these articles of commerce on Manhattan Island back and forth through crowded streets, and the ferrying of much of it to and fro across rivers, when it might be avoided by better location of docks, is not in the interest either of the Port of New York in comparison with other ports of entry in the United States not so handicapped, or of the people of the United States who must ultimately pay the cost of such expensive hauling of goods out of place. It is not to the advantage of the people of the United States to have their commerce pay undue tolls at this port, nor is it to the advantage of the Port to compel commerce destined elsewhere to be handled and rehandled on Manhattan Island. If commerce is deserting the Port of New York, it is simply because it is to the benefit of the country at large to transact its business along lines of less resistance. This harbor or port must furnish facilities for commerce along the most economical lines. Considerable space in Mr. Whinery 's report is taken up with a descrip- tion of this congestion of business now existing in New York at the locality in question, and it is stated that the enlarged and improved dock facilities in progress and in contemplation will greatly concentrate commercial busi- ness already greatly congested in that vicinity. In view of this it would seem unfortunate that the City had determined upon this particular locality, and had inaugurated extensive and costly improvements at a point where such great congestion already exists and must be materially increased thereby, and especially to select for its longest piers that part of the river where their construction would be most objectionable The general public of the United States is very much interested in the question whether the advantages of this harbor — in great measure increased and made available by expenditures from funds in large part contributed by such public — are properly and economically used for the general benefit. * Mr. S. Whinery, an engineer, was commissioned by the Mayor to inves- tigate the subject of pier extension. 91 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK It is a matter of indifference to the people at large whether their harbors are in the States of New York, New Jersey, Virginia, Louisiana, or else- where within the National domain, provided that the most economical lines of traffic, so far as affects their resources and business, are followed. An argument, therefore, based upon the advantages to accrue to a particular city or State has and should have no force, unless at the same time it is shown that the general public will be the gainer, or at least not a loser, by the execution of the proposed project. The Board also observes that, in its opinion, there is nowhere shown in Mr. Whinery's paper any necessity for an advancement into the channel of North River of the harbor lines at this point. Nearly all the facts stated by him are against long piers in this vicinity, even if the river were not already too contracted there. He shows: (a) That long piers are now constructed and maintained much more economically in this immediate vicinity, on the opposite shore of the North River, in New Jersey, and at other points in New York Harbor. (b) That all freight constituting cargoes of vessels landing along Man- hattan Island is carried and distributed by trucks, and that the streets of New York are now too much congested, and must be still more so should these piers be built, unless costly methods not now provided for be installed for handling it. (c) That the steamship lines directly, and their patrons indirectly, must pay for the increased cost of piers along Manhattan Island, or, in other words, that the commerce of the port handled at such piers must be more heavily taxed than if handled elsewhere in the harbor. (d) That on account of heavy port charges and lack of economical facilities in New York Harbor, commerce is seeking other ports. Mr. Whinery does not show that the construction of long piers in this vicinity will result in less taxing of commerce, but he argues that it is now expedient (and advantageous for the Borough of Manhattan) to build long piers in connection with an important improvement now in progress in this vicinity, and that the conditions are now favorable for constructing such piers. Under his showing it is simply a matter of convenience and expediency in the interests of the Borough of Manhattan; but he does not show that such extension would be In the interest of the general public or even of the Port of New York. In conclusion, the New York Harbor Line Board has to report that after maturely considering the arguments of Mr. Whinery and all the bearing of the case, it is confirmed in the opinion, heretofore expressed, that it is not to the interest of the public that the harbor lines be advanced in his vicinity, but that, on the contrary, such an extension as is requested would be against the public interests, inasmuch as it would diminish the navigable capacity of North River and be obstructive to navigation, while at the same time offering no compensating advantages to the public at large. The Board, therefore, respectfully recommends that the application be denied. Respectfully submitted: CHAS. R. SUTTER, Colonel, Corps of En- gineers; AMOS STICKNEY, Colonel, Corps of Engineers; W. L. MARSHALL, Major, Corps of Engineers. New York City, Dec. 2, 1903. 92 THE STATISTICAL APPENDIX (Note 14) Assessed Valuations by Boroughs, 1913 Ordinary Land Value Improvements Special Franchises Real Estate of Corporations Personal Property Total Manhattan . The Bronx . Brooklyn Queens . . . Richmond $3,155,389,410 332,354,808 782,660,179 280,223,990 40,263,963 $1,587,341,496 240,453,355 776,434,353 156,026,337 36,089,213 $297,674,923 24,741,625 98,440,849 15,428,524 2,575,660 $86,536,766 42,790,805 22,478,210 26,113,9^5 2,629,410 $265,509,435 5,094,060 46,296,870 6,740,850 1,777,225 $5,392,452,030 645,434,653 1,726,310,461 484,533,686 83,335,471 Total . $4,590,892,350 $2,796,344,754 $438,861,581 $180,549,176 $325,418,440 $8,332,066,301 — From the Municipal Tear-Book of the City of New York, 1913. Increiase: in Population or TMC VARIOUS BOROUGHS OF New Yor\^ City BY DEICADCS FROM ISOO TO I9l0 AND ESTinATEID FROn i9l0 TO BY Tme: Board of Water Supply of that city POPULATION 80S o 5 gi 8 8 g S O eg CO 5 / ICMMO (D 1940 POPULATION 4.000.000 (Note 15) Statistics on Population Estimated Population July 1, 1913 Manhattan 2,487,796 The Bronx 583,981 Brooklyn 1,845,443 Queens 359,891 Eichmond 95,872 5,372,983 Area of City Boroughs In Acres In Square Miles Manhattan 14,038 21.93 The Bronx 26,017 40.65 Brooklyn 49,680 77.62 Queens 82,883 129.50 Richmond 36,600 57.19 Total 209,218* 326.89 * Compare with note on page 11. There is some discrepancy between the several methods of computing- the City's area. The Brooklyn Eagle Almanac gives 202,068 acres. 93 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK Density of Population Per Acre July 1, 1913 Manhattan 173.6 The Bronx 20.4 Brooklyn 35.7 Queens 4.0 Richmond 2.5 Average for City 24.7 Density of Population Per Acre in Several Selected Wards (1910 Census) Manhattan — Fourth 257.1 Seventh 515.6 Tenth 604.0 Eleventh 696.7 Thirteenth 604.3 The Bronx— Twenty-Third 63.0 Brooklyn — Fifth 162.5 Sixteenth 278.7 Twenty-seventh 189.6 Queens — First 13.3 Richmond — First 8.1 — From the Municipal Year-Book of the City of New York, 1913. (Note 16) 1910 Population of Wards in Brooklyn and Queens, Constitu= ting the "Jamaica Bay District" (According to U. S. Census) Brooklyn 1910 1900, Increase Twenty-six 177,963 66,086 111,877 Twenty-nine 72.351 27,188 45,163 Thirty-one 30,988 14,609 16,379 Thirty-two 17,419 8,243 9,176 Queens, Four 67,412 30,761 36,651 Five 12,476 7,193 5,283 378,609 154,080 224,529 Increase from 1900-1910 equals 146%. Population estimated in 1914, 599,716, on basis of continuing same rate of growth. As a city, would rank seventh among the cities of the United States. 94 THE STATISTICAL APPENDIX THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK (^ote 17) Harbor Statistics Number of Miles of Straight Waterfront Measured Along the Shore Line: Port of New York 771 miles New York City 578 New Jersey 193 Number of Miles of Waterfront Measured Around Piers and Shore Line: Port of New York 921 miles New York City 681 " New Jersey 240 " Number of Miles of Improved Waterfront Measured Along the Shore Line: Port of New York 166 miles New York City 103 New Jersey 63 " Number of Miles of Improved Waterfront Measured Around Piers and Shore Line: New York City 259 miles** Number of Miles of Waterfront in the Port of New York Publicly Owned, Measured Along Shore Line: City of New York 127 miles Number of Miles of Waterfront in the Port of New York Publicly Owned, Measured Around Pier and Shore Line: City of New York 159 miles Number of Miles of Waterfront in the Port of New York Publicly Owned that Have Been Improved, Measured Around the Shore Line: City of New York 47 miles Number of Miles of Waterfront in the Port of New York Publicly Owned that Have Been Improved, Measured Around the Pier and Shore Line: City of New York 79 miles Area of the Port of New York 175 square miles — From "Commerce of the Ports of the World," by R. A. C. Smith, New York City Commissioner of Docks. * Through typographical error this item was given as 227 miles in the authority quoted; the exact figure is 102.58 miles. The correction of this figure involved the change of the item immediately above it from 290 miles to 166 miles. ** This figure includes the wall along the Speedway and other non-commercial development ;the total City waterfront improved with wharfage is 224 miles. (Note 18) Appropriations for the Improvement of the Rivers and Harbors of the United States from the Foundation of the Government up to June 30, 1913 Following is a careful compilation made up from data in the possession of the United States Government, showing the amount of the appropriations for the improvement of the rivers and harbors of the United States, by the Congress of the United States, from the foundation of the Government tip to June 30, 1913, and such other contributions as are of record as having been made by States, municipalities, individuals and private interests for the same purpose: Total appropriations by United States for rivers and harbors to June 30, 1912 $697,311,347.06 River and Harbor Act, July 25, 1912 31,059,370.50 Appropriations, Sundry Civil Act, August 24, 1912 9,500,250.00 River and Harbor Act, March 4, 1913 41,073,094.00 Appropriations, Sundry Civil Act, June 23, 1913 10,045,795.00 Deficiency Act, March 4, 1913 1,157.89 Permanent Annual Appropriations 297,600.00 Total $789,288,614.45 96 THE STATISTICAL APPENDIX Individual appropriations, care of canals, removing sunken vessels, etc $2,338,115.74 Eelated expenditures, California Debris Commission, preven- tion of deposit in New York Harbor, International Water- wavs Commission, engineer school for river and harbor instruction 217,010.00 The above statistics show a grand total of expenditures for rivers and harbors and related work from the earliest operations of tlie Government up to the present time of $791,843,740.19. This, of course, takes no account of appropriations for Panama Canal, upon which there had been expended up to December 31, 1913, a total of $314,726,717.73. Amounts Expended by the United Stat Channels in the Harbor of New York Same Project es upon Improvement of and for Maintenance of From Estab- During Two lislunent of Fiscal Years Government Ending June until June 30, 30, 1913 1911 Arthur Kill, between Staten Island and New Jersey, and channel north of Shooters Island, between New York and New Jersev .$706,490.97 Bronx Eiver 29,000.00 Bronx River and East Chester Creek 73,598.68 Buttermilk Channel 630,024.51 Canarsie Bay 64,574.18 Conev Island Channel East Chester Creek 90,901.32 East River and Hell Gate 4,827,517.50 Flushing Bav 122,595.53 Gedney's Channel 200,000.00 Gowauus Bav 3,468,107.62 Harlem River 1,585,000.00 Hudson River Channel, New York Harbor Jamaica Bay 10,449,15 Newtown Creek 445,498.00 New York Harbor (including Ambrose Channel) 6,979,622.14 Sandy Hook Channel 78,883.20 Sheepshead Bay 26,000.00 Staten Island Channel, between New York and New Jersey 275,000.00 Staten Island Ice Breaker 19,482.20 Wallabout Channel 36,000.00 Westchester Creek 5,000.00 $152,038.35 15,639.48 14,806.07 53,395.00 27,781.49 309,477.97 12,124.25 409,542.88 118,639.33 2,826.69 68,461.98 26,661.65 ^383,511.69 i,442'..56 6,697.44 38,837.61 Total $19,673,745.00 $1,641,884.44 $19,673,745.00 1,641,884.44 Gross Total $21,315,639.44 Deduct amount ' ' reimbursable ' ' 14,000.09 Net Total $21,301,639.35 Percentage of total amount appropriated by United States for Rivers and Harbors Improvements to June 30, 1913 2.68 — From "Commerce of the Ports of the World," by R. A. C. Smith, New York City Commissioner of Docks. *$14,000.09 "reimbursable." 97 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK (Note 19) Foreign Arrivals of Vessels at New York Nationality Steamers Ships Barks Bri s rigs ScliGonGrs Total 1913 Total 1912 American 614 1 205 820 782 British 1,738 6 11 198 1,953 1,900 Norwegian .... 528 6 10 544 454 German 565 *8 " i 574 486 Italian 147 i 148 119 Austrian 63 63 66 Swedish 1 French 178 i 10 189 170 Belgian 40 40 32 Spanish 28 28 25 Dutch 156 156 157 Danish 82 82 60 Portuguese .... 5 Russian on 29 2 31 29 Argentine .... 2 2 Cuban 108 108 108 Brazilian 9 9 12 Other 12 7 19 35 Total, 1913 .... Total, 1912 .... Total, 1911 .... Total, 1910 .... 4,297 3,905 4,020 3,879 21 10 11 14 37 48 62 47 2 2 411 478 406 558 4,766 4,441 4,501 4,500 4,441 4,501 4,500 4,502 ♦Motor ships. Domestic Arrivals at New York From Eastern Ports Months Steamers Ships Barks Brigs Schooners Total 1913 Total 1912 January 50 79 129 101 February 44 31 75 69 March 37 33 70 163 April 43 2 143 188 212 May 48 133 181 192 June 61 166 227 240 July 75 156 231 220 August 73 142 215 225 September .... 70 153 223 203 October 48 107 155 221 November .... 50 153 203 178 December .... 45 92 137 146 Total, 1913 . . . . Total, 1912 .... Total, 1911 .... Total, 1910 .... 644 700 653 602 i 1 2 1 1 3 1,388 1,468 1,534 1,717 2,034 4,170 2,189 2,322 2,170 2,189 2.322 2,937 98 THE STATISTICAL APPENDIX From Southern Ports Months Steamers onips Barks Bngs bcnooners ■ Total 1913 Total 1912 January 165 2 49 216 220 February 150 55 205 219 March 164 1 82 247 228 April 162 68 230 246 May 164 2 85 251 254 June 178 1 69 248 235 July 182 2 78 262 254 August 170 1 60 231 268 September .... 182 1 59 242 241 October ioD 1 1 oD COL November .... 173 45 218 235 December .... 173 i 78 252 261 Total, 1913 .... Total, 1912 .... Total, ]911 . . . . Total, 1910 .... 2,049 2,020 1,969 1,978 2 12 11 1-i 25 793 877 1,046 J, 287 2,854 3,908 3,029 3,292 2,908 3,029 3,292 3,321 — From Annual Statistical Report of the New York Produce Exchange (1913). (Note 20) Table Showing Percentages of Growth of Foreign Commerce at Leading United States Ports 1871 to 1880 over 1881 to 1890 over 1891 to 1900 over 1901 to 1910 over 1911 to 1913 over 1861 to 1870 187 1 to 1880 1881 to 1890 1891 to 1900 1901 to 1910 Ports Percentages of Percentages of Percentages of Percentages of Percentages of (0 in CO m 1 'a 3 'a o "ft, 3 o "a. 3 o a 3 o o H 1 X W H 6 X H e w H 6 X W H New York . . . 57.1 95.8 71.8 28.8 26.0 27.6 6.4 16.9 10.9 42.3 44.8 43.4 38.8 46.1 42.9 Boston 45.7 148.5 73.9 21.4 88.9 47.5 7.5 54.2 31.6 41.2 «1.9 15.2 35.3 *26.4 4.6 New Orleans . . 92.8 121.6 116.9 *1.5.3 9.4 5.8 44.7 11.6 15.:', rjs.T 55.2 65.8 101.6 9.2 27.1 Galveston . . . 520.2 359.1 370.0 *4.3 36.1 33.8 *18.3 159.4 lis. 'J •Ji:;.} I'.M.O 194.5 54.1 59.8 59.7 Philadelphia . . 104.8 191.3 146.4 63.0 12.2 36.2 31.1 38.4 34.6 (■)2.5 44.7 36.1 *11.6 9.4 Baltimore . . . 147.0 254.4 199.0 *43.4 50.3 12.1 2.2 69.4 65.4 92.'4 3.8 15.8 16.3 8.5 10.3 •Decline. — From "Commerce of the Ports of the World," by R. A. C. Smith, New York City Commissioner of Docks. 60% 50% 405 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1680 1885 I890 1895 1900 1805 1910 1915 Variation in New York's percentage of the total Foreign Commerce of the United States. 99 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK (Note 21) Tonnage of Vessels in Foreign Trade that Entered at Leading United States Ports by Single Years, from 1830 to 1880, and Average Annual Tonnage by Decades, from 1881 to 1913 New York, N. Y. Entered Tons 305,181 547,694 1,145,831 1,973,812 3,093,186 7,611,282 6,181,931 7,241,695 10,516,817 13,855,625 27.7 23.9 30.5 39.4 49.0 49.9 45.6 38.3 38.8 39.5 Philadelphia, Pa. Entered Tons 77,016 39,070 132,370 182,162 300,006 1,391,312 1,093,541 1,566,639 2,112,097 2,752,350 Boston, Mass. Entered Tons 113,238 291,323 478,859 718,587 793,927 1,347,447 1,327,234 1,816,206 2,761,388 2,951,322 % 10.3 12.7 12.8 14.3 12.6 8.8 9.8 9.6 10.1 8.4 New Orleans, La. Entered Tons 349,949 632,398 458,447 760,910 759,458 1,224,376 1,789,421 2,259,656 9.3 12.6 7.3 5.0 5.6 6.4 6.6 6.4 Baltimore, Md. Entered Tons 61,121 89,748 99,588 186,417 272,290 1,502,713 744,153 1,115,134 1,377,365 1,355,106 -From " Commerce of the Ports of the World," by R. A. C. Smith, New York City Commissioner of Docks. (Note 22) Value of Imports and Exports of Merchandise at Leading United States Ports by Decades Fiscal Year Ports Average Annual Value of Imports Per Cent Average Annual Value of Exports Per Cent Average Annual Value of Imports and Exports Per Cent 1861-70 New York $227,408,703 64.8 1137,648,066 34.5 1365,056,769 48.7 Boston 35,967,959 10.2 13,397,()28 3.3 49,365,587 6.5 New Orleans 6,884,028 1.9 35,695,965 8.9 42,579,9! »3 5.7 Philadelphia 11,516,632 3.2 10,697,226 2.() 22,213,858 3.0 Baltimore 9,6<)1,37() 2.7 9,(>36,169 2.4 19,327,539 2.5 Galveston 221,405 .0() 3,133,547 .8 3,354,952 0.4 1871-80 New York 357,430,909 66.7 269,565,783 45.7 626,996,692 55.7 New Orleans 13,244,561 2.4 79,120,011 13.4 92,364,572 8.2 Boston 52,421,466 9.7 33,422,197 5.6 85,843,663 7.6 Baltimore 23,542,156 4.4 34,151,144 5.2 57,()93,300 5.0 Philadelphia 23,584,576 4.4 31,162,248 5.7 54,746,S24 5.0 Galveston 1,383,235 2 14,387,692 2.4 15,770,927 1.4 1881-90 New York 4()0,475,898 6().3 339,724,966 44.4 800,200,8()4 55.1 Boston 63,()37,221 9.2 ()3,135,()71 8.2 126,772,81)2 8.6 New Orleans 11,195,278 86,612,929 11.2 97,S( )8,207 6.7 Philadelphia 38,478,519 5.5 36,093,()16 4.7 74,572,135 5.2 Baltimore 13,333,911 1.9 51,334,249 6.6 64,()(;s,l()0 4.4 Galveston 1,322,914 .1 19,()82,955 2.4 21,005,869 1.4 1891-00 New York 490,142,932 64.2 397,291,510 3S.8 887,434,442 49.6 Boston 6S,4(').",,638 <).() {>7,3()( ),6()8 9.7 165,824,306 9.3 New Orleans 1(),207,859 2.1 !)(),73( ),( K )5 9.5 112,!)37,864 6.3 Baltimore 13,()30,713 1.7 86,S<)8,8( )8 S.4 1 00,52! »,521 5.7 Philadelphia 50,450,865 6.4 49,963,545 4.7 10( 1,414,410 5.6 Galveston 1,080,312 .1 51,069,128 4.7 52,149,440 2.8 100 THE STATISTICAL APPENDIX Value of Imports and Exports of Merchandise at Leading United States Ports by Decades— Continued Per Cent A\"erage Annual Value of Imports and Exports rev Cent 35.5 1,272,997,762 45.9 5.8 192,091,896 7.0 9.3 187,252,261 6.8 9.3 153,567,<)82 5.4 5.0 145,34n,2S4 5.2 5.6 116,449,592 4.2 37.4 1,809,358,239 46.2 10.6 245,256,737 6.2 7.2 238,72!),254 6.0 ■ 3.1 201,089,605 5.4 3.2 159,071,988 4.0 4.3 128,438,067 3.4 Ports New York Boston New Orleans Galveston Philadelphia Baltimore New York Galveston New Orleans Boston Philadelphia Baltimore Average Annual Value of Imports 697,726,032 96,669,251 37,079,867 3,385,920 64,125,104 26,231,394 9(58,542,546 5,220,447 74,737,094 l;50,S2!l,!)()9 87,391,503 30,502,680 Per Cent 60.5 8.3 3.1 .2 5.5 2.2 58.1 •> 4.4 7.6 5.3 2.1 Average Annual Value of Exports 575,271,730 95,422,645 150,172,374 150,182,062 81,215,180 90,218,198 840,815,693 240,036,290 163,992,160 70,259,636 71,780,485 97,935,387 ■From "Commerce of the Ports of the World," by R. A. C. Smith, New York City Commissioner of Docks. (Note 23) Value of Imports and Exports and Net Tonnage of Vessels that Entered and Cleared in Foreign Trade at the Four Prin= cipal Seaports of the World Year 1910 1909 1909 1909 1911 1910 1910 1910 1912 1911 1911 1911 1913 1912 1912 1912 Values of Imports $935,990,956 1,000,746,471 723,146,084 810,179,970 881,592,689 1,110,828,205 828,620,152 872,629,975 975,744,320 1,119,238,957 962,925,352 778,225,287 1,048,290,629 1,096,550,183 1,164,769,445 872,320,787 Values of Exports $651,986,356 569,256,326 728,131,030 578,343,753 Total $1,587,977,314 1,570,002,792 1,451,277,114 1,388,523,723 772,552,449 1,654,145,138 643,014,124 1,753,842,32<) 829,250,836 1,657,870,988 661,480,352 1,534,110,327 817,945,803 1,793,690,123 672,618,684 1,791,857,641 711,261,824 859,055,190 917,935,988 864,229,672 702,161,337 944,662,492 1,674,187,176 1,637,280,447 1,966,326,617 1,960,779,855 1,866,930,782 1,816,983,279 Net Tonnage of Vessels Entered 13,042,318 11,605,698 7,747,994 11,061,041 13,428,950 12,154,162 7,588,653 11,417,773 13,673,765 11,973,249 11,830,949 7,887,719 14,464,161 13,567,913 10,800,716 7,253,016 — From " Commerce of the Ports of the World," by R. A. C. Smith, New York City Commissioner of Docks. 101 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK (Note 24) World's Merchant Marine Table showing increase in size of vessels and growth of steam tonnage (Vessels of over 100 tons) Per cent. 22 Years. Increase -f Decrease — —6.1 + 101.3 +211.9 —55.2 Number of Vessels Total, Tonnage Total, Steam Gross Tons, Sail Net Tons, 1890 32,298 22,151,651 12,985,372 9,166,279 1912 30,316 44,600,677 40,518,177 4,082,500 Merchant Marine of United States Table showing increase in size of vessels and growth of steam tonnage (Vessels of over 100 tons) Per cent 22 Years, Increase + 1890 1912 Decrease- Number of Vessels Total, 23,467 3,442 —85.3 Tonnage Total, 4,424,497 5,258,487 +18.8 Steam Gross Tons, 1,859,088 4,107,849 +120.9 Sail Net Tons, 2,565,409 1,150,638 —55.1 In 1890 the United States had 20 per cent of the world's shipping ton- nage. In 1912 its share was 11.7 per cent. — From "Commerce of the Ports of the World," by R. A. C. Smith, New York City Commissioner of Docks. (Note 25) The Merchants' Association upon New York's "Wasteful" Policy The commerce of the Port has far outgrown its facilities. The City is constantly compelled to deny applications for dock facilities, thus driving commerce to other ports. Expenditures by the City made for docks and harbors are paying divi- dends into the City treasury, sometimes as high as seventeen per cent upon the investment. Such expenditures are not counted in estimating the margin of the City's borrowing capacity above the Constitutional limit. Owing to the lack of a comprehensive plan which shall provide for the future, much of the waterfront development work already done has been wasteful. Moreover, a considerable number of the City's 232 piers are occu- pied by railroads because the creation of direct connections between the rail and water has been neglected. While other ports are eagerly competing for commerce. New York hitherto has been actually turning commerce away because it has lacked the necessary wharf and dock facilities. — From "Greater New York," February 9, 1914, OflS.cial Bulletin of the Merchants' Association of New York. 102 THE STATISTICAL APPENDIX (Note 26) Requirements of Commerce, The first requirement of a great port like New York is ample space for the accommodation of water carriers, in close relation to railroads, warehouses and the active business district of the City. To understand this feature a knowledge is necessary of the extent and usage of the available water frontage near the commercial section of Man- hattan Island, as given in the following table. It will thus be seen that foreign and domestic steamship lines each have but 13 per cent of the available river frontage; whereas the railroads utilize 21 per cent for the reception and delivery of freight, and with existing methods of distribution will need a larger percentage in the future to accom- modate their growing traflfic. The canal interests w^ill also require more space upon the completion of the Erie Canal enlargement. With the available water frontage on the commercial portion of Man- hattan Island incapable of enlargement, and with an urgent demand by the water carriers for more room, it is apparent that some method of land car- riage must be devised that will decrease rather than increase the need for railroad space on the waterfront. The evidence given before the New York Commerce Commission in 1900 shows conclusively that something must be done to enlarge the waterfront facilities of Manhattan Island if the Port is to maintain its pre-eminence. A knowledge of the volume and cost of handling trafl&c on Manhattan Island is essential to an intelligent conclusion. The tonnage that more vitally affects the subject under discussion is the part that requires draying on the City streets. From the carriers and other authoritative sources the following information has been obtained, applicable to the years 1906-1907 : Approximate Tonnages of the Principal Rail and Water Carriers Requiring Drayage in Manhattan Merchandise Coal Total Carriers (Tons) (Tons) (Tons) Railroads: Rail delivery 2,000,000 Water delivery . . 7,800,000 9,800,000 4,000,000 13,800,000 North River south East River south User of 72nd St. of 44th St. Totals, No. Lineal ft. % No. Lineal ft. % No. Lin. ft. % Railroads, exclusive of Ferries 8 9,460 30 6 2,680 10 14 12,140 21 Foreign Steamships. 12 7,446 23 1 137 i/o 13 7,583 13 Coastwise, River and Sound Lines 16 4,084 13 7 3,208 12 23 7,292 121/2 Ferries 10 2,132 7 12 3,010 11 22 5,142 9 Municipal Purposes. 5 1,962 6 10 2,415 9 15 4,377 7% Miscellaneous Pur- poses 6,451 21 . . 15,620 57^2 • • 22,071 37 Totals 31,535 100 27,070 100 58,605 100 103 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK Merchandise Coal Total Carriers (Tons) (Tons) (Tons) Foreign Steamship Lines: Terminating on Manhat- tan Island 1,400,000 Terminating in New Jer- sey 800,000 2,200,000 2,200,000 Coastwise Lines (incomplete) 2,900,000 2,900,000 River and Sound Lines (incomplete) . . 1,300,000 1,300,000 Irregular Lines (incomplete) 3,000,000 3,000,000 Totals 19,200,000 4,000,000 23,200,000 The cost of handling this tonnage is of vital importance. With the exception of the portion of the New York Central tonnage that is drayed to and from its rail termini on Manhattan Island, all freight carried by the rail- roads requires lighterage, and break of bulk on the waterfront. The cost of the lighterage in connection with this service was investigated by the New York Commerce Commission in 1900. and was found to widely vary, depend- ing on the class of freight, the method of water transportation and the places of distribution. The average result, however, including interest, deprecia- tion, taxes, and insurance on plant and structures, and cost of wages and supplies, was shown to vary from 83 cents to 88 cents per ton. No conclusive evidence was produced as to terminal costs on both sides of the river, includ- ing rentals, handling of freight and similar items; but data have been obtained from other authoritative sources. The cost of cartage on the City streets is found to vary, depending on the length of haul and the character of freight. For certain commodities it is as low as 60 cents per ton, and for others as high as $1.25 or more per ton. An average of 80 cents per ton is considered to be a conservative figure. The following estimates of the cost of handling freight from the out- lying yards of the railroad companies west of Bergen Hill, New Jersey, and 60th Street, New York, to the shipper, are believed to be low rather than high: Railroad Merchandise: Per Ton Terminal costs on the New Jersev side of North River and at Six- tieth Street I Lighterage or equivalent charges Terminal cost on waterfront, Manhattan Island Cost to railroads Cartage defrayed by shippers Total cost from outlying yards to sliippers $2.25 Coal: Handling, storage and lighterage or ferriage $0.40 Cartage .60 Total $1.00 Steamship Merchandise: Cartage $0.80 Based on these figures the approximate annual terminal charges at Man- hattan Island for the tonnages handled by the principal carriers, exclusive of the large traffic of the minor carriers, are: Per Annum 9,800,000 tons at $2.25 $22,050,000 9,400,000 tons at .80 7,520,000 4,000,000 tons at 1.00 4,000,000 23,200,000 tons $33,570,000 104 THE STATISTICAL APPENDIX In addition to the tonnage passing between the carriers and the shippers, there is a large volume of business that is redistributed from manufactories and warehouses to consumers. Owing to the time required to obtain reliable information on this feature, no attempt has been made to include it in this report; but in seeking for a solution of the freight problem the necessity for more economical and expeditious methods of subdistribution should not be forgotten. One of the handicaps of the commerce of the Port is the delay in deliv- eries, due to the time taken for the lighterage of freight to and from the Island, and the interruptions from fogs and snow storms. Under favorable conditions the minimum time required for the transfer of freight from the New Jersey side of the North Kiver to the consignee on the Island is from three to six hours. An improved method of freight distribution should seek to reduce this time. The growing importance of the Port, as testified to before the New York Commerce Commission of 1900, is causing congestion of trafldc in the Harbor to such a degree that the time is not far distant when this will become a serious disadvantage, and, therefore, should have consideration in determining what shall be done to improve the situation. The inaccessibility of the waterfront to the general public has a retard- ing effect uj3on its growth, more particularly along the East River, where rapid transit facilities are so far removed as to discourage the selection of that side of the Island for passenger boat traffic. From the standpoint of commerce, improved passenger transportation methods should be considered in conjunction with a study of the freight problem. To summarize, the commerce of the Port of New York requires a solution of the freight problem that will abolish change of bulk on the waterfront, and thus afford space for the expansion of steamship traffic; expedite deliveries; facilitate interchange of freight; reduce harbor congestion; improve acces- sibility of the waterfront to the public; and decrease costs of freight dis- tribution and subdistribution. — Eroni Report submitted to the Eirst District by the Amsterdam Corporation, September 25, 1908. (Note 27) New York City's Greatness and Its Needs At this time, when some of our fellow citizens in other ports of the United States are pleased to speak of the Empire State of New York as "Darkest America," it may be well for us, like Livingston and Stanley, to make a trip of exploration and discovery, to find out something about this "Darkest America." We learn at the outset that among all the States she is first in population, first in commerce, first in manufactures, first in banking and first in transportation by rail and water. Moreover, she lias held this pre-eminence for many years. She took the lead in population in 1810. She became first in industry in 1820. She had been easily first in banking since 1837. She has always been a leader in promoting transportation facilities. Her commerce has exceeded that of all competitors for more than a century. This supremacy is due chiefly to water. With one of the three or four most spacious harbors in the world — and the one which can be most inex- pensively maintained and developed for the expanding needs of modern shipping, with lakes and rivers supplying unequalled sources of transportation and power, with a canal system which, built, preserved and enlarged en- tirely at the expense of the State, without outside aid, has linked the Mis- sissippi Valley wath the Atlantic Ocean, it was inevitable that a vast popu- lation should gather around the w^aterways of New York, that commerce and industry should thrive, that over 8,000 miles of railway should be built within our boundaries, and that every important Eastern trunk line should expend millions in building terminals in and around our great harbor. When, 105 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK several years ago, I asked President Cassatt why it was that the Pennsyl- vania Railroad was spending $125,000,000 in order to get into New York he replied by asking me what 1 thought the Pennsylvania system would amount to without a terminal there. The Danger from Competition In like manner, I might ask you what the State of New York would amount to with her big harhors closed and the Hudson dried up. She might be a Vermont or a New Hampshire, but she would not be the Empire State. But there are in the United States other harbors besides that of New Y'ork, other lakes besides Erie, other rivers besides the Hudson, other canals besides the Erie and the Champlaiu. We have been greatly blessed in our geographical position, but we have no monopoly. Never before In the history of this country has there been so keen a competition between ports, between States and between cities as there is at this time for commerce and manu- facturing. This State and urban competition is being scientifically organized. Governmental forces uniting with commercial associations to promote the business of different sections and cities. It is unnecessary to go into the details of the booming and advertising with which much of this competition is accompanied. SuflSlce to say that each locality is putting forth every effort to secure its full share — and a little more — of the trade of the country. As the biggest State and the biggest City of them all, the State and City of New Y'ork must necessarily meet this competition at every point of the compass. It has been computed that an expenditure of $1,000,000,009 is involved in projected port improvements throughout the world. Boston, Philadelphia, New Orleans, Montreal, San Francisco, Seattle, Los Angeles and other cities are making extensive and expensive plans for new terminal facilities so as to adapt their harbors to the expanding units of international and domestic commerce, which it is expected is to be vastly increased by the opening of the Panama Canal. New York City should spend $60,000,000 in harbor and dock improvements, and would have been able at once to plan on that scale of development if she had not taxed her resources to the utmost to build subways. Now, in this competition of section with section and city with city, it is important for us to consider how the State and the City of New York stand. We cannot escape from the problems which this competition thrusts upon us. We may deplore certain features of it, and we may be anxious lest the spirit of socialism which it involves may work harm. But we must rec- ognize that on the whole this competition, by inspiring new civic enterprise in different parts of the country, will, in the final results, promote the pros- perity of all the country. New York City's Advantages We in New Y'ork have held our own very well during the past ten years or so. Taking the figures of the 1910 census and comparing them with those of 1900, we find that in population the State of New York has expanded over 25 per cent in ten years against 21 per cent in the preceding decade. She has grown even faster than the country as a whole, and now holds one- tenth of all the people in the United States. In manufacturing the record shows that while in 1849 our share of the total industry of the United States was 23.3 per cent, in 1910 it was 16.3 per cent. In the five years from 1904 to 1909 our number of manufacturing establishments increased 20 per cent, against 24.2 per cent in the country as a whole, the capital invested 36.8 per cent against 45.4, and the value of products 35.4 per cent against 39.7. While this shows that our increase is not as large as the rest of the countr)', the exhibit is after all gratifying because, in spite of the tremendous competition to which we are subject and the enormous economic changes which are constantly going on, we have made important gains. In foreign commerce the port of New Y''ork, in the fiscal year 1912, enjoyed 46.99 per cent of the country's total against 46.12 per cent in 1911. 106 THE STATISTICAL APPENDIX The ten-year average, however, was 47,85 per cent. In the ten years from 1902 to 1912 our share of the nation's merchandise imports declined from 61.9 per cent to 59.0 per cent, and of merchandise exports its share increased from 35.5 to 37.4 per cent. So we are holding our own very well in foreign commerce. Look at the statistics of bank clearings, which are probably the best test we possess of the volume of total business transactions. In 1912 New York State's share of the total bank clearings of the United States was nearly 59 per cent, a splendid showing. But while in the ten years from 1902 to 1912 the bank clearings in the City of New York increased over 29 per cent, the gain in the rest of the country was over 74 per cent. This showing is, however, complicated by the effect upon the figures of the specu- lative depression of the past decade, which is chiefly felt in the financial center. As citizens of the State of New York it seems to me that we should consider carefully the significance of these figures. How to Maintain Leadership Now, of course, we don 't want in the State of New York a monopoly of the commerce and trade of the United States; nor do we want the City of New York to become a great anaconda of a city, throwing its power around and squeezing the life out of the rest of the country. We believe in the motto, "Live and let live." We do not adopt that kind of competition that uses one 's own strength to destroy others. But, while holding this spirit of good will toward our competitors, it must not be expected that we are going to stand still and permit our God- given advantages of commerce to be snatched away by them. Our problem is not to make war upon our neighbors but to defend and maintain and pro- mote the supreme interests committed to our hands. Thus far we have maintained our leadership for a hundred years. That superiority is not yet threatened. But the point I am endeavoring to impress upon your minds is that of the folly and danger of supposing that our position is impregnable and that we need pay no attention to the strenuous endeavors of our sister States and cities. Even Gibraltar could be taken. Every busi- ness man knows that the moment he stops striving for more trade, that moment marks the beginning of his decline. What is true of individuals is also true of States and cities. We must go ahead or fall behind. There is no safety in standing still. If New York is to move forward, if she is to maintain her splendid posi- tion of commercial, financial and industrial leadership in this country, keep- ing pace in every decade with the material progress of the whole country, then it is imperative that every interest in the State should move in unison to that end. We should strive to eliminate every vestige of offensive section- alism within the State This road to the sea is the Ambrose Channel. This magnificent road connecting the docks of the City with the deep water of the Atlantic Ocean, is 40 feet deep at mean low water and 1,000 feet wide. It is as much a thor- oughfare as any built upon land. Its limits are well defined, and there are trafiic rules to govern the ships that may pass through it. This is the broad avenue to the sea in which every great steamer must travel. And it is just as important to the farmer in Sullivan or Ulster counties that there should be this Ambrose Channel as it is to any inhabitant of the City. If that channel were closed and the steamers of big construction were thereby prevented from entering New York Harbor, there is not a citizen of the whole State who would not suffer loss. The blow to the commerce and the trade of the State would be incalculable. The loss would be a National calamity. The develop- ment of the port and terminal facilities of the City of New York is as much the interest of the interior of the State as it is of Manhattan Island. — Ex- tracts from a speech by Sereno S. Pratt (Secretary of the New York Chamber of Commerce), before The New York Waterways Association, Oct. 31, 1913. 107 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK (Note 28) New York's Growth Depends Upon Its Commerce The growth of the City of New York depends almost entirely upon com- merce, including manufactures, and the people who conduct such commerce and manufactures constitute on the one hand a steady and increasing market for the products of the State, and on the other hand, supply the force which, through the exercise of skill, invention, thought and activity, sends into the non-urban portion of the State an increasing number of variety of manu- factured products and appliances, to minister to the necessity, the comfort and the luxury of those who pay for such necessities, comforts and luxuries by the products of the soil New York City must either continue to expand or commence to contract. It cannot continue to expand unless occupation is provided for those who are to come, and occupation is almost absolutely dependent upon transporta- tion. This question of transportation is divided into questions of land and water transportation, and the question of water transportation is again di- vided into those of trans- Atlantic, coastal and inland. There is no desire to minimize or overlook the importance of any of these branches; but the point is, that all of these facilities may be constantly improved to meet the con- stantly increasing requirements of the constantly increasing population; and, unless it is done, the City loses value as a market for the products of the country, and loses efficiency as a producer of improved and manufactured products. — From paper by Ex-Congressman William Stiles Bennet, read before the New York Waterways Association, Oct. 30, 1913, (Note 29) "Subsidizing Foreign Steamships" MR. SILLECK (Brooklyn): I don't want this Convention to go home with the idea that New York City is a sleepy town and behind the times. We have located down there the John M. Robbins Dry Dock and Repair Yard, a corporation capitalized at $10,000,000, and to my certain knowledge for the last five years they have been trying to make connection with the various steamships, that if they would agree to give them a thousand-foot dry dock and a sufficient amount of business annually, they would build that dock. And they are ready to-day, with the Clyde interests behind them, to make that proposition good, but the foreign steamships in New York Harbor have for years and years had their docking facilities for a great deal less than cost. They are renting the Chelsea piers at about 2 per cent of cost. The State is spending $140,000,000 to build a Barge Canal; the United States Government is spending $200,000,000 for the Panama Canal, and the larger per cent of that business will center in New York Harbor, and why New York City, or New York City's interests should sell the dockage privi- lege to foreign steamship company at less than cost, in other words, prac- tically subsidizing foreign steamships to come into our harbor and do its business, we can't understand. New York's foreign commerce is over $2,- 000,000,000 annually. The foreign commerce of Boston is inside of $200,- 000,000 and the great steamships like the eight or nine hundred foot vessels would have to lay up in Boston three or four weeks to get a cargo, and they could get a cargo every twenty-four hours in New York. But we have live, active business men who are ready to do business the world over and will invest tliree or four or five or ten million dollars to build docks, but they will not sell that product at less than cost, and I, as a citizen of the City of New York and a taxpayer of the City of New York, do object most decidedly to spending public money and then subsidize for- eign steamships which carry freight out and into our great harbor. — From proceedings of the New York State Waterways Association, Oct. 31, 1913. 108 THE STATISTICAL APPENDIX (Note 30) Why Trade is Diverted to Competing Ports That the waterfront problem of Manhattan requires a remedy is strik- ingly shown in the Eej)ort of the Xew York Commerce Commission in 1900. Of the 11 miles of frontage adjacent to the commercial sections of the Island, only 1^2 miles are available for foreign steamships, and a similar amount for the coastwise, river and Sound traffic. On the other hand, the railroads, ex- clusive of ferries, utilize nearly 2\i> miles of this limited frontage, with a constantly increasing demand for more. The result of this inadequate pro- vision for water-borne commerce is the diversion of trade to competing ports, and to the outlying jjortions of the Port of New York, from which the cost of cartage to Manhattan is excessive. That conditions are growing no better is shown by recent complaints by commercial interests of dwindling profits in, for instance, the tea trade, caused by the inability of ships plying between this Port and the Orient to find space for unloading their valuable cargoes, and their consequent banishment to Staten Island, from whence the extra cost of cartage is stated to be $2.20 per ton. Perhaps the best evidence of unsatisfied demands for piers is the com- petition of both rail and water carriers for a space that is insufficient for the use of all. In fact, these ol)jectionable conditions will be intensified if the final solution of the West Side problem of the Xew York Central & Hudson River Railroad is accomplished in a way that will necessitate the acquisition by that company of additional piers in the vicinity of St. John's Park to replace the existing inland facilities. It therefore seenis proper to conclude that there is an urgent demaud for some remedy that will minimize the need of the railroads for this expen- sive and restricted waterfront for the trans-shipment of freight between ear and truck, so that this space may be devoted to the expanding needs of the water carriers. — From Brief of Amsterdam Corporation, by William J. Wilgus (formerly Vice-President of the New York Central & Hudson River Railroad). miles at the widest, and has an area of over eight square miles. The first half mile of this new dock system is already in commission, and though not quite finished, it is crowded with ships and barges, serving to its limit even before sheds and tracks can be supplied. It is the plan now to begin construction on the next section, con- sisting of two slips and a turning basin, just as soon as this first section is completed. It is estimated that the entire group of new docks will cost $55,000,000, exclusive of the river diversion, and will give Antwerp a total of 38 miles of quay, and five miles of quiet anchorage in the old bed of the Schelde. — From Report of Chicago Harbor Commission, 1909. (Note 38) Overcoming Obstacles Abroad The Port of London . . . The very causes that led to London's one-time supremacy finally led to her downfall, in the matter of commercial and maritime su- premacy. So long had she reigned in the world of shipping and transship- ping, that she became old, and her docks and warehouses and her facilities became antiquated, while her new-old rivals, . . . took the lead in mod- ernizing their ports and in recapturing the trade that they had lost three cen- turies ago. . . . If it shall be that London, which has but just fallen from her exalted first rank, shall reassert herself, devoting her energies and her resources to such improvements in her port as the magnitude of its neces- sities justify, it wovild not require a prophet to forecast the sequel.* * Announcement was made in the press, January 27, 1911, that the Port of London authority is about to undertake improvements in the Thames from Lon- don Bridg-e to Tilbiiry, in the construction of new basins with an aggregate area of 329 acres all told and tlie enlarg-ement of existing: basins, all at an expense of about $70,000,000. The Port of Liverpool Liverpool is the second largest port of Great Britain and has for genera- tions been notable for the ability and efficiency of its management. The Mersey Docks and Harbor Board, created by Act of Parliament in 1857, is regarded as the most successful board, from every point of view, that is in control of a British port. The method of electing members to it and the composition of the membership has long been regarded as the British stand- ard. No obstacles seem too great for it to overcome, nor any undertaking too costly if it is the judgment of the Board that Liverpool requires it. It has always been in the lead in its ability to accommodate any vessel, whatever her size, and in this respect her facilities have always been ahead of the demand. Explaining and discussing the tremendous new work under way at Ant- werp, Mr. Desmond Fitzgerald, of Boston, who was greatly impressed with the extent and character of the work, no less than with the rapid growth of the Port's traffic, in part says: 114 THE STATISTICAL APPENDIX '*It may be foolish to spend the time in designing such an ambitious scheme, which may be greatly modified as conditions change, or, in fact, which may never be built at all. But a little reflection will, I think, show that this is not the case. Engineers who have charge of the devel- opment of large dock systems have learned by experience the great cost of acquiring property for building new works where the land has not previously been set aside for that purpose. They have also learned that however large the scale on which they have built in the past, business has outstripped their caution, with the result that systems developed by piece- meal have lacked harmony and efficiency. Besides these considerations, there is always a keen rivalry between the different ports competing for the world 's commerce, and it wouM not look well for any of the ports to be behind the others in its plans for the future. Thus we find at Havre, Antwerp, Bremen, Eotterdam and Hamburg very large plans to provide for the growth of trade." The same is true of the Port of Liverpool, which so steadily advances in its new construction work as not to be compelled to undertake very large enterprises at one time; and there is but little doubt that London is on the eve of larger developments under its new Port authority. With all of these the Port of Antwerp is not only holding its own, but is valiantly at work providing extensions that shall meet every possible requirement, and in this the State is backing up the Port without stint. If the planning and providing of the amplest facilities, in the way of basins, quays, sheds, warehouses, cranes, rail connections and connections between inland and ocean-going car- riers, at the minimum of cost to the users, can make of Antwerp the first port of the world, the people of that city and the people of Belgium will spare no expense to provide them. It may well be said that the Belgians are a wonderful people. The Port of Hamburg Hamburg is the greatest seaport of Europe. In many respects it is the greatest port in the world. In respect to the tonnage entering it, and the goods transshipped at its wharves, it is only exceeded by the Port of New York, But the distinction between Hamburg and New York is most marked. The State of Hamburg carved out of the river Elbe, some sixty-five miles from the sea, in a river of shifting sands and unreliable channel, a mag- nificent port, available for the greatest ships that float, with splendid wharves, unequalled warehouses, ample sheds, an array of cranes for the expeditious loading and discharging of vessels that are more numerous than is to be found anywhere else in the world, and the most efiicient rail connections with all of its wharves and the interior of EuiO})e. What Hamburg has achieved has been through the indomitable determi- nation of a patriotic, a wise and keenly interested citizenship. Hamburg has but to know the need in a matter of harbor development in order to furnish it. It has done everything for itself, nature having done almost nothing. It is these facts that command for Hamburg the admiration of the entire world — because of her incomparable port development in the face of seem- ingly irremediable adverse conditions. — From Report of Barge Canal Terminal Commission (1911). (Note 39) The Financial Situation The amount of money represented by modern port development, as near as can possibly be ascertained, is as follows: London $186,700,000 Liverpool 125,000,000 Manchester 90,000,000 Glasgow 40,000,000 Newcastle 80,000,000 115 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK Bristol 30,000,000 Cardifif 30,000,000 Antwerp 45,000,000 Hamburg 100,000,000 Rotterdam 33,000,000 Marseille 29,500,000 Havre 24,000,000 Montreal 10,000,000 The rate of interest paid by the port authorities on the money borrowed, sanctioned by corporation or State, varies from 2 14 to 4:% per cent. — From Report of Harbor Commissioners of Montreal, 1908. (Note 40) Why New York City Should Have a Free Port (Address of William Harris Douglas at the hearing given by the Foreign Trade Committee of the Merchants' Association, May 14, 1914) At the request of our Chairman, Mr. Fuller, and on behalf of the Foreign Trade Committee of the Merchants' Association, I have been requested to make a short statement in regard to ''Free Ports," what has been accom- plished by others in the past and what it is possible New York City might do for its own commercial advancement, if we should be able to establish a free zone along new and improved m.ethods, based on the experience of others. The "Free Port" or ''Free Zone" idea is generations old. At first it merely meant that a seaport or inland city desiring to increase its im- portance and attract business — in the one case shipping and merchandise combined, and in the case of inland places the trade of the surrounding territory and adjacent countries — allowed merchandise of all kinds to enter unrestricted, without payment of duty, and sales could be made without taxation in the public market places; but beyond what the port or city furnished in a general way there were no other advantages. Gradually, however, the idea was taken up on much broader lines, dock and storage facilities were provided, and many special improvements were created for the benefit of the trader. We will pass over the gradual advancement made and deal at once with the great port of Hamburg, which furnishes the most complete example of up-to-date methods and successful operation of the "Free Zone" of to-day. Even in the case of Hamburg, however, the growth has been grad- ual. The city, which lies some eighty-five miles up the Elbe, started first to improve the river by dredging to enable vessels of reasonable size to go from the seaboard to the city itself, and this improvement has gone steadily forward until to-day they have from thirty-five to forty feet depth of water, enabling vessels of the deepest draught to go up at high tide. The Germans then owned few vessels of their own, the carrying trade being largely in the hands of the English and the Dutch; but with wise foresight, they realized that if they could make their city attractive to shipping, and at the same time demonstrate to their own merchants that it was desirable to establish ocean trade routes as quickly as possible and upbuild their own shipping, they would be able largely to control the trade of Northern Europe; and further, that their port would be extensively used for transshipment purposes and vessels of other nations would call there on their trading voyages to and from the East, including China, Japan, India, the Straits Settlements, Australia, and other points of exploitation which were opening to the world's commerce. IK) THE STATISTICAL APPENDIX They saw plainly that only by these methods could they bring their city to the fore as a great shipping center. Antwerp, Bremen, Trieste, Stettin and other European cities were also striving for the trade. Gradually their accomplishments have borne out all their expectations. They have spent many millions of dollars improving their harbor, and have built great warehouses for the accommodation of goods which could be stored at a low cost, either to be sent to various ports of Europe or transshipped to foreign countries. They have provided the finest piers and basins possible for the accommodation of vessels, the newest system of loading and discharging has been introduced, dry docks of the highest type and workshops have been built, furnishing the means for repairs to be made at low cost; and they have opened up a large area for manufacturing purposes and for the sorting of goods. Their charges for all privileges are placed at the lowest basis consistent with a small return on the capital invested. The emigration trade has not been overlooked and special buildings have been provided where the emigrant can live from arrival until depar- ture at a low cost, or even without charge; so that Hamburg is now the most popular port for this purpose in Europe. Their merchants have thus succeeded not only in attracting vessels of other nations, but have created a shipping of their own, and to-day they are large owners of steamers and regular lines have been established to all the great trading ports of the world. These advantages and the regularity of sailings draw from all ports of Europe the export products which would undoubtedly go to other nearer seaport cities if the same advantages for quick transit to destination could be secured. Germany is a protective country and consequently Hamburg is not, in the true sense of the word, a ''Free Port"; but it has the "Free Zone" which takes in a large portion of the port itself. If foreign goods pass, however, from the "Zone," they then pay the same duty that they would have been charged if they had entered Germany from any other port. New York to-day, notwithstanding our enormous commerce, is prac- tically in the same position which Hamburg was in 100 years ago. We have no vessels of our own and are entirely dependent upon the shipping of other nations to bring the world's products to our City, or to take away the goods which are manufactured for export in our own sphere or which reach us from inland places. By reason of our enormous population and our natural advantages as a shipping port, we have up to the present been able, even without much of an effort on our part, to hold our commanding position as the port of entry and departure of a large percentage of the foreign trade of the United States. Aided by our splendid waterfront, the North and East rivers and their natural facilities for dock purposes, we have kept fairly up-to-date in this particular, but are sadly lacking in many other of the necessary and important shipping facilities which we have briefly enumerated as per- taining to Hamburg. What has been done by that port we can undoubt- edly do in our own City, and unquestionably reap equal, if not greater, advantages. The handling of the problem by us will be much easier than it was with them, and should be done at much less expense. The Changing Conditions of Commerce Conditions are changing rapidly. While circumstances have favored us thus far, we can no longer depend on good luck to keep us to the front, and our people must at once take action to protect their interests. The cities of Boston, Philadelphia, Savannah, Newport News, New Orleans, Montreal and others to the north are making great strides to our detriment, and several of them are spending large amounts of money to place them- selves in a position to rival us in advantages and shipping facilities. 117 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK The opening of the Panama Canal is to a large extent responsible for this activity". It will unquestionably bring to this country an expansion of shipping interests and a vast extension and increase in our foreign trade. There is no reason why we should not arouse ourselves to a realiza- tion of the situation so that we may place our port in a position that will enable us still to command a large share of America's foreign commerce. It is perfectly feasible to establish a ''Free Zone" so situated as to give us easy connection with all our trunk lines and afford opportunity for vessels entering our port to do so at a minimum of cost as compared with the charges they are called upon to pay to-day; and if this is done, large warehouses being built and all the other necessary advantages, as outlined, provided for, we shall reap benefits which will undoubtedly repay the cost to us very many times over. This can be done without in any way interfering with the trans- Atlantic or other established steamship lines which may still prefer in entering our port to load and discharge at their present wharves and under their present arrangements. In November, 1913, I prepared a paper on this subject, and in conclusion stated: Before we can decide definitely to advocate a "Free Zone" we must first determine whether we can gain sufficient advantage to warrant the expenditure. Will it be possible for us to obtain the many millions required to carry through the undertaking successfully? We must use wisdom in selecting the site, and a large area is necessary. Can we attract sufficient manufacturing plants to the ''Free Zone" to warrant this being a distinctive feature of the enterprise? Will it be possible by means of a "Free Zone" not only to attract foreign shipping, but to upbuild our own maritime interests? Are we willing, if the money is procurable, to expend it for the general benefit without looking for any large return, which would be difficult to obtain? The Necessity for Taking Action I then stated that these questions, answered in the affirmative, would unquestionably justify our City in taking action. Since that time I have given further thorough and careful study to the question, and the more light that it is possible to obtain and the more the matter is analyzed and looked into, the more necessary, advan- tageous and desirable appears to be the project. If others have made the unquestioned success which it has been clearly shown they have, there is no reason why we should not also succeed equally well. There only, therefore, remains one point — my second question — which deals with the money proposition and whether we can secure the necessary funds to put through the work. We cannot look to the National Gov- ernment except in a small degree, and will perhaps be satisfied if we secure their consent to undertake the work. It must, therefore, become a State and City enterprise, and largely the latter. We have undertaken many works for the benefit of our State calling for as large an expenditure of money, and there is no reason, therefore, why we should not succeed in securing the amount necessary. Our aim, if realized, will unquestionably give new life to our shipping and manufacturing interests. We shall become more than ever the "Metrop- olis" of the Western Hemisphere, and the greatest seaport, not alone of the United States, but of the entire world. Other nations are doing their utmost to retain their prominent position, and we must emulate their example or we shall unquestionably fall back in the struggle for commercial supremacy. Now is the time; New York City is the place. Let us hope that our merchants and our people generally will show themselves equal to the opportunity which presents itself. 118 THE STATISTICAL APPENDIX (Note 41) An Ideal Site for a Free Port I have had considerable experience in investigating free ports, or free areas in ports, and I believe the interior areas of Jamaica Bay would be admirably adapted to this important purpose. On the ground made by dredging channels of approach to these areas, islands of large extent could be made, on which industries of various kinds could be established, raw materials received free of duty, the materials worked into goods and the duty paid when sent away — all under the charge of United States Govern- ment inspectors, as in bond warehouses. Another important feature of all ports is the location of inflammables, and it is often difl&cult to find a suitable place where there is no danger to a crowded port. In the interior area of Jamaica Bay there are many marsh or shoal areas where large depots for inflammables could be con- veniently established, and where bulk oil, kerosene, naphtha, gasoline and other inflammable products could be deposited. — From a letter by Dr. Elmer L. Corthell. (Note 42) The Immediate Need For a Comprehensive Plan This Association, through its Committee on Harbor, Docks and Ter- minals, has recently given very careful consideration to the traflic, terminal and industrial conditions in and adjacent to this City. As a result of this study, the Association is of the opinion that immediate steps should be taken to promote the securing and adoption in the near future of a com- prehensive plan for the development of the Port of New York. The need of such a comprehensive plan rests primarily in the facts: A. That no general plan or movement has ever been made to utilize many acres of the Port that possess economic and physical advan- tages, and B. That the competition for sites within certain restricted areas has raised the value of the land, wharf and terminal sites to an amount where the interest and rental charges thereon are increasing the cost to the shipper and consumer beyond economical necessities; C. That the efforts of the authorities and private interests have here- tofore been directed solely toward the remedying of and planning for restricted areas which comprise only a few of the units of the entire Port problem. The ideal conditions for industrial development, especially in localities otherwise favored by nature like New York, are: a. Cheap lands for industrial sites and low rental charges; b. Close proximity and easy access to rail or water carriage; c. Eeasonable proximity to labor markets and homes, and easy access thereto for cartage; d. Readily and always obtainable food supplies with economical facili- ties for distribution. With perhaps one exception, in previous plans made for the ameliora- tion of specific localities, little or no attempt has been made to co-ordinate rail and water traffic, to minimize cartage, and no general application of economic engineering principles has been applied to the general terminal facilities and rail or water transportation interests. — Extract from a letter written by The Merchants' Association of New York, by W. A. Marble, President, to Mayor Mitchel. Greater New York,'' February 9, 1914.) 119 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK (Note 43) New York the Industrial Metropolis New York City is not only the leading city and the commercial center of the United States, but also the industrial metropolis, holding first place in the total value of manufactured products as well as in many individual industries. In 1909 the population of New York City was practically equal to that of the State of Ohio, and exceeded only by Pennsylvania, Illinois and New York itself, but the value of its manufactured products exceeded that reported by any State except Pennsylvania and New York. This pre- dominance in manufactures is closely connected with the abundant supply of labor, its large immigration population being in particular an influential factor in causing manufacturing enterprises to locate there. New York City is the chief center of trade between the United States and Europe, and also one of the principal distributing points for domestic trade. This commercial importance has also contributed to the high rank of the City in manufacturing industries and to making New York the financial center of the United States, thereby rendering it easy to obtain capital for the establishment and extension of such industries. . . . The value of the City's manufactures represented 9.8 per cent of the total manufactured products of the United States in 1909 and 10.3 per cent in 1904. There were 21 industries in New York City in 1909 for which the value of products in excess of $20,000,000 was reported. For two of these industries, the refining of cane sugar and smelting and refining of copper, statistics cannot be presented separately without disclosing the operations of individual establishments. The other 19 industries, arranged in order of value of products, are indicated in the following tabular statement, which shows the absolute and relative increase in this respect between 1904 and 1909, and also the percentage which the value of products for each industry repre- sents of the corresponding total for the State: Industry Amount Clothing, women's $266,477,000 Clothing, men's, including shirts 218,411,000 Printing and publishing 183,509,000 Slaughtering and meat packing 95,862,000 Foundry and machine shop products 63,853,000 Tobacco manufactures 62,488,000 Bread and other bakerv prod- ucts \ 61,904,000 Liquors, malt 53,469,000 Millinery and lace goods 51,239,000 Fur goods 39,874,000 Gas, illuminating and heating. 34,117,000 Paint and varnish 26,664,000 Musical instruments, pianos, organs and materials 25,516,000 Furnishing goods, men's 25,496,000 Patent medicines and com- pounds and druggists ' prepa- rations 24,984,000 Lumber and timber products. 24,122,000 Copper, tin and sheet-iron products 23,303,000 Artificial flowers and feathers and plumes 21,098,000 Confectionery 20,062,000 Per cent A^alue of products, 1909 of total for the State 97.8 82.1 84.6 75.4 41.4 81.5 71.8 68.8 98.3 96.5 80.6 93.4 75.8 60.4 66.9 33.3 60.6 99.7 78.6 Increase over 1904 Amount Per cent $98,058,000 58.2 68,927,000 46.1 45,007,000 32.5 39,924,000 71.4 5,916,000 10.2 11,963,000 23.7 17,904,000 40.7 10,301,000 23.9 18,896,000 58.4 14,595,000 57.7 4,402,000 14.8 3,834,000 16.8 6,586,000 34.8 8,883,000 53.5 6,868,000 37.9 2,903,000 13.7 5,914,000 34.0 17,132,000 432.0 6,017,000 42.8 120 THE STATISTICAL APPENDIX Of the five boroughs which form New York City, the Borough of Man- hattan is the most important industrially, the value of the manufactured products reported by the establishments within its limits in 1909 consti- tuting 68.4 per cent of the total for the entire city. The proportions of the total contributed by the other boroughs in that year were as follows: Brooklyn, 20.6 per cent; Queens, 7.5 per cent; the Bronx, 2.1 per cent; and Richmond, 1.5 per cent. The totals presented for New York City do not include statistics for three establishments operated by the Federal Government, namely, the United States Navy Yard, with 3,622 wage-earners and products valued at $7,032,416 in 1909; the United States Naval Clothing Factory, with 96 wage-earners and products valued at $670,198, located in Brooklyn, and the United States Lighthouse Establishment, with 60 wage-earners and products, such as illuminating and signal apparatus and machinery and other lighthouse supplies, valued at $995,745, located at Tompkinsville, in the Borough of Richmond. — From the L^nited States Census Report on Manufactures. (Note 44) Average Number of Wage=earners 1909 1904 1899 Manhattan 385,358 339,221 285,265 Bronx 14,434 * Brooklyn 123,883 104,905 87,445 Queens 23,891 14,905 10,684 Richmond 6,436 5,595 5,192 554,002 464,716 388,586 Value of Products 1909 1904 1899 Manhattan $1,388,408,005 $1,043,251,293 $810,807,975 Bronx 42,680,793 * Queens 151,680,120 92,941,158 35,427,561 Brooklyn 417,222,770 373,462,930 313,617,489 Richmond 29,700,888 16,866,995 13,017,236 $2,029,692,576 $1,526,523,006 $1,172,870,261 * Included in Manhattan Borough. — From United States Census Statistics. (Note 45) New York's Attractions for the Machine Tool Industry New York's Advantages If the concentration of the industry in New England is due primarily to the presence of a skilled labor supply, and in Ohio to the natural adjust- ment of the costs of assembling materials and in reaching the market, what then are the advantages which the New York location presents? As compared with New England, New York furnishes definite savings in the cost of assembling the raw materials. New York is nearer to the iron and steel centers of Pennsylvania and the freight rates on iron and steel products are approximately 12 per cent lower than to New England points. In the cost of securing the fuel supply, New York furnishes greater savings. The all-rail rate from the bituminous coal fields in Pennsylvania to Worcester is $2.90 per ton; to New York, $1.80 per ton. The rail-and- water rate from Hampton Roads, via Boston to Worcester, is about $1.60 per ton, and to New York approximately 80 cents. THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK While it is true that the cost of the materials in the metal-working machine industry seldom amount to 30 per cent of the total production cost, yet the costs of assembling the materials are very important factors in the total cost of the materials. The New Englander usually attacks the New York location from the standpoint of the labor supply; the Westerner from the viewpoint of reach- ing the markets; yet in spite of these arguments, there are important factors in favor of the New York location from both standpoints. The Labor Supply in New York The statement sometimes made that the New York location is imprac- ticable on account of the difficulty of securing a proper labor supply is based on misinformation. The several larger manufacturers of metal-work- ing machine products in New York in recent interviews stated that New York furnishes them an adequate and satisfactory supply of skilled labor, and that the open-shop principle is generally adhered to. It is frequently stated that the well-paid mechanic, accustomed to own his home in the smaller community, is never satisfied with living conditions in New York, yet the consensus of opinion among employers of skilled labor in New York seems to be that well-paid labor prefers the City. Once having enjoyed City life, such labor refuses to abide in the smaller commu- nity. In fact, the manufacturer in the smaller community finds it necessary to furnish his employees ''citified" recreation. Moreover, it is forgotten that the living conditions of the smaller community, together with the advantages of the City, can be secured in the outlying sections of the Metropolitan District. One large plant in another line of industry — but employing a high percentage of skilled labor — which moved its establishment to a suburban community, found that within a comparatively short time 90 per cent of its labor force, which was drawn from different parts of the City, had become residents of the community in which the plant was located. It is also stated that wages for skilled mechanics in New York are excessively high, yet a comparison of the wages for tool makers between three metal-working machine establishments located in New England and two New York establishments, brought out the fact that there was but a slight difference. New York has a large and diversified labor supply to draw from, and there seems to be no reason to believe that it would be impossible to develop a well-organized and skilled force for the metal-working machine industry. Advantage in Distribution As compared with New York, New England is relatively isolated as a distributing center. Isolation of this type is costly. For instance, the rail rate on planing machines from Worcester to New York in carload lots is 20 cents per hundred pounds. The water rate from New York to New Orleans on such machines is only 60 cents per hundred pounds. The New York location gives the manufacturer the advantage of similar low rates to many of the important markets for metal-working machinery in the Eastern Atlantic, Southern Atlantic and Gulf States. Water rates from New York to the Pacific Coast should enable the New York manu- facturer to compete satisfactorily in the rapidly growing far Western mar- ket. It is evident that for reaching the Eastern market, the manufacturer in New York has a distinct advantage over the manufacturers located in Ohio. The Export Trade The most striking feature of the development of the metal-working machine industry in the last few years has been the growth of the export trade. In 1909 the value of such exports was $3,640,034, while in 1913 it amounted to $16,097,315. American metal-working machine tools are recog- 122 THE STATISTICAL APPENDIX nized as the standards in almost every over-sea market, and the inventive- ness of the American manufacturer has enabled him to keep ahead of his European rivals. New York City controls the export trade in the industry from the United States. In 1912, approximately 71 per cent of the total value of such exports passed through this port. For the manufacturer who is interested in the systematic development of the export markets, this City is the location which furnishes the re- quired shipping facilities, and enables him to make an aggressive and direct campaign in pushing the sales of his product. The Local Market Last, but not least. New York City furnishes an important local market for the use of metal-working machines. One manufacturer who has been located here for a number of years, stated that the success of his establish- ment was largely due to its location in this City. It furnishes a number of opportunities for special development, and as an order market it is recognized as the largest in the United States. Every metal-working machine manufacturer of any importance is repre- sented here, either directly or through selling agents. Orders for metal- working machines for use in all parts of the country are given here. In fact, the president of one of the largest metal-working machine supply houses in Xew York said that he believed that between $20,000,000 and $25,000,000 worth of machines are ordered annually in New York. For many metal-working machine manufacturers who find themselves hindered by their present location, therefore. New York offers advantages and opportunities which might furnish a solution of their problem. — From an article on the Metal-working Machinery Industry, prepared by the In- dustrial Bureau of the Merchants' Association for "Greater New York" (February 9, 1914). (Note 46) Why Manufacturers Are Leaving the City The group of establishments located in Brooklyn shows quite clearly the effect upon the reasons for location of marketing a large product in New York City. Hence the firms marketing a large proportion of their product in New York City find the accessibility of the New York market to be their chief advantage, while the others find their chief advantages in other features, such as saving in cost of site, labor supply and trans- portation facilities. Firm (d), which has been located at its present site for many years, finds many disadvantages there as well as advantages. Thus Brooklyn furnishes a large supply of unskilled labor. The saving in cost is only a saving in comparison with Manhattan sites. Among the disadvantages that they find are lack of transportation facilities, particularly the high cost of direct access to waterfront property, and the consequent necessity of truck- ing. These disadvantages are so weighty that the firm is seriously con- sidering removing its plant to New Jersey. Another factory, manufacturing paints, has found the location in Brook- lyn so hampering that the proprietor has purchased a new site, and is erecting a factory at Elizabethport, N. J. This man wished to expand his business, and in order to do this he found it necessary to purchase additional land. This could be obtained in the vicinity of the present plant in Brooklyn only at a very great cost. In discussing the difl&culties, he pointed out very clearly that the cost of such a removal would be very great indeed, but that the main item of cost was the initial removal of the machinery. It made very little difference, therefore, whether he moved his factory a few blocks or several miles. In Brooklyn, the plant 123 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK occupied a scant acre at some distance from the waterfront; in the new location there will be fifty-eight acres, with direct water and rail facilities, thus eliminating trucking and rehandling. There wiU also be a large saving in taxes and insurance, and no difficulty in obtaining labor is anticipated. The latter is of the cheapest grade, composed mainly of Poles. With one exception (1), the establishments composing the Queens group are located on the waterfront, and do the largest and most essential part of their shipping by water. In the case of establishment (h), this is espe- cially necessary, because about 45 per cent of its product is exported. — From ' * Causes of Congestion of Population in New York City, ' ' by Edward Ewing Pratt, Ph.D. (Note 47) Where the Factory Workers Reside The data collected from workers in lower Manhattan show that a very small proportion of them reside in the Bronx. This is also true of Man- hattan above Fourteenth Street (see Table 1). In fact, only 5.5 per cent of the workers below Fourteenth Street reside in the Bronx, and 2,9 per cent of those working in other parts of Manhattan. The proportion of factory workers residing in Westchester County is negligible. On the other hand, large numbers of all classes of workers, even those working the longest hours and receiving the lowest wages, live in Brooklyn and Queens. 23.4 per cent and 4.6 per cent respectively of the workers in lower and upper Manhattan lived in Brooklyn, and 2.8 per cent lived in Queens. — From ' ' Causes of Congestion of Population in New York City, ' ' by Edward Ewing Pratt, Ph.D. (Note 48) The Welfare of Factory Hands Dependent Upon Location One of the greatest gains that can be made by the removal of a manufacturing establishment from Manhattan to the less congested bor- oughs or the suburbs is the improvement of factory conditions and its effect upon the personnel of the plant, physically, mentally and morally. The suburban manufacturers, if not the employers located near the center, are, to some extent, able to pick their labor and to weed out the undesirables. This the employer located in the center of busy Manhattan where labor goes and comes without any attempt at permanency, cannot do. In the center of the City the very overcrowding of the factory and work-place makes for looser morals. In a congested district conditions prejudicial to the greatest efficiency of workmen exist, not only in the factory itself but also in the home. In Manhattan, at the end of a day's work in a crowded factory, the worker returns to a crowded home in a dingy, ill-lighted, ill-ventilated, dirty and often unsanitary tenement. For this he pays a high rent, while in a suburban manufacturing district or almost any outlying section of Greater New York he could obtain well-lighted, well-ventilated rooms, not closely packed in rows of five and six-story tenements. It is quite undeniable that under these conditions of overcrowding the standards of life, whether they be physical or moral, break down much more easily than in a small town, where neighbors know neighbors and where each adheres to a certain community ideal. — From ' ' Causes of Congestion of Population in New York City" by Edward Ewing Pratt, PhD. 124 THE STATISTICAL APPENDIX (Note 49) Paris Sets an Example for New York With the distribution of the factory districts to the outskirts of the City, workmen's suburban trains would not need to be operated into the heart of the City. Thus the country districts would be brought into close contact with the manufacturing districts of a great city. For example, in Paris, where for many decades factories have been prohibited from running riot over the city, the manufactories are located largely outside of the city wall. Congestion of traffic in the subways and street cars is unknown, and many of the workers eat their lunches in their own homes. There is no great problem there of gathering up the people from the suburbs and carrying them into a highly congested area during one or two rush hours and"^ then bringing them out again at the close of the day's work. There are no highly congested districts in Paris, either of population or of manufactures. No doubt the most difficult part of the foregoing progress for relief of congestion of population in New York City to put into practical opera- tion, and the part which would doubtless be subject to the greatest oppo- sition, is the proposal to remove manufacturing establishments from Man- hattan and to segregate them in specified districts in the suburbs. How- ever, if I have correctly analyzed the currents of economic movement, certain groups of industries will offer little resistance beyond the stag- nating influences described as inertia. Keal estate interests will doubtless predict dire disaster. But if the steady growth of the City continues, the factory buildings will be only temporarily vacant. Certain other industries will find locations outside of "the central City extremely inconvenient, others will find them even advantageous. Such differences could be adjusted without great difficulty. Any objection which may be offered at this point is that some of the facts cited in an earlier chapter seem to show that any plan involving the removal of factories from the City cannot be successfully carried out, because workmen will not leave New York City, and will not move to the country. This objection brings forward two very important points upon which the success of establishing suburban industrial centers stands or falls. First, the location must not be far from Manhattan; in fact, it must be in the very immediate vicinity. Second, there must be definite and constant, but not patronizing, efforts to replace the amusements of the City with adequate substitutes. — From ''Causes of Congestion of Population in New York City,'' by Edward Ewing Pratt, Ph.D. MAMUrACTURIMG STATISTICS OF New ^fORK C ;iTY Borough Number of Establoh Persons engaged in Industry ■ Capital Salaries Wages Cost of Materials Value of Products Value added Manufacture Total Salanad ^1/^MM/^TTAN BRONX 1909 19,769 500,299 22,658 T7:e49 399,792 $822726.000 434,971.000 123T467000 «7E5456.0OO $1431.089000 $705,633,000 i904 15,9'75 410,324 19,367 51,716 339,221 620,526,000 56,750,000 IS 2, 000.000 507030,000 1.043,252,000 536,222,000 1699 14362 35.6ei 285,265 51 1,91S,000 40,725,000 146.505,000 398,076,000 eio,esoei00o 412,732,000 BROOKLYN 1909 5,218 145.222 5,495 15,644 123,883 S>362,33TOOO S2I,|46.000 $68,328,000 »235,I32,000 *4I7'223,000 $182,091,000 1904 4,182 119,534 4,597 9,932 104,995 313,452,000 13,521,000 54,535000 230.809,000 373463.000 142,654,000 1699 4.30I 6,826 87; 445 263,471.000 9,097000 42,341,000 206,335,000 313,617,000 107,282,000 QUEENS 1909 771 27:495 74-5 2,659 23.891 1145,307000 *4,407000 $14,169,000 *ii3,,?oo,ooo *l 51,680,000 636^480,000 1904 513 16,669 SOT r,Z57 14.905 92,977000 1,836,000 a,44o,ooo 70,403,000 92,941,000 22,538,000 1899 395 912 10,664 67.420.000 l,E64,000 5,534,000 23,354,000 35,428,000 12,074,000 RICHMOND I909 lao 157 90I 6,436 t33.3a3,O00 »l,549.000 ft3.734,00O t> 16.367000 $29,701,000 $11,334,000 1904 169 6,435 159 5,595 15,991,000 912,000 3,073.000 9.767000 16,867,000 7;080,000 1899 185 3S4 5,192. 10,430,000 5TI,000 2,277.000 e,445,ooo 13.017.000 6,572,000 125 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK Diagram showing the average annuar percentage cff increase in population of the various wards of Brooklyn in the ten gears 1900 ->o. I . i . iii I ■ I 23456769IO 12 13 14 15 16 17 e e 20 21 22 23 20^7 2& 30 34 26 29 31 32 Diagram showing the cost of building operations in the various wards of Brooklyn for the gear ending Dcc.3l*^ I9ll = 3.000.000 2.000,000 1.000000 I 2 34 5 67B9)ollt2l3t4l5i6i7iei9a02l 22 2325Z72830 2426 2931 32 26-29 -31-32 WARDS of BROOKLYN and 4- ond 5 of qUEENS BOSTON , Mass. DETROIT, Mich. 5T. LOUIS, Mo. CLEVELAND, O. PITTSBURG, Pa. 5UFFAL0 , N.Y. DALTIMOCE, Md. BUILDING OPERATIONS OF THE JAMAICA BAY DISTRICT COMPARED WITH THOSE OF OTHER CITIES 126 THE STATISTICAL APPENDIX THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK List of Illustrations The Site of New York's Original Settlement Frontispiece Page The Port and Harbor of New York (Map) 8 Manhattan Has the Smallest Waterfront (Diagram) 10 New York's Percentage of Foreign Commerce and Federal Appropria- tions (Diagram) 11 The Island's Crowded Waterfront 12 Congestion of Trucks at the Piers 13 Increase in Commerce and Increase in Wharfage Since 1898 (Diagram) . 15 Countless Craft of Every Sort" 16 Docking the Imperaior in the North River 17 Leaving New York in Order to Expand 21 The Good and the Bad 23 Studies in New York Congestion 26 One of the Results of Overcrowding 27 Present Congestion and Ideal Distribution (Diagram) 28 Population of the Most Congested Districts of Seven Large Cities (Diagram) 29 The Site of the New Pier Development 32 The ''Costly Sacrifice" When Completed 33 South Brooklyn Marginal Railroad (Map) 35 A Step in the Right Direction 36 The Famous Bush Terminal 37 A Saving in Distance and Time (Diagram) 40 The Vast Size of the ''Auxiliary Harbor" (Diagram) 41 Brooklyn's Two Waterfronts 43 ' ' Close Proximity to Water Carriage " 49 A Great City With an Idle Harbor (Map) 51 Opening the Bay's Main Channel 54 Municipal Wealth as a By-product 55 The First Two Steps (Map) 56 Map Showing First Step 59 Map Showing Second Step 61 Two Scenes in Busy "Brownsville" 64 The City Impinging Upon the Bay 65 Areas of the Several Boroughs (Diagram) 73 Population Movement in Greater New York (Diagram) . V 75 Value of Imports and Exports of Merchandise at the Ports of New York, Boston and Philadelphia (Diagram) 78 Increase in Population of the A^arious Boroughs by Decades (Diagram) . 93 Population in Various Districts of City (Map) 95 Variation in New York's Percentage of Total Foreign Commerce of the United States (Diagram) 99 Manufacturing Statistics of New York City (Table) 125 Annual Increase in Population in Brooklyn Wards (Diagram) 126 Building Operations in Brooklyn Wards (Diagram) 126 Building Operations of the Jamaica Bay District Compared With Those of Other Cities (Diagram) 126 Greater New York and Long Island 127 128 INDEX Index Page Adams, Campbell W 13 Ambrose Channel (see New York City; Harbor) American Dock Co 37 Amsterdam 41 Amsterdam Corporation 105 Antwerp 38-41-55-57-112-113-116-117 Appropriations, Harbors of U. S 96 Areas (see New York City and names of boroughs) Babbitt, B. T 21 Baltimore 40-57-99-100-101-126 Barg-e Canals (see also Erie Canal) 15-18-71 Barge Canal Terminal Commission 108-112 Barren Island 58-59 Beach, Col. Lansing- H 40 Bennet, William Stiles 108 Bergen Basin 56 Board of Estimate and Apportionment, Chief Engineer 5 Boiler, A. P 110 Bombay 28-29 Boston 9-19-78-99-100-101-109-117-126 Bremen 41-117 Brinton, Willard C 16 Bristol 116 Bronx, Borough; Area 11-50-73-93 Bronx, Borough; Industry 121-125 Bronx, Borough; Land Value 93 Bronx, Borough; Population 75-93-124 Bronx, Borough; Waterfront 10-37-60-61-62 Brooklyn, Borough; Area 11-42-50-73-75-93 Brooklyn, Borough; Building Operations 126 Brooklyn, Borough; Growth 61-62-66-126 Brooklyn, Borough; Industry 121-125 Brooklvn, Borough; Land Value 75-93 Brocklvn, Borough; Population 42-50-57-74-75-93-94-95-124-126 Brooklyn, Borough; Waterfront 10-35-36-37-43 Brooklyn Eagle 54-55-93 Brooklyn Eastern District Terminal 37 Brooklyn League 49 Brooklyn League Committee on Industrial Advancement 3-4 Brooklyn, Office of Borough President 5 Brooklyn, South, Improvement 35-36 Brownsville 60-64 Buffalo 126 Bureau of ]\Iunicipal Research 5 Bush Terminal 23-36-37-40-41 Calcutta 28-29 Canarsie 40-41-61 Cardiff 116 Cartage, cost of 43-58-104 Chamber of Commerce 5-19-47-107 Charity Organization Society 5-23-26-27 Chicago 19 Chicago Harbor Commission 114 Chicago iMunicipal ^Markets Commission 58 Clinton, DeWitt 9-63 Cleveland 126 Commerce (see names of ports) Congestion (see ^Manhattan, New York City and N. Y. C. Harbor) Congestion of Population, N. Y. C. Commission on 25-29-48 Cornell Basin 56-63 Cornell Creek 46-86 Corporation Counsel's Office 5 Corthell, Dr. Elmer L 45-69-71-119 Cresson, B. F., Jr 109 Department of Docks and Ferries, New York City 5-109 Department of War, Authority Over Channel 11 Detroit 20-47-128 Douglass, William Harris 16-116 Engineering Record 34 Erie Canal (see also Barge Canal) 9-18-63 Farley, Philip P 83 Fitzgerald, Desmond 114 129 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK Page Ford, William G 39-42-83 Forty-fourth Street Piers (see New York Citv Harbor Improvements) Free Ports 52-116-119 Fresh Creek 65 Fresh Creek Basin 56-60-61-64 Galveston ; 99-100-101 Gerritsen Basin 56 Gillespie, Gen. G. L 13-91 Glasg-ow 28-29-115 Hamburg- Harbors, Foreign ...16-31-38-52-55-57 Harbors of U. S. (see names of cities) Harbors of U. S., Appropriations for 11-96-97 Harbors of U. S., Improvements 16 Havre 116 Hawtree Basin 56 Hudson River (see North River) Hughes, Gov. Charles E 89 Industrial Communities, Ideal Conditions for 24-52-119 Tngersoll, ^Mr 110 Intracoastal Waterway 15-18 31-41-52-101-102-110-112-115-116-117 ■-101-102-110-112-113-114-115-116-117 Jamaica Bay, Advantages 40-41-42-44-45-49-50-51-52-77-83-85-119 Jamaica Bay, Appropriations 42-46-55-77-81-82-87-88-90 Jamaica Bay, Basins 49-55-56-57-58-59-60-61-63-64-66 Jamaica Bay, Commerce 43-58 Jamaica Bay, Development Cost 53-54-55-56-57-60-62-81 Jamaica Bay, Development Plan 45-46-53-54-55-56-57-59-60-61-62-63-83- 84-85-86-87 Jamaica Bay, Dimensions 39-40-41-77 Jamaica Bay, District 43-50-51-64-65-75-94 Jamaica Bay, as Free Port 119 Jamaica Bay, Improvement Commission 39-41-44-46-58-71-81-82-83 Jamaica Bay, Land Reclamation 49-54-56-58-59-60-61-62-63-66 Jamaica Bav, Land Value 45-49-58-60-62-66 Jamaica Bay, Legislation 46-55-67-81-82-87-88-89 Jamaica Bay, Location 40-41-42-43-49-51-65-127 Jamaica Bay, Present Development 46-49-55-56-90 Jamaica Bav, Transportation 43-44-45-49 Jay Street Terminal 37 Jersey City 22 Knight, Col. John G. D 46-76-81-86-87 Ijackey, Oscar F 57 Law, Charles B 53 Liverpool 31-41-100-110-112-113-114-115 Lockwood, Col. D. W 87 London 28-29-41-101-110-114-115 Luce, G. W 17 81 115 -93 93 120 49 125 -93 124 -12 Mackenzie, Gen. ^. Manchester 52- Manhattan, Borou Manhattan, Manhattan. Borough :Manhattan. Borough ^Manhattan, IManhattan, Manhattan. Manhattan, Manhattan Area 11-50-73-75 Borough; Assessed Value . , Congestion Financial Position Industry 20-22-48-77-117-121- 29-34-48-75-77-91- Borough; . Borough; Land Value 12-33 Borough ; Borough Population 75-93 Waterfront 8-10-11 Tradition 11-25-28 Marble, William A 23-47- Marks, INIarcus M Marseilles Marshall, Major U. L Mcl.iaughlin, John J • Merchants' Association, N. Y 5-7-12-13-15-16-47-77-102-116-119- Merchant IMarine ^^"^5: Mill Basin 49-56-57-58-59-60 Montreal o Montreal, Harbor Commissioners of 112- Municipal Year-Book 93 119 9 116 88 83 123 102 -66 117 116 -94 N^ewark 21 Newcastle ii5 New Jersey Harbor Commission ^"^^'^^"'^'^"^'^oa^oi J2 New Jersey. Industry ;,A^yz? Jr^ New Orleans 99-100-117 130 INDEX Page New York Boat Owners' Association 5-14 New York City, Advantages ..9-19-20-24-31-50-52-105-106-1U7-11T-121-122-123 New York City, Appropriations for Jamaica Bav 46-55-56-81-S2 New York City, Area 11-24-73-75-93 New York City, Assessed Valuation 66-93 New York City, Catskill Water Svstem 31 New York Citv, Congestion 13-25-26-27-28-29-30-48-87-95-124 New York City, Future 52-67-68-107 New York City, Growth -..71-72-73-74-75-93-105-108 New York City, Harbor Administration 7-11-12-15-32-38-39-102 New York City, Harbor, Ambrose Channel 8-40-41 New York City, Harbor, Commerce ...9-11-13-14-15-16-17-18-76-78-84-85-86- 91-99-100-101-102-103-104-105-108-109-110-116 New York City, Harbor, Congestion 10-12-14-34-62-67-76-77-105-109-112 New York City, Harbor, Costs 104-105-109 New York City, Harbor, Craft 14 New York City, Harbor, East River 8-34-35-37-103-117 New York City, Harbor, Improvements 32-33-34-35-36-37-40-59-111-112 New York Citv, Harbor, Lower Bay 8 New York City, Harbor, North (or Hudson) River ..9-33-34-91-92-103-110-117 New York City, Harbor. Problems 7-18-39-45-53-62 New York City, Harbor. Statistics 8-14-15-31-40-76-96-103-105-111-112 New York City, Harbor. Railroad Connections 14-35-36-37-44-45 New York City, Harbor. U. S. Appropriations for 11-97 New York City, Harbor, Upper Bay 2-S New York City, Harbor. AVar Department's Authority Over Channels — 11-55- 60-63-86-87-90-91-92 New York City, Industry 19-20-21-22-23-24-29-47-48-49-52-119-120-121- 122-123-124-125 New York City, Interboro Transportation 42-77 New York City, Loss of Trade 13-20-21-22-23-123 New York City, Land Value 12-33-34-37-49-52-56-58-60-62-66-93 New York City, Population 9-19-27-28-29-30-72-74-75-93-95-126 New York Citv, Rapid Transit 31 New York City, Site 2-7-9 New York City, Waterfront 8-10-55-62-96-117 New York Dock Co 35-36-37 New York Federation of Churches 5-95 New York Harbor Line Board 87-91-92 New York, Port of 8-11-76-77-78-109 New York Produce Exchange 5-99 New York State, Jamaica Bay Legislation 46-55-67-88-89 New York State, Commerce Commission 67 New York State, Waterways Association 107-108 Newport News 117 Newtown Creek 60 Nock, Dr. Albert J 21 Norris, George W 13 Panama Canal 15-16-17-106-108-109-118 Paris 28-29-125 Philadelphia 9-13-19-78-99-100-101-109-117 Pittsburgh 126 Population (see names of cities and boroughs) Port of New York Commission, Proposed 78 Ports, U. S., Commerce of 99-100 Prague 28-29 Pratt, Dr. Edward Ewing 20-124-125 Pratt, Sereno S 107 Public Service Commission 31 Queens, Borough; Area 11-42-50-73-93 Queens, Borough; Assessed Value ' 66-93 Queens, Borough; Building Operations 12fi Queens, Borough; Growth 61-62-75-93 Queens, Borough; Industry 117-121-125 Queens, Borough; Population 42-50-7.4-75-93-94-95-120-124 Queens, Borough; Waterfront 10-61-62 Railroads, Connecting 44-50-65-74 Railroads, D., L. & W 110 Railroads, Lehigh Valley 14 Railroads, N. Y., X. H. & H 44-65 Railroads, Pennsylvania 44-65 Railroads, South Brooklyn :Marginal 35-36 Richmond, Borough; Area 11-73-75-93 Richmond, Borough; Assessed Value 66-93 Richmond, Borough; Industry 121-125 Richmond. Borough; Population 75-93-94-95 Robbins, John 'M., Dry Dock and Repair Yard 108 Rockaway 40-41-42 Rockaway Inlet 42-56-59-86 Rotterdam 41-110-116 131 THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK Page Savannah 117 Sheepshead Bay 56 Silleck, Mr 108 St. Louis 19-126 Smith, R. A. C 8-35-96-97-99-100-101-102 South Brooklyn Improvement 35 Spring- Creek Basin 56 Staniford, Charles W Ill Staten Island, Terminal 37 Stettin 117 Sticknev, Col. Amos 92 Sutter, Col. Charles R 92 Tenement House Department 5 Tomkins, Calvin 24-42-44-46-47 Transit, Docks and Ferries, Committee on 26 Trieste 117 Transportation, Rates 43-58-59-110-122 Tuberculosis 27, Tuberculosis, Committee on Prevention of 5 Truesdale, Mr 106 United States Army, Board of Engineers ....5-42-44-45-46-71-81-86-87-90-91 United States, Commerce 11 United States, Department of Commerce 5 United States Government, Appropriations for Development of Jamaica Bay 46-55-81-82 United States Government, Appropriations for Rivers and Harbors .. 11-96-97 United States Government. Appropriations, X. Y. Harbor 11-97 United States, Development of Jamaica Bay .. 42-46-54-55-56-57-59-60-61-63- 66-67-81-86-87-88-90-91 United States Merchant IMarine 102 Veiller, Lawrence 28 Walsh, Georg-e Ethelbert 44 Whinery, S 91 "Wilgus, William J 58-109 AVright, Luke E 81 132 REFERENCE MAPS TO BE USED IN CONNECTION WITH "THE PROBLEM OF GREATER NEW YORK AND ITS SOLUTION" THE UNITED STATES Showing Principal Ports, Shipping Routes and Navigable Rivers, including Panama Canal, the New York State Barge Canal and the Intra-Coastal Waterway GREATER NEW YORK AND ITS HARBOR Showing Railroad and Shipping Terminals and Principal Improvements Described in the Text THE PENINSULA OF BROOKLYN AND ITS TWO WATERFRONTS Showing built-up Areas, Wards adjacent to Jamaica Bay and Crest of Dividing Ridge