San Francisco Relief Survey; the organization and methods of relief used after the earthquake and fire of April 18, 1906

PART III

Chapter 2514,436 wordsPublic domain

BUSINESS REHABILITATION

PAGE I. THE PEOPLE AIDED AND THE RESULTS OBTAINED 171

1. The Plan Itself 171 2. The Study of Results 173 3. The Families and Individuals Aided 174 4. Changes in Family and Business Life 176 5. Occupations 183 6. Homogeneity of Grantees 185 7. Results of Business Rehabilitation 186 8. Reasons for Success and Failure 187

II. ANALYSIS BY OCCUPATIONS, STUDY OF REFUSALS, AND SUMMARY 196

1. Success or Failure in Relation to Occupations 196 2. Study of Refusals 208 3. Summary of the Results of Business Rehabilitation 210

THE PEOPLE AIDED AND THE RESULTS OBTAINED

1. THE PLAN ITSELF

Business rehabilitation grants were made from the beginning of the relief work in cases where assistance in another form would have been less effective. Thus, on May 16 and 18, within a month after the disaster, the Rehabilitation Bureau made a grant of $75 for a shoe repairing shop, and another of $100 for a restaurant, and on May 30 and June 29, 1906, grants of from $250 to $500 each for a restaurant, a rooming house, a book store, and a grocery. It is interesting to note that to no one of these first six business cases was it found necessary to give additional aid. The Rehabilitation Committee soon after its organization, July 2, 1906, roughly formulated its business rehabilitation policy, which is embodied in the following notes from the minutes of July 19:

1. The Committee is not disposed to set people up in business in which they have not previously been engaged, although it is possible some exceptions will have to be made.

2. Estimates of amount necessary to start a business must be cut to the lowest practical figure.

3. References and other evidence should be required that applicant is capable and that request is reasonable.

The theory of rehabilitation in business, craft, or calling remained practically the same from May, 1906, to the close of the work in 1908. Nevertheless, there were differences from time to time in the handling of applications, due to the factors which have been shown in the preceding part[153] to have influenced the rehabilitation work in general. In the first period the applications for business rehabilitation were comparatively few and the grants small. In the second, the Rehabilitation Committee was getting fully prepared to carry its work. In the third, no new applications for business were received and action on those pending was deferred, except in the cases of unsupported women and aged people. These were given business rehabilitation during the period of arrested progress only when the need was very urgent and other means failed. In the beginning of the fourth period a sub-committee of the Rehabilitation Committee, known as Committee VI, was appointed[154] to consider business rehabilitation cases. The work of Committee VI and the fourth period are practically synchronous, because after the beginning of the fifth period, in April, 1907, the few business rehabilitation cases considered were acted upon by the Rehabilitation Committee itself without the intervention of its sub-committee.

[153] See Part II, p. 113 ff.

[154] See Part II, p. 125.

Committee VI was fortunate in having for its chairman Charles F. Leege, a merchant and banker of wide acquaintance and of extended experience, and four members, three of whom had had abundant commercial training. It had a staff consisting of a secretary, six to eight visitors, and three clerks.

This committee took up its work with enthusiasm, for its members believed that in no way could money be spent to greater advantage than in the manner proposed. While the business applications which had been accumulating since August were being disposed of, in November, 1906, printed forms[155] were prepared for future applications, and the public was notified of the conditions under which business aid might be obtained by means of the following announcement, displayed for some days in the newspapers:

SAN FRANCISCO RELIEF AND RED CROSS FUNDS

(Incorporated)

Rehabilitation Department

For business rehabilitation, applications will be received from those who have been successful in trade, business, or profession, and who have been so crippled by the fire that they cannot now provide themselves with the necessary equipment or stocks in trade, and who have no other way of supporting themselves or their families.

Assistance can be given in a limited way only, and for the same line of business, and the committee reserves the right to deny any applications.

Applicants can address a letter or postal card to Business Committee, Gough and Geary, San Francisco, giving name and address. Blanks will be sent immediately, which must be filled and returned by mail. No applications will be received after November 30, 1906.

Personal calls and applications cannot be received.

[155] See Appendix II, p. 443.

The blanks sent to applicants were framed so as to help the applicant to explain clearly on what scale he had been doing business up to the time of the disaster, what was the present relation of his assets to his liabilities, and on what scale he proposed to re-establish. He was directed to present letters from wholesalers or others with whom he had had business relations. As a part of the subsequent investigation, it was often possible for the committee’s visitors to secure written statements from creditors or from wholesalers, stating definitely what terms they were willing to make for the payment of old debts or for the establishment of new credits.

An applicant’s plan for re-establishment was not considered complete until it included a proposed definite location. Before making a grant for a lodging house or shop, the location for either of which is important, the committee usually required the applicant to secure a definite option on a reasonably good location. One of the most important functions of the visitors on the staff was to visit and to determine the merits of these proposed locations. Every effort was made to prevent an applicant from starting business in a poor but costly location merely as an excuse for securing an allowance from the relief funds.

The general aim of Committee VI was to supply the right sort of man with money enough to pay one month’s rent, to buy the necessary fixtures, and to cover a deposit on stock or on machinery or instruments. The applicant went into debt for the rest of his equipment, with the idea of discharging the debt little by little from the profits of the business.

2. THE STUDY OF RESULTS

Between October, 1906, and April, 1907, Committee VI considered 2,032 applications. Applicants to the number of 464 were refused aid of any nature; 111 applicants were given aid, but for purposes other than business; and 1,226 were given business aid in amounts ranging from $50 to $500.[156] The remaining 231 cases were withdrawn or taken over by other committees. Most of the applicants, many of whom collected little or no insurance upon property destroyed by the fire, represent the class that prefer a very modest living in an enterprise of their own to better wages working for others. There were those, too, who by reason of age or other infirmity had small prospect of holding their own as wage-earners, and can hardly be said to have had the choice between the two ways of making a living.

[156] Committee VI made about one-fourth of all the business grants that were made. The total number of cases in which grants were made was 4,916, and the total sum granted was $872,437.20. See Tables 40 and 41, pp. 157 and 158.

A re-visit, for the Relief Survey, to persons who had applied for aid for business purposes, was begun in July, 1908, and completed in November, 1908. This re-visit covered 1,000 cases, in 894 of which aid had been given, and in 106 refused. Cases from all periods of the rehabilitation work were selected at random, and should therefore be representative. Of the 894 grants, 196 were made before October 27, 1906, by individual committeemen representing the Rehabilitation Committee. The remaining 698 grants to these cases were the work of the special sub-committee known as Committee VI. The average grant for business received by the 894 applicants to whom grants were made was $247.55.

It is not to be understood, from the statement that 1,000 persons were re-visited, that all were found and personally interviewed. A number of the families had disappeared and could not be found. In cases of this sort an effort was made to secure as much information as possible from outside sources; and naturally the information supplied was more complete on some phases of family or business life than on others.

The word “family” in the sections which follow is used as meaning any applicant for aid and the persons with whom he lived. As will be shown below, a number of the families aided consisted of but one person.

3. THE FAMILIES AND INDIVIDUALS AIDED

Data as to nativity were obtained for 750 of the 894 revisited families which received aid. These are shown in Table 48.

TABLE 48.--NATIVITY OF HEADS OF FAMILIES RECEIVING BUSINESS REHABILITATION

From this statement of the nativity of heads of families, it appears that the American born constituted almost exactly half (50.3 per cent) of the entire number. There were, among the heads of the families aided, 122 Hebrews, of whom 22 were born in Russia, seven in Roumania, five in Austria, four each in Germany and in America, and one each in Poland, Hungary, Turkey and England; 76 Hebrews did not give their nativity. Together, the Hebrew families constituted over 16 per cent of all the families revisited for which information as to nativity was secured. Table 49 shows the conjugal condition of the families aided.

TABLE 49.--CONJUGAL CONDITION OF FAMILY GROUPS RECEIVING BUSINESS REHABILITATION[157]

======================================+========================== Conjugal condition |Families of each specified | conjugal condition --------------------------------------+-------------------------- Married couples | 394 Women, widowed, divorced, or separated| 286 Single women | 93 Men, widowed, divorced or separated | 55 Single men | 61 --------------------------------------+-------------------------- Total | 889 --------------------------------------+--------------------------

[157] Of the 894 family groups investigated, five consisted of men who failed to supply information relative to conjugal condition.

The table shows that there were 394 married couples among these families that had received aid. Man and wife were of the same nativity in 360 cases, and of differing nativities in 34 cases.

The average size of the family groups aided with business grants was relatively small, being but 2.8 persons per family. The average number of children per family was low, partly because of the large number of single persons aided; but the average number per marriage was low, too, being 1.37. Of the 394 married couples, 124 had no children at all, or none living at home; of the 286 widowed, divorced, or separated women, 128 had no children at home; of the 55 widowed, divorced, or separated men, 33 had no children with them.

The ages of all but 19 of the applicants who received aid are known. Of the 875 concerning whom information is available, only 3 per cent were over seventy; 45 per cent not more than forty; 60 per cent not more than fifty; and 77 per cent, over three-fourths, not more than sixty. More than one-half were between thirty-five and fifty-five years of age.

The 894 family groups aided included, at the time of the re-visit, 2,270 individuals. Of these, 1,138, or 50.1 per cent, were fully self-supporting; 113, or 5 per cent, were partially self-supporting; and 1,019, or 44.9 per cent, were dependent. The burden on the breadwinners is thus seen to have been relatively light. However, the income from most of their businesses was very small. It was less than the wages earned in the organized trades and fluctuated so that it was found impossible to reduce net receipts to dollars and cents.

In many cases when grants were given to persons who had no young children, they were given in consideration of the fact that there were others, often aged parents, depending upon them. This is true of one-third of the single women and about two-fifths of the single men.

4. CHANGES IN FAMILY AND BUSINESS LIFE

Partly as a result of the fire, and partly, no doubt, from other causes, the situation of the families aided with respect to membership, manner of living, and business arrangements, was somewhat different at the time of the re-visit from what it had been before the fire. The families aided had been composed, previous to the fire, of exactly 2,500 individuals. When the re-visit was made, 29 of these individuals had died and 201 had disappeared, leaving 2,270 individuals in the families studied.

Of the 894 families, 691, or 77 per cent, were found not to have changed in membership. For 83 families no data on this subject could be secured. Changes of membership in the remaining 120 families are shown in Table 50.

TABLE 50.--CHANGES IN FAMILY COMPOSITION BETWEEN PERIOD BEFORE FIRE AND THE RE-VISIT IN 120 FAMILIES RECEIVING BUSINESS REHABILITATION

============================================+================== Nature of change | Changes of each | specified nature --------------------------------------------+------------------ Women married since fire | 21 Men married since fire | 5 Separated couples reunited | 2 Couples divorced or separated | 6 Wives deserted by husbands | 3 Women widowed | 23 Men widowed | 5 Families in which other deaths have occurred| 21 Children married since fire | 22 Unmarried children away | 12 --------------------------------------------+------------------ Total | 120 --------------------------------------------+------------------

A further classification of the 120 families shows that in 16 families, consolidation, instead of separation, had taken place. Any tendency of families to stay together or of related families to consolidate, was fostered by the policy of the Rehabilitation Committee, which was to treat the family group, if possible, as a unit, and to give but one grant and that to one member on behalf of the whole family.

RENTALS AND CHARACTER OF PREMISES

Of the families aided, some had living quarters connected with their places of business, while others lived away from their offices or stores. Some families owned the premises which they occupied, but the great majority paid rent for business accommodations, for residences, or for both. For 197 of the 894, data could not be secured upon this subject. The situation of the remaining 697 families with respect to the payment of rentals, both before the fire and at the time of the re-visit, is shown by Table 51.

TABLE 51.--NATURE OF PREMISES OCCUPIED AND OF RENTALS PAID BEFORE AND AFTER THE FIRE, BY FAMILIES RECEIVING BUSINESS REHABILITATION

The table shows that there were many changes in the rental situation of the families. Before the fire, 658 families paid a business rent; that is, hired either a separate place of business or quarters in which business and residence could be combined. The latter plan was followed by 481 families, the separate rental plan by 161. The remaining 16 paid a business rent only, as they owned the house they lived in. After the fire, only 464 of the families were paying a business rent. The falling-off is most marked in the group of persons following the more ambitious plan of renting a place of business separate from the residence. Note the six families that before the fire owned premises for business and residence combined. This number was raised through the disaster to 34, most of whom were found, however, to be carrying on some small enterprise in a cottage taken from a camp to a cheap suburban lot. The 33 that paid only residence rent before the fire are among the families that were given money for business though not in business before the fire. The 152 families that, since the fire, had been paying residence rent only, and the 47 that were paying no rent, were the families that had utterly failed to recover their ground. Some were working for wages; the rest were dependent on relatives or the public.

RESIDENCE RENTALS AND SIZE OF RESIDENCES. Of the 894 families there were 125 that are known to have paid rental for separate residence quarters, both before and after the fire. The rents paid and the number of rooms occupied at both periods by 94 of these are known, so that the housing conditions of these families may be discussed apart from their business affairs.

TABLE 52.--RESIDENCE RENTALS PAID, BEFORE AND AFTER THE FIRE, BY 94 FAMILIES RECEIVING BUSINESS REHABILITATION, WHO PAID RENTALS FOR SEPARATE RESIDENTIAL QUARTERS IN BOTH PERIODS

=====================+======================= Monthly rentals |FAMILIES PAYING RENTALS | SPECIFIED +-----------+----------- |Before fire|After fire ---------------------+-----------+----------- Less than $10 | 13 | 14 $10 and less than $20| 38 | 30 $20 and less than $30| 26 | 23 $30 and less than $40| 13 | 12 $40 and over | 4 | 15 ---------------------+-----------+----------- Total | 94 | 94 ---------------------+-----------+-----------

The highest rent paid before the fire was $45; after the fire, $65. It will be noted that both before and after the fire, these families were able to pay rents that would seem to have assured fairly comfortable housing accommodations. Before the fire 45.7 per cent of the families paid a rental of $20 a month or more; after, 53.2 per cent were paying $20 or more.

It was found impracticable to establish the relation between rent paid and income received, for the reason that scarcely a person interviewed was able, however willing he might be, to say what his income for a year past had been. Income in most instances had been exceedingly irregular, and ordinarily the most that a man could say to the visitor was that his business had or had not met its running expenses; had or had not, in addition, furnished some sort of a living for the family; was or was not paying instalments on the principal of any debt incurred in starting. Therefore, the standard of life represented by the families in this study can be shown only by indirect means.

One of the best of the indirect indications of standards of living consists in the number of rooms occupied for residential purposes. The situation in this respect, before and after the fire, of the 94 families for which information was secured, is shown by Table 53.

TABLE 53.--NUMBER OF ROOMS IN RESIDENCES OCCUPIED, BEFORE AND AFTER THE FIRE, BY 94 FAMILIES RECEIVING BUSINESS REHABILITATION, WHO PAID RENTALS FOR SEPARATE RESIDENTIAL QUARTERS IN BOTH PERIODS

==================+============================ Number of rooms | FAMILIES OCCUPYING |RESIDENCES OF EACH SPECIFIED | NUMBER OF ROOMS +-------------+-------------- | Before fire | After fire ------------------+-------------+-------------- 1 | 19 | 20 2 | 3 | 5 3 | 28 | 33 4 and less than 8 | 39 | 32 8 and less than 15| 5 | 4 ------------------+-------------+-------------- Total | 94 | 94 ------------------+-------------+--------------

The table shows that no striking change took place in the number of rooms used for residence by these families. Individual families had their ups and downs, however. Whereas 39 families occupied the same number of rooms after the fire as before, 31 occupied fewer than before, and only 24 occupied more than before. As for outlay for rent for living quarters, 13 of these 94 families paid the same rent before and after; 27 paid less after the fire, and 54 paid more after the fire.

In some instances the disparity in the amount paid in the two epochs by the individual family is very great. Some families were found to be paying twice and some even three times as much rent as before the fire, in spite of the strong effort that people naturally made to secure quarters corresponding in size and price with those previously occupied. On the other hand, some of the childless couples did not try at once to resume housekeeping, but boarded, so that their rent dropped from the price of a flat to that of a single room. When families undertook to re-establish themselves in 1906-1907, the city was not sufficiently rebuilt to afford every family just what it required in the way of quarters at a reasonable price; but the families showed themselves highly adaptable by taking what they could get, and making the best of it.

BUSINESS RENTALS. The list of 894 cases affords 76 instances of families who, both before and after the fire, maintained places of business separate from their residences, and the amount of rent paid by 74 of these families for business quarters is known. The residence rents of 56 of them have been discussed in the preceding paragraphs. The data relative to business rents are presented in Table 54.

TABLE 54.--BUSINESS RENTALS PAID, BEFORE AND AFTER THE FIRE, BY 74 FAMILIES RECEIVING BUSINESS REHABILITATION, WHO PAID RENTALS FOR SEPARATE BUSINESS QUARTERS IN BOTH PERIODS

=======================+====================== Monthly rentals | FAMILIES PAYING | RENTALS SPECIFIED +-----------+---------- |Before fire|After fire -----------------------+-----------+---------- Less than $20 | 23 | 19 $20 and less than $40 | 25 | 22 $40 and less than $60 | 11 | 12 $60 and less than $80 | 9 | 10 $80 and less than $100 | 0 | 5 $100 and less than $300| 6 | 6 -----------------------+-----------+---------- Total | 74 | 74 -----------------------+-----------+----------

Of the 74 families, 10 were paying the same rent as before the fire, 21 less rent, and 43 more rent. The premises rented were as follows: 30 shops, 23 stores, 12 offices, 3 stands, 2 restaurants, a studio, a stable, a coal yard, and a junk yard. Eight enterprising persons who took advantage of unsettled conditions to secure better quarters at a much higher rental in better locations than before the fire were doing well.

There are no such striking cases of retrenchment in business rent as appeared when families gave up housekeeping and went to board. Unless a man could resume business on a scale corresponding in some degree with the scale on which he had done business before the fire, he often became a wage-earner. Where he did drop from a relatively high to a relatively low rent, his business usually suffered a corresponding decline. Many people evidently failed to secure advantageous locations, and though their actual rent was less than it had been, it was harder to meet.

COMBINED RESIDENCE AND BUSINESS RENTALS. The simplest and cheapest arrangement for a family engaged in business is to live in the house in which the business is carried on. Except in the case of lodging houses, this presupposes smaller rental and in most instances, smaller income, because places of business with living quarters attached are usually remote from the business centers of the town, and attract therefore a smaller volume of trade. The list of combined quarters is a long one. Of the families re-visited, 302 are known to have lived in combined quarters both before and after the fire. Data are complete for 285 of the 302 cases, and the amounts paid are given in Table 55.

TABLE 55.--COMBINED BUSINESS AND RESIDENTIAL RENTALS PAID, BEFORE AND AFTER THE FIRE, BY 285 FAMILIES RECEIVING BUSINESS REHABILITATION, WHO PAID COMBINED RENTALS IN BOTH PERIODS

=======================+======================= Monthly rentals |FAMILIES PAYING RENTALS | SPECIFIED +-----------+----------- |Before fire|After fire -----------------------+-----------+----------- Less than $10 | 13 | 33 $10 and less than $20 | 61 | 27 $20 and less than $30 | 75 | 53 $30 and less than $40 | 34 | 58 $40 and less than $50 | 32 | 44 $50 and less than $60 | 26 | 25 $60 and less than $80 | 25 | 24 $80 and less than $100 | 7 | 6 $100 and less than $200| 8 | 10 $200 and less than $400| 4 | 5 -----------------------+-----------+----------- Total | 285 | 285 -----------------------+-----------+-----------

The quarters secured by the payment of the above rentals include 200 premises with from 1 to 120 rooms; 37 stores with from 1 to 8 rooms attached; 25 shops with from 1 to 7 rooms; 12 offices with from 1 to 9 rooms; 3 studios with from 1 to 3 rooms; 2 saloons with rooms; 2 stables with rooms; and a factory, a restaurant, a stand, and a theater, each with a room or rooms attached.

To secure these quarters, 34 families were paying the same rent as before the fire, 110 were paying less, and 141, or 49.5 per cent, were paying more than before. Of the 33 families who paid less than $10 a month after the fire, 15 had before paid higher rents. Subsequent to the disaster each of these families rented ground in an out of the way place, and had put up a shack for a factory or utilized a refugee cottage for shop and residence.

Rents have been gone into in detail because, more than any other item, they show the far-reaching family changes brought about by the disaster. Astonishing, indeed, is the adaptability of families whose quarters, from being one room, became seven; or from being eight, became one; whose rent jumped from $20 for a restaurant and two rooms before the fire, to $175 for a restaurant and one room afterwards; or who, having lived for years in a twelve-room house for $35, dropped after the fire, to a $7.50 ground rent for space for a three-room shack.

As conditions in San Francisco approach more and more nearly what they were before the fire,[158] it is to be hoped that the families can better see how to adjust their efforts so that business will yield at least a fair living. The details of many of these long-continued struggles of adjustment are striking, not to say dramatic, and it is to be regretted that the following pages must deal rather with the general features of the contest and, for sake of compactness, omit much that would serve to clothe the dry bones of statistics with living flesh.

[158] It may be that the steady growth which San Francisco is destined to make will prevent the rent of business premises ever falling to before-fire levels.

5. OCCUPATIONS

The Rehabilitation Committee made 4,736 grants to as many families to enable them to resume business of 219 different kinds. The 894 families re-visited are a little less than 20 per cent of the whole number. In the grants made to these, 126 occupations are represented.

Grants were confined almost entirely to re-establishing families in a line of business in which they had been engaged as proprietors. A departure from this rule was for good cause, such as the death or injury of the former head of the business, or a change in trade conditions. The number of exceptions is 75, or 8.4 per cent of the whole number of re-visited families receiving grants. They are: 28 wage-earners and six housewives given grants to enter business; and 41 former proprietors aided to re-engage in business in an entirely different line.

In 79 cases it was recognized at the time the grants were made that it would be impracticable to reinstate the applicant on the before-fire scale. In such cases it was hoped that business would be successful enough on a small scale to admit of gradual expansion. Table 56 shows the occupations for which grants were most frequently given.

TABLE 56.--PROPOSED OCCUPATION OF APPLICANTS RECEIVING BUSINESS REHABILITATION

Among the 267 cases entered in the table opposite “other occupations,” there were 61 occupations with only one representative each, and 49 with from two to thirteen representatives each.

6. HOMOGENEITY OF GRANTEES

Of the 2,032 applicants for business rehabilitation considered by the business committee, 464, or about 23 per cent, were refused business aid, though many who were judged not to be suitable candidates for business rehabilitation were given aid for other purposes. This severe weeding out of candidates for one definite, specialized form of aid had this result, that those aided were a group homogeneous to a high degree. This fact was voiced often by the investigators during the progress of the work and by the staff that did the re-visiting in 1908, and was mirrored in the uniform reports filed by all these visitors. The uniformity shown in the records was not due to superficial inquiries, for data were unusually full and often included side-lights on the situation thrown by old friends, former business associates, former landlords, and other references. A further indication that the business group was looked on as being practically homogeneous is the fact that there were so many unconditional grants of $250. The phenomenon of so many of the grants being for exactly $250 may have been due in part to the effort to make the average grant not more than one-half[159] of what was the established $500 maximum grant, or may have been a reflection of the committee’s impression that there was little to distinguish many of the applicants, one from another, either as to plight or as to recuperative power.

[159] See Part II, p. 129, for the result of limiting a committee’s power to make grants larger in amount than $500.

The applicants that received aid were almost uniformly persons who had had successful business experience. Most had founded their own enterprises; none, as far as the records show, had come into his holding by inheritance, as might have been the case in an older city; and few by purchase of an established business. There were but few of the applicants who had occupied for any great length of time the place burned out. A shifting population and the resultant changes in minor business centers had been the instruments by which the less fit had been to a great extent eliminated in the years preceding the disaster.

7. RESULTS OF BUSINESS REHABILITATION

The nature of the occupations which the 894 re-visited families that were given aid proposed, with the assistance of the committee, to re-enter, or, in a few cases, to enter for the first time, has already been shown. How many of these families, at the time of the re-visit in 1908, nearly two years later, had succeeded in getting into and continuing in business? The answer to this question will go far toward showing the success or failure of the work of business rehabilitation.

Data showing the status of the grantees in 1908 are presented in Table 57 and the chart which follows.

TABLE 57.--BUSINESS AND EMPLOYMENT STATUS AT THE TIME OF THE RE-VISIT, OF APPLICANTS RECEIVING BUSINESS REHABILITATION

[160] This group includes 29 applicants who were known to have died before the time of the re-visit.

The table and chart show what the Relief Survey visitors found in 1908. They found 543, or 60.7 per cent, of the families in business; 507 in exactly the kind of business contemplated by the grant, and 36 in business of another sort. A much smaller group, 95, or 10.6 per cent of the total, were engaged in gainful occupations, but not as proprietors. Of these 95, 66 were employed in the same business, and 29 in a different line of business than before the fire. There remain 256, or 28.7 per cent of the total number, who were not in business or employed. The visitors found that of this last group 36 were housewives; eight were unsettled, their affairs being in a transition state; 33 were dependent; 31 were known to have left San Francisco; 29 were known to have died; and 119 were not to be found for a personal interview by the visitors. Of this latter number, 75 had dropped completely out of sight.

Of the 351 found not to be in business at the time of the revisit, 140 are known to have started in business and then dropped out. The remaining 211, as far as the records show,--some no doubt for the best, and others for the flimsiest of reasons,--failed even to get into business.

8. REASONS FOR SUCCESS AND FAILURE

As has been shown in the preceding section, some of the families aided were as a result of rehabilitation successfully established in business, while others either did not embark at all in business ventures or began business only to discontinue. It is important to determine as far as possible the causes that resulted in success in some cases and in failure in others. Among the questions which, in the judgment of the writer, should be considered in this connection, are the following:

1. Was the grant made in a manner suited to the need of the case?

2. Was the grant timely?

3. Was the grant adequate?

4. Was the location chosen for business a good one?

5. Was the applicant handicapped by ill health of himself or family?

6. Did the applicant begin business with sufficient capital?

It will be noted that the first three questions relate to the deliberate action of the Committee, and involve a judging of its work by the reviewer. Question 4 relates to the applicant’s ability to secure or his own good fortune in securing proper quarters, and also involves a judgment by the reviewer. Questions 5 and 6 relate to the circumstances of the applicant.

MANNER IN WHICH GRANT WAS MADE. The reviewer for the Relief Survey in 1908 found in 21 case records strong internal evidence to the effect that the grant had not been made in the proper manner. Appropriate safeguards had not been provided to assure the carrying out of the plan. Of the 21 families, 12 failed to start in business, one started and gave up, and only eight were in business in 1908.

Ignoring those who managed to make a start, let us briefly consider the 12 who failed to do so. A woman who planned to separate from her husband was granted money to establish a rooming house to support herself and baby. By mistake the money was handed to the husband, who kept it and turned her and the child out of the house. She then obtained a divorce but she never recovered the money. A tailor, sixty-one, who claimed he was “afraid of the high rents,” spent his grant for living expenses. The visitor could see no reason why he should not have made a start. In the other 10 cases there was serious illness or disability in the families, so the grants were spent to meet doctors’, hospital, or undertakers’ bills. In each instance the expenditure was an error of judgment on the part of the beneficiary, as he might have made a second claim on the relief fund for medical aid until his business should be on a paying basis. It showed a hesitancy in applying for relief to be expected on the part of those whose lifelong habit was to be entirely independent. The 12 families could have been started in business if the expenditure of the grants had been supervised by a third person acting as agent of the committee.

The policy of supervision should not have been extended to all business cases, for the applicants were of all the classes seeking aid the ones best fitted to put money to good use. But supervision might well have been extended to all the families which carried obvious burdens of illness or such handicaps as advancing years, a visionary outlook, or a lack of initiative. The advantages to be derived from adequate supervision are shown by the experience of 35 cases re-visited other than the 21 mentioned above. In all of these 35 cases the results were mutually satisfactory. In some cases the supervision was found to have gone no further than the committee’s seeing that a plan was perfected and a location secured; in others to the extent that an applicant was not allowed to handle the grant money, it being expended on his behalf by one of the committee’s visitors, by some other organization, or by a personal friend acting as trustee. Consequently, the 35 started business, and of the 33 found by the Relief Survey visitors, 23 were still in business.

Guidance in expenditure would undoubtedly have secured the permanent re-establishment of many a family that through no fault of its own had dropped hopelessly behind in the race. A supervised payment by instalments, payments subsequent to a first instalment being conditional on a square business start having been made, provided that the first instalment had been adequate for a start, would have resulted in the canceling of second instalments on grants made to persons with no original intention of re-entering business or with changed plans.

TIMELINESS OF GRANT. The second question, “Was the grant timely?” cannot be answered by a positive “yes” or “no,” as the elusive personal equation makes assertions fallible. In some cases the beneficiary could with reason claim that earlier aid would have been more effective.

There were a number of cases in which it seems obvious that the grants were unnecessarily and unduly delayed. Twenty-two of these families, notwithstanding the obstacle, were in business; the only comment to be made is that some enterprising and refined families were left to endure the hardships of camp life months after they might have been engaged in independent business, had the machinery and the funds been available.

Among applicants who started in business and later dropped out there was one man so old that results would probably have been the same if there had been no delay. In three other instances the grants were, in the opinion of the reviewer, inadequate as well as delayed, a combination well calculated to bring about failure.

Among the families whose grants were delayed and who did not even start in business there was one man whose grant was delayed for six months, because the check was accidentally delivered to another person of the same name. This man claimed to have lost good opportunities for starting. Another grant was delayed forty days, not an unusual length of time, but in the interval the subjects, a refined American woman and her elderly husband, had suffered irreparably. The wife had injured herself doing unsuitable work and had died, leaving the man powerless to open the rooming house they had planned together. Another applicant, one of the many whose cases were shelved from three to four months during the dispiriting period of arrested progress, had a friend who was ready at the time of the application to loan money to add to the relief grant for starting a notion store. Three months later the friend’s circumstances had changed, and with the relief money alone the applicant dared not make the venture. The predicament of three other applicants was much the same. By the time they received their business grants, late in the winter of 1906, every cent of their insurance money had been used for living expenses. Another illustrative story is that of a German cobbler with a frail wife and two young children, who after the disaster had $100 in savings. He bought tools, but as he could not support his family by cobbling alone and his savings were gone, he asked for a business grant. When he was finally given $200 to stock a small shop with shoes to sell, he and his family had been sleeping on the floor for six months.

ADEQUACY OF GRANT. Inadequate aid, in the estimation of many of the applicants, was the one stumbling block in the path to satisfactory re-establishment. This question, like the two which have preceded it, must be recognized as having an illusory quality. In the opinion of the reviewer the complaint of inadequacy was justified in slightly over 100 cases, in about three-fourths of which the grants were lower than the average grant of $247.

Of the 894 grants under consideration, only 52 were for $500[161] or over, and 162 grants, or nearly one-fifth of the total, were for exactly $250, from which it appears that the latter figure was firmly lodged in the minds of the disbursers of the fund. But one in nine of the re-visited applicants who received business rehabilitation, received grants for other purposes. The average amount given to those who did receive such subsidiary aid was $83.75.

[161] See Part II, pp. 128-129, for explanation of limitation of grants to less than $500.

The ultra-cautious policy of the initial rehabilitation work was early changed. Between June 1 and July 7, 1906, 21 checks for more than $100 each had been drawn for business rehabilitation, the two highest being each for $400. By the middle of July, four checks for $500 had been drawn for business cases. Before the end of July, a $900 business loan was made. A scanning of the early case records shows that the committeemen were careful to give the exact amount needed.

During the third rehabilitation period the size of the business grants was much smaller than in the preceding period, two-fifths of the grants being under $100 each and four-fifths less than $200. The average grant for the 123 re-visited cases which had been passed during the second period was $305.77; for the 73 passed during the third period, $191.16; for the 698 passed during the fourth period, $242.26. Of applicants who received aid in the third period, the period of arrested progress, when the grants were small, a materially smaller proportion were in business at the time of the review, than of those who received grants in the second and fourth periods.

A few examples show the fate of some applicants who were given prompt, but apparently inadequate aid.

* * * * *

An elderly woman who applied for $250 for a rooming house was given $100. She is doing well, but had to incur a heavy debt which by close management, hard work, and with great mental anxiety she has been able to pay off.

* * * * *

A family of five, the father sixty-three, the mother fifty-seven, and their children, were given $150 for a rooming house. They took a six-room flat and by subletting two rooms met their rent. But their plan was to take a larger house which would bring in enough to provide more than the equivalent of rent and which with the supplementary small wages of a son and daughter in their teens, would have made a fair income.

* * * * *

A tailor was given $125 to add to his own limited resources in order to open a shop, but as he couldn’t make good he sold his shop and is now a bushelman.

* * * * *

FAVORABLE LOCATION. After the fire there was naturally for a time a scarcity of desirable locations for business. With ready money in hand, those applicants who were keen to judge and prompt to act secured the best places, while many were left to take locations with which they were not satisfied and which proved to be unprofitable.

In some instances locations good at first became undesirable through the shifting of the population; certain business centers proved to be but temporary and had to be abandoned like a sinking ship by all who had begun business there. The man who did not have money to move when his first location proved unfit, had to fail or discontinue.

The proportion of re-visited applicants who, having been assisted to engage in business, were still in business, was materially larger among those applicants who, in the judgment of the reviewer, secured satisfactory locations than among those whose locations seemed less favorable. As is suggested in the preceding sentence, the quality of a business location is largely a matter of opinion. If a business succeeds it is easy to conclude that its location is good; if it fails a poor location is a ready excuse. Here, again, a definite estimate is made nugatory by the intrusion of underlying queries relative to the applicants. How adaptable were they? How far sighted? How much initiative had they? To such as were lacking in any of these qualities a favorable location did not always mean success.

HEALTH OF APPLICANTS AND FAMILIES. Serious illness in the family tended, of course, to interfere with the carrying out of a business plan. The outcome of business rehabilitation in cases where there was no serious handicap of this nature, and in those where such a handicap existed, is shown by Table 58.

TABLE 58.--BUSINESS STATUS AT THE TIME OF THE RE-VISIT OF APPLICANTS RECEIVING BUSINESS REHABILITATION, BY HEALTH OF FAMILIES.[162]

===========================================+=================+====== Health of family | APPLICANT | Total +--------+--------+ | In | Not in | |business|business| -------------------------------------------+--------+--------+------ Family all well or without serious handicap| 448 | 249 | 697 Family seriously handicapped by ill health | 95 | 73 | 168 -------------------------------------------+--------+--------+------ Total | 543 | 322 | 865 -------------------------------------------+--------+--------+------

[162] Of the 894 families investigated, 29 lost the applicant by death before the time of the re-visit.

Since the business grant was given in behalf of the family as a whole, the health of the whole family including that of the head has been considered. Of the 697 families without serious handicap, 448, or 64 per cent, were in business at the time of the re-visit, while 95 of the 168 families handicapped by ill health, or 57 per cent, were in business. This latter proportion seems relatively high. Many a man or woman in frail health can see that his hope for security lies in maintaining a small business against all odds. The man with more capital and better health has a chance to make a better income, but he who is without the alternative of employment for wages cannot permit himself to be deterred. A further study of the records seems to indicate that, among the applicants still in business, the proportion who were doing poorly is decidedly smaller in the case of those not handicapped by ill health than in the case of those burdened by a handicap of this nature, whether slight or serious.

CAPITAL AVAILABLE. The part played by the amount of capital available for starting afresh in business was an important one. The term capital as here used includes the grant, and other resources, if any, such as equipment or stock saved from the fire, insurance, savings, gifts, loans, and credit. Table 59 shows the numbers starting business with given amounts of capital, and shows what part the grant played therein.

TABLE 59.--AMOUNT OF GRANTS TO AND OF CAPITAL AVAILABLE FOR APPLICANTS RECEIVING BUSINESS REHABILITATION[163]

[163] Of the 894 families investigated, 200 failed to supply information relative to capital available.

It has already been seen that grants ranged in amount from less than $100 to $900. The amount of capital available for starting business varied from less than $300 to as high as $5,000. More than two-thirds of all persons in this group received less than $300 cash from the committee. By virtue of other resources which some of the group had on hand or managed to secure, 463, or almost exactly two-thirds of the entire number, had $300 or more available for starting business.

In general, the rehabilitation committee adhered to its announced policy of helping only those that were accustomed to doing business on a small scale. Even among these, however, there were degrees. For clarity, as the division seems a convenient one, the discussion that follows will recognize two groups: one of 497 persons whose available capital including grants was less than $700, and one of 197 persons who had $700 or more available for the start. These will be spoken of as the low capital and the high capital groups respectively. In a similar way, grants for business rehabilitation consisting of less than $300 will be referred to as small grants, and grants of from $300 to $1,000 as large grants.

Of the 497 members of the low capital group, 380 received small grants and 117 large grants; while of the 197 members of the high capital group, 96 received small grants and the remaining 101 large grants. Thus the proportion of applicants who received large grants was much larger in the case of the high capital group than in the case of the low capital group--an application, doubtless justifiable, of the scriptural principle, “unto him that hath shall be given.”

The members of the high capital group who received small grants were possessed of other resources so considerable that the grant was, in many instances, but a small fraction of the capital available for business. In such cases, the grant derived its importance and its justification from the fact that it was in the form of cash. The possession of a certain amount of ready money was always necessary to secure a site, and was often a necessary condition of obtaining credit.

Whether or not a given capital is sufficient for a business venture will depend largely on the nature of the business entered; and, as has elsewhere been noted, the successful applicants for relief engaged in many different and highly diversified undertakings. The discussion of the adequacy of capital and of the relation of capital to grants will therefore be deferred to the following chapter, in which the recipients of business relief will be considered in occupational groups.

SUMMARY. Outward circumstances have much to do with the success of a business enterprise: the time, the place, and the money form a strong combination, and with health thrown in for good measure the combination is almost proof against disaster provided the right man make use of the combination. A committee disbursing business aid which patiently eliminated those doomed to fail, could get practically all of its beneficiaries started if it were left free-handed throughout the whole period of relief distribution to make well-timed and adequate grants, and if it spent enough on administration to allow for the supervising of grants whenever character and circumstances indicated the advisability of doing so. It may be noted that the 45 persons who in the judgment of the reviewer received timely aid, properly given, to the extent of $250 or as much more as was needed; persons who had resources to equal or exceed the grant, who were in good health, and who secured what seem to have been good locations, had started in business. Only three of the 45 had discontinued business, and of these, one had only temporarily discontinued.

II ANALYSIS BY OCCUPATIONS, STUDY OF REFUSALS AND SUMMARY

1. SUCCESS OR FAILURE IN RELATION TO OCCUPATIONS

The proportion of applicants aided who succeeded in establishing themselves in business varied to a certain extent with the occupation entered. Sufficient data relative to the occupations and success in business could be secured for only 702 of the 894 applicants visited in 1908. The table next presented shows for the different occupational groups the number of cases in which grants of each specified nature were made and the proportion of these cases that were still in business at the time of the re-visit.

TABLE 60.--BUSINESS STATUS AT THE TIME OF THE RE-VISIT OF APPLICANTS RECEIVING BUSINESS REHABILITATION, BY OCCUPATIONS.[164]

[164] In this table data are presented for only the 702 applicants of the 894 investigated for whom complete information relative to occupation and business success or failure was secured.

The occupations shown in the table are not necessarily those for which the grants were given, but the occupations in which applicants were found engaged in 1908.

If one thing stands out more clearly than another it is, that following a disaster, persons who seek to re-establish themselves in professional or manufacturing pursuits have a much higher expectation of success than those that seek to re-establish themselves in trade or as proprietors in some branch of personal and domestic service, such as a restaurant or a rooming house.

On an earlier page it has been noted that some applicants were unable to make a start because of lack of capital. Lack of capital was less seriously felt by those having mechanical or professional skill, to whom the amount of capital held appeared to be of slight moment, than by those in the two remaining groups. The relation of capital to success in the trade and in the personal service groups is treated, therefore, at some length in connection with the detailed discussion of these groups.

THE PROFESSIONAL GROUP

Of the 88 members of the professional group re-visited, 79 whose cases furnished data complete on the points to be considered are here studied. As for the grants made, none exceeded $500 and 50 were for $250 or less. Those whose offices, studios, and in many cases, homes also, had been burned, had little left in the way of material possessions. Twenty persons are noted on the visitors’ schedules as having had no resources other than their grants. The amounts with which the members of this group essayed to re-establish themselves were as follows: 34, less than $500; 24, $500 and less than $700; and only 21, $700 or more. The outcome by 1908 was: of the first group 29 were still in business; of the second, 20; and of the third, 19. There were eight who had not started, and three who had started and discontinued.

In the cases of those that did start, the grant was as a rule applied as a cash payment toward equipment. The difference between the amount of capital and the amount of the grant, in general, measures the amount of credit allowed by wholesalers in the purchase of instruments and equipment. The proportion of success is high even among those with least capital at their disposal, and no direct relation is to be discovered between amount of capital and success except in the cases of a dentist and a photographer who were found to be working for wages and to be adding savings to their grants so as to start later with better equipment. Six others, as stated above, also failed to start. A woman pianist married and gave up her profession. A woman physician accepted a position in her alma mater as an instructor. A stenographer took a position on salary instead of opening her own office. An elderly music teacher became a chronic invalid and was admitted to the Relief Home. A man who had wanted to resume his work of giving electric treatments took instead a position with the city board of health and the visitor who saw him thinks he did not intend to resume his old line. Supervision of his grant of $250 would have tested his good faith. Another case which should have been supervised was that of an elderly showman who was given $450 to replace the tent used to house the wax figures of his quaint historical show. He spent most of the business grant for an operation to restore the failing sight of his elderly wife. A supervisor could have arranged for surgical care without interfering with rehabilitation.

Three cases, as noted, started but to discontinue. A physician who had received $450 from the Rehabilitation Committee and $100 from the Physicians’ Fund, opened an office; then, having closed it “on account of dull times,” left the city. A gymnasium director set up his equipment, but found his location a poor one; therefore he stored his apparatus and closed his place until he should find a better. A public stenographer had typist’s cramp from overwork. When able to resume work, he took a salaried position. More careful investigation and supervision of the eleven unsuccessful cases would probably have resulted in withholding the grant from one man, and getting one other into business. But as a group the applicants accomplished all that was possible under the circumstances, and that without the use of large sums of money.

MANUFACTURING AND MECHANICAL GROUP

An almost equally high degree of success attended the efforts of 183 persons engaged in manufacturing and mechanical industries.

These were largely tailors, dressmakers, shoemakers, painters, and metal workers. In the group of 79 in which capital was under $300, the attempts at rehabilitation of 50, or less than two-thirds, were successful. In the group of 104 with more capital, the showing was higher. The 26 who had $1,000 or more were without exception successful.

There were 23 who started business and discontinued, and 14 who did not start. Among these 37 cases, 10 failures appear to be due principally to lack of capital, but the 27 remaining failures are to be attributed largely to other causes, among which unfortunate choice of location and ill health complicated with old age are uppermost. Two examples must suffice:

A shoemaker, aged sixty-six, presented a plan to Committee VI which definitely called for $400 to buy a half interest in a given shop. He was granted $250, but as he could make no satisfactory arrangements with his proposed partner he began working at wages. A younger man with that amount of cash might have started a shop of his own, but this was too much to expect of one of his age. Another, a much younger man, failed to make a success of his bakeshop. He leased a lot on which to build his shop and invested in equipment his capital of $500. When competition sprang up around him, he could neither afford to move nor to remodel his shop in order to rent it to some one else for another purpose.

Perhaps one-half of the foregoing 37 failures could have been averted or mitigated by intelligent oversight. As a rule, however, it is safe to assume that persons with the skill to do mechanical work require less supervision than do those of the groups we are to discuss in the following sections.

TRANSPORTATION AND MISCELLANEOUS GROUP

Of the 16 members of this group, seven were established in business at the time of the re-visit. Grants were given to 12 men to start as teamsters or draymen. Ten of the 12 men bought teams, but only four were still in business in 1908. The price of hay was high, and work at wages easy to obtain; the two men who made no start became wage-earners. One man who was given money to acquire a messenger service, had been successful. Of the three remaining grantees of this group, one started a chicken farm which was running with fair success; another, a cleaning and dyeing establishment which was successful; and the third, a venture of the last named kind which had failed in the first month. This last proprietor after his failure had left the city.

In considering the relatively small number of successes among the members of this group, it must be remembered that the number of cases is too small for the data to be truly representative.

PERSONAL AND DOMESTIC SERVICE GROUP

Just as a small manufacturing enterprise is the avenue through which skilled artisans seek by becoming small proprietors to reach independence, so rooming and boarding houses, barber shops, restaurants, laundries, and the like are the roads along which individuals of a less skilled class travel to reach the same end. The cheap rooming houses of today are often run by the charwomen of yesterday; the better grade houses, by widowed housewives of somewhat higher station; the barber shops, by erstwhile barber’s helpers; and the small restaurants and lunch counters, by one-time cooks. Competition is extreme because persons accustomed to small earnings are constantly entering these fields with their little hoard of savings, ready to be satisfied with very moderate returns. In the long run, business ability tells in this as in all other lines of enterprise, but to this class adequacy of equipment and suitable location are of relatively more importance than in other forms of enterprise previously discussed.

In a city changing as rapidly as San Francisco changed for the first three years after the fire, the wisest could not tell with certainty how long a certain locality would remain desirable for his purposes. Some persons, in order to avoid prohibitive rents, signed leases for one or two years, which held them in poor locations after their better judgment told them they should move to keep near their shifting patrons. Under such circumstances two or three hundred dollars in the bank, or even less, might mean the difference between success and failure.

Where competition is close it makes a very great difference whether the equipment is owned outright or whether considerable monthly cash instalments must be paid. It is true that in ordinary times clever persons can fit up rooming houses and rent all the rooms at a fair profit. But ordinarily the small house at best offers a woman nothing more than an opportunity to be her own employer at very moderate wages; her fate depending, at each recurring crisis, on a cash reserve sufficient to carry her over a dull period, or to enable her to win in an endurance test with a nearby competitor. Rooming houses are spoken of specifically because more than three-fourths of the grants for personal service enterprises were given for this purpose.

As has been shown by Table 60, of 249 applicants visited in 1908 who had been given aid for personal and domestic service and for whom data have been tabulated, 168, or almost 68 per cent, were still in business at the time of the re-visit.

In this group the tendency of committeemen, already commented on, to make grants about uniform in amount is clearly seen. In fact, 105, or more than two-fifths of the 249 cases discussed in this section, received grants that were $200, and less than $300. It was understood that many of the enterprises required a considerably larger capital, but the business committee had the theory that given a sum of $200 or $250 any normally enterprising person could “raise” the rest. Many applicants did so, but not all. By sub-dividing the 245 cases in which the amount of capital is known into three groups we are able to see the respective parts played by the relief grant and the applicants’ other resources. The figures are given in Table 61.

TABLE 61.--BUSINESS STATUS AT THE TIME OF THE RE-VISIT OF APPLICANTS RECEIVING BUSINESS REHABILITATION FOR PERSONAL AND DOMESTIC SERVICE, BY SIZE OF GRANTS AND AMOUNT OF CAPITAL[165]

==============================+===============+=========+====== Business status |CASES IN WHICH |Cases in | Total |CAPITAL WAS LOW| which | +-------+-------+ capital | | Grant | Grant |was high | | small | large | | ------------------------------+-------+-------+---------+------ In business at time of revisit| 66 | 41 | 57 | 164 Started and discontinued | 29 | 7 | 9 | 45 Did not start | 27 | 5 | 4 | 36 ------------------------------+-------+-------+---------+------ Total | 122 | 53 | 70 | 245 ------------------------------+-------+-------+---------+------

[165] Information relative to the amount of capital was secured for only 245 of the 249 applicants receiving business rehabilitation for personal and domestic service concerning whom data are presented in Table 60.

The classification of capital as high and low, and of grants as large and small, has been discussed in the preceding chapter. The first group dealt with in the table, which will be called for convenience the small-grant low-capital group, consists of persons whose grant was less than $300 and whose capital available for business, including grant, was less than $700. Their enterprises in general were those of side streets and out-of-the-way locations.

The second group, known as the large-grant low-capital group, is made up of persons whose grant was $300 or more, but whose entire capital was no more than $700. They were largely persons whose previous enterprises had been capitalized at over $700 and to whom the Rehabilitation Committee gave liberal grants with the idea that the applicant would go into debt for the balance needed.

There remains a third group of the high-capital group which was previously capitalized at from $700 up and which expected to go into business in fairly prominent locations, on something like the old scale. As its members had considerable resources, the grant, while it played an important part in the applicant’s rehabilitation, was not the sole factor determining a start. Such was frequently the case in the two low-capital groups. The distinction between large grants and small grants, as it is of much less importance to the members of this group than to the members of the two low-capital groups, has not been indicated in the table.

It will be noted from the table that the proportion of applicants aided who were in business at the time of the re-visit was largest for the high-capital group, and much larger for the large-grant low-capital group than for the small-grant low-capital group. Brief consideration will now be given to each of the three groups.

The small-grant low-capital group has 122 members. Of its members 93 were given aid to open boarding and rooming houses, 15 to open barber or hairdressing establishments, eight to start restaurants, three to start laundries, and three to set up boot-blacking stands. Nearly two-thirds of the group were widows, and 57 were persons or couples living alone.

At the time the grants were made, 93, or more than three-fourths of this group, had no other resources; 27 had savings, collectible insurance, or real estate available for business. Data are lacking as to the resources of the two remaining individuals.

It was the hope of the Rehabilitation Committee that the large proportion of persons who came empty-handed, would, on receipt of a lump sum in itself insufficient to establish a business, develop latent resources. Such was often the result. Of the 93 cases mentioned above as having no before-fire resources, 46 received cash gifts other than the relief grant, negotiated friendly loans, or were allowed credit with former dealers. The manifestly right function of a relief grant of money for business is distribution such as will not supplant aid from other sources. But what of the small grants given to persons who could by neither hook nor crook obtain a supplemental sum? Forty-six of the 93 did succeed in getting help from other sources, and with three exceptions, made a start. Forty-seven did not succeed in getting help from other sources, 19 of whom failed to start. Of this 47, more than one-third were past the age of fifty. It is precisely in the cases of these individuals who have no other resources that supervising visitors would prove useful in devising ways and means to get a venture launched, arranging if necessary for a further committee grant.

An inspection of the case records seems to show that the members of the small-grant low-capital group who increased their resources by borrowing were, on the whole, more successful than those who did not borrow. Of the 50 applicants who went into debt, 34, about two-thirds, were found in business in 1908, while of the 70 who incurred no debt, only 30, considerably less than one-half, were in business. In the two remaining cases of the 122, the data were incomplete. The plan of the Rehabilitation Committee then, which was to have applicants use their grants as the means of a start on a credit basis, seems justified as applied to those individuals who have the courage to assume necessary debts.

The applicants who did not go into debt seem to have been ultra-conservative persons for whom the rehabilitation program was too strenuous. Doubtless for the most part they did well not to go into debt. Most probably these were frugal souls who had never incurred risks but had saved their wages and not made their original start until they could equip a business for cash. Afterwards they had doubtless continued, as they started, paying cash as they went along. It is not to be expected of those who have done business on a cash basis all their lives, that, when the passing years have done their work of lessening initiative, they should cheerfully and confidently assume a burden of debt. It would seem to be the duty of a relief committee to recognize the handicap on those trying to earn their living through business who never possessed the initiative of the typical business man, have been robbed of it by age or ill health, or have been made conservative by domestic responsibilities.

The 122 cases of the small-grant low-capital group comprise one-half of the re-visited persons to whom aid had been given for enterprises in personal or domestic service. In view of the fact that but 66 of the 122, slightly over one-half, were in business in 1908, it seems evident that a considerable number of these families (1) should not have been given money except for household rehabilitation, (2) should have been given sums materially larger in amount, or (3) should have been given the advantage of expert supervision.

Before leaving the subject of rehabilitation in personal service, it will be well to note briefly the remaining 123 cases, which number divide themselves into a large-grant low-capital group of 53 cases and a high-capital group of 70 cases.

The occupations of the members of the large-grant low-capital group were much the same as the foregoing; of the 53 in this group, 40 secured grants for boarding and rooming houses, seven for barber shops, and six for restaurants. As in the case of the preceding group, a number of the applicants went into debt in order to increase their capital available for business; and again the Relief Survey records show that those who incurred debt were, in general, more successful than those who did not. Extreme care must, however, be exercised in formulating conclusions because of the small number of cases involved.

The 70 persons in the high-capital group represent higher standards and more ambitious plans than the members of the preceding groups. The grants were often small in amount because the applicant’s resources were known to be substantial. Capital ranged in this group from $700 to nearly $3,000. Again, rooming houses are in the ascendancy. There were 56 grants for this purpose, seven for restaurants, three for barber shops, two for laundries, one for a towel supply concern, and one for a window-cleaning enterprise. The families were constituted much as in the small-grant low-capital group, over two-fifths being individuals or couples living alone. Among the 175 cases of the two low-capital groups, in which capital was under $700, only one-fifth of the number had savings, insurance, or real estate available for business. In this high-capital group 36, or more than half of the cases, had resources.

Twenty-five out of the 36 who had resources, and every one of the 34 who were without resources, went into debt, and all but four of the 70 started business. In the low-capital groups those who stayed out of debt exceeded those who incurred it. In this group, the great majority had gone into debt, even including the greater number of those who had insurance or savings in addition to their grant.

Of 11 applicants who avoided debt, three did not start in business, but eight who did so remained in business; while of the remaining 59, who borrowed, all but one started, and 49 remained in business. Because of the small number of cases, and particularly of cases in which no debt was assumed, these figures must not be construed as establishing a relationship between success and borrowing or failing to borrow.

Some comparisons between these three groups are suggestive. It seems that the families in the small-grant low-capital group must have needed much more money than they had, or so many would not have failed to get into business as planned. The small grants they received were not enough to encourage them to incur a moderate debt and go ahead. Consequently, only slightly over one-half succeeded in establishing themselves in business.

Persons in the large-grant low-capital group appear not to have needed much additional assistance, for while considerably over half of them got along without incurring debt, over three-fourths were established in business.

Those in the high-capital group needed sums of $700 or more to resume business on anything like the old scale. The grants they received were in many cases actually, and in most cases relatively, small. Even though many had substantial resources, yet nearly all went into debt. That the capital with which members of this group entered business was, in general, sufficient, seems to be indicated by the fact that 57 of the 70 were in business at the time of the re-visit.

TRADE GROUP

The success of small trade enterprises is affected in the confusion of post-disaster conditions and, in the absence of expert supervision, almost as much by the amount of capital available as is personal and domestic service. Like the keeping of rooming houses and other branches of personal service, trade is looked upon by the unskilled as an easy means of earning a livelihood. But the prizes in trade are, as a matter of fact, reserved for those rare few who have the special sense for perceiving the “elusive value that hovers now here and now there.” The average citizen, if he is to make even a modest living by trade, needs certain material advantages to compensate him for the lack of that keen economic sense possessed by the shining few who started with the traditional pack and are now numbered among our merchant princes. When the everyday citizen sets out to peddle, he must have a horse, a place to keep him, hay to feed him while he lives, and money enough to make a payment down on another if he dies. If the business is to be in a shop, it must be fairly well located, and decently equipped with fixtures and stock. He can go into debt for fixtures, but as a rule he can get little credit for stock, especially if it is a mixed stock, like that of a notion store, or perishable stock, such as food stuff. In fact, the only shop keeper sure of holding his own in the face of universal competition is the one who can pay a fair amount of rent from the start, can buy attractive fixtures for cash, pay cash for all goods,--thus avoiding interest charges on deferred payments,--and have enough margin left to extend credit, when necessary, to customers and to carry stock over a dull season. Such business does not from the start necessarily include shelter for the family as is the case with a rooming house. It is often many months before the net income is sufficient adequately to support more than one person.

So much for the average citizen, starting business on his own capital, or given a lump sum by a relief committee and left, without supervision, to run the risk of making costly if not irretrievable mistakes.

It has already been seen that, of the 175 applicants given assistance for trade, 124, or about 71 per cent, were in business at the time of the visit in 1908. In three cases satisfactory data relative to capital could not be secured. The 172 remaining cases have been classified, like the persons aided in personal and domestic service, on the basis of capital and grants. Table 62 shows for the small-grant low-capital group, for the large-grant low-capital group, and for the high-capital group the number of applicants in business at the time of the Relief Survey, those who started but discontinued, and the number who did not start.

TABLE 62.--BUSINESS STATUS AT THE TIME OF THE RE-VISIT OF APPLICANTS RECEIVING BUSINESS REHABILITATION FOR TRADE, BY SIZE OF GRANTS AND AMOUNT OF CAPITAL[166]

==============================+===============+========+===== Business status |CASES IN WHICH |CASES IN|Total |CAPITAL WAS LOW| WHICH | +-------+-------+CAPITAL | |Grant | Grant |WAS HIGH| |small | large | | ------------------------------+-------+-------+--------+----- In business at time of revisit| 54 | 20 | 50 | 124 Started and discontinued | 14 | 7 | 4 | 25 Did not start | 19 | 4 | .. | 23 ------------------------------+-------+-------+--------+----- Total | 87 | 31 | 54 | 172 ------------------------------+-------+-------+--------+-----

[166] Information relative to amount of capital was secured for only 172 of the 175 applicants receiving business rehabilitation for trade concerning whom data are presented in Table 60.

It will be seen that the proportion of applicants remaining in business was very high for members of the high-capital group, and only very slightly higher for the members of the large-grant low-capital group than for the members of the small-grant low-capital group.

Of the re-visited applicants who were given rehabilitation for trade, 87, or about one-half, fall within the small-grant low-capital group. Some of the 87 proposed to become peddlers, canvassers, or agents, but the majority planned to be merchants or dealers. Notion stores, branch bakeries, cigar stands, grocery stores, millinery stores, tea and coffee routes, and stationery stores were among the enterprises contemplated. Two-thirds of the families either had no dependents or had wage-earners to supplement the income from the business. The proportion entirely without resources is high, being 62 out of 87. Twenty-six incurred indebtedness in order to engage in business; and of these, 23 were in business in 1908. Of the 61 who did not borrow, only 31 remained in business.

It seems that to start a small enterprise, grants of under $300 to persons who could not bring their capital to a point between $500 and $700 without assuming an unwieldy debt, were too small, in the absence of close supervision, to assure their restoration within a reasonable length of time to a normal standard of living.

The large-grant low-capital trade group had but 31 members. Nearly half of the number were families with dependents and without wage-earners. Their enterprises were of the same character as were those of the small-grant group. Only eight of the 31 went into debt, and the amounts they obtained were in no case as much as the grant. Six of the eight remained in business. Of the 23 that did not borrow, 14 remained in business. Because of the small number of cases involved, no conclusions should be drawn as to the relation between success and borrowing.

There remain of the trade enterprises a high-capital group of 54 persons in half as many different lines of buying and selling. Over half of these families had dependents, most of the families having dependents being couples with from one to five young children. Four-fifths of all the families had before-fire resources. The persons who contracted indebtedness numbered 42, and of these, 39 were in business at the time of the re-visit. Eleven of the 12 families who did not borrow were in business. Because of the similarity of the proportion of successes among those who incurred indebtedness and among those who did not, and because of the small numbers involved, conclusions would be worse than valueless.

2. STUDY OF REFUSALS

One hundred and six persons who had applied for aid for business and had been refused were visited in 1908, and most of them were located and personally interviewed. The visitors had dreaded to meet these disappointed applicants face to face, and were agreeably surprised to find that most of them were quite willing to be interviewed and for the most part bore the Rehabilitation Committee no ill-will. The many who were doing well were proud to have achieved success without aid; and those who had failed to get into business and were doing poorly, were pleased to have some one on whom to lay the blame. Only one man refused point blank to give an interview.

Except for showing a preponderance of married couples, the families to whom aid was refused were constituted about as were those families to whom aid was given. They had in general much more extensive resources than the grantees, though 13 had no resources whatever and 22 others had less than $500.

The reasons for which aid was refused were in general more technical than those for which assistance of a less specialized nature was denied. Six were refused, in fact, because their character and habits were thought to be such as would militate against success; two were remitted to the care of near relatives; and two were found to have rehabilitated themselves unaided. Ten only were refused because they had not been in business before the fire; and 20 because they presented no feasible plan or because they wanted to start saloons, which latter proposal, naturally, the Committee could not approve. Five were refused because they wanted to be re-established on a large scale. The largest grant the Committee could have given them would have been too small for their needs. The remaining 61 were refused because they were judged able to rehabilitate themselves, if not in business, then through wage-earning.

Of the 106 refused grants by the Committee, 42 did not start business, but 62 started without the aid applied for. Two of those refused had died. Of the 62 who entered business, eight failed and the remaining 54 were still in business in 1908. Failure to start was much more general among the candidates for rehabilitation in personal service than among those who sought aid for manufacturing or mechanical enterprises, which serves to emphasize what has been said as to the greater expectation of success in the lines involving mechanical skill.

As was to be expected from the fact that exhaustive investigation was not attempted by the Rehabilitation Committee in 1906, a certain number of the refusals appeared, in the judgment of the reviewer, to have been unjustified. There were 23 such instances. In 12 of them conditions were not without remedy. Reports on seven of the cases were submitted to the Rehabilitation Committee, and grants of from $250 to $350 each were promptly made. Five other families were found in which circumstances had changed so as to make aid advisable. To the 12 families, the sum of $3,090 altogether was distributed in 1908.

3. SUMMARY OF THE RESULTS OF BUSINESS REHABILITATION

Business rehabilitation was successful, then, to the extent that of the 894 applicants aided who were visited, 683 started in business and 543 were still in business in 1908.[167] Of the 211 applicants who received grants, but did not enter business, 10 are known to have died; 63 abandoned altogether their plans for entering business; 21 modified their plans as stated to the Committee, or substituted other plans; 10 spent their grants for housing, furniture, or living expenses; and one invested the grant in his son’s business. Data as to the 106 remaining cases are lacking.

[167] See Table 57, p. 186.

It seemed to the reviewer unlikely that any of the 63 applicants who had abandoned the idea of going into business at the time of the grant would ever enter business again. Thirty-nine were working for wages, nine were housewives, and nine were dependent. Data concerning six are incomplete.

As to the causes of the breaking down of the plans for rehabilitation presented to the Committee, the amount of capital available appears to have played its part. While for nine of the 63 cases in which the plan broke down utterly, the amount of capital was not known, in only nine of the remaining 54 cases, or about 17 per cent, was the capital as large as $500. Of those, on the other hand, who merely modified their plans, or who substituted others, over half had $500 or more working capital. In 57 cases it is known how the grant was spent: in 20 instances it went for general living expenses; in 11 instances for illness and in six others for funeral expenses; in 11 for household furniture; in three for housing; in two for clothing; in two for old debts; in one for a typewriter; and in one for transportation.

In 42 of the 63 cases of breakdown of the plan, there is strong internal evidence that the grant was either inadequate (23 cases), given too late (eight cases); or given without supervision, of which there was an obvious need (11 cases). In six cases the applicant appears to have been deficient in enterprise, and in 11 cases the applicant’s circumstances changed after receiving the grant. Of the four remaining cases little is known.

Sickness and death and household and personal needs consumed more than three-fifths of the diverted grants. In the summer and fall of 1906 the members of the Rehabilitation Committee often shaved down grants because of a perfectly natural fear of a future shortage of funds. A mental habit of caution was being formed during these months of uncertainty which without doubt affected Committee VI in its later handling of some 1,690 cases. Some of these applications were very properly refused. The 894 re-visited applicants who were aided were given grants averaging $247. With the half million dollars that Committee VI had on hand, the grants could have been made to average $400 for the 1,226 grantees aided by this committee. Doubtless grants of such an amount, augmented when necessary to provide money for furniture and clothing, coupled with more frequent supervision, would have reduced materially the number that failed to re-establish. Failures would then have been largely confined to those few persons who showed themselves deficient in enterprise, or whose circumstances changed so completely after receipt of the grant as to make re-establishment impossible.