New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1915-03-11
EFFICIENCY ITS UNDOING?
The Tenement House Department Ripper
Pressed for That Reason.

To the Editor Of The Tribune.
Sir: Il is about time that the citizens OF
greater New York were aroused TO the fact
that the Lockwood -Ellcnbogen bill is one Of
the most vicious bits of ripper legislation of
the last twenty years. 1t is most vicious
where it jeopardizes the independence of the
Tenement House Department. This depart
ment was organized not quite fourteen years
ago, and has been vital factor in imprOv-
ing the living conditions of the tenement
dweller
We have often heard OF men being dis
charged for failure to perform their duties
and have witnessed business firms going into
bankruptcy on account of poor business meth
DDS but here we have a department that has
not been remss in the discharge of its duties,
has faithfully carried out the provisions OF
the tenement house law, and yet its very
efficiency and honesty of purpose may prove
its undoing.
II has been stated that the passage Of this
bill will mean the saving of considerable
amount of money for the city. But will it?
Will it not be a case Of being "perny wise
and pound foolish? Would the saving OF
$3.50, 900 or $4,000 at the most make up for
the total Generalization that would undoubt-
eddy follow the passage OF this bill? II pro-
vides among other things, that the Supern-
tendent of Buildings shall. within the Dor
ough for which appointed, have jurisdiction
and control OF the construction, alteration,
lighting and ventilation Of all buildings.
With five different neads, is it reasonable to
suppose that there will be any unanimity o.
action, or that the same methods or proceed
ure in any one borough would be followed
out in another borough? Is 1t too far
fetched TO suppose that the welfare OF the
tenement dweller Will be lost sight OF under
this proposed change? Do we stop to con
slider the conditions that were responsible
for the passage of the tenement house law
VIII not the same conditions arise again {.
We find behind this bill the same group OF
selfish realty interests that has continually
chafed under departmental restraint and mas
been ever ready to attack this law BY the
introduction OF amendments at almost every
past session Of the Legislature.
As a matter OF fact, tenement houses are
not overinspected, and are less Inspected than
any other class Of buildings and do not suffer
from a duplication of orders The last report
Of the Committee of Fourteen showed that
there had been great increase III prosttu-
ton in tenement houses. The Tenement
House Department is proceeding along intel
ligent lines to eliminate this even from among
tepement dwelers. Are We TO believe thai
among its manifold duties the new Bureau O.
Buildings will be able TO find time for this
important phase of city life that strikes at
the very peace and purity Of our homes? :
Why don't the supporters of this bill come
out in the open and state that this is class
legislation Of the worst kind? Why are thet
not frank in telling US that according TO their
belief the tenant has no rights whatsoever
other than 20 promptly pay mis- rent? The
cry crudeness of the bill is proof Of the
fact that its supporters either don't know
don't care 10 know what will happen after
its passage. but want it passed merely for
their own selfish interests. Their motto seems
TO be after US the deluge.' H. A. H.
New York, March s, 1915.