| 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
| Premises and rentals | CASES IN WHICH PREMISES AND RENTALS WERE AS SPECIFIED | |
|---|---|---|
| Before fire | After fire | |
| One rental for business and residence combined | 481 | 353 |
| Two rentals | 161 | 98 |
| One business rental (residence owned) | 16 | 13 |
| No rental (combined premises owned) | 6 | 34 |
| One residence rental | 33 | 152 |
| Not in business and not paying rent | .. | 47 |
| Total | 697 | 697 |
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.
A plumber’s new start
