| Number of rooms | FAMILIES OCCUPYING RE- SIDENCES 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.