TABLE 69.—ESTIMATED MONTHLY WAGES RECEIVED BEFORE THE FIRE BY THE 380 MEN WHO WORKED FOR WAGES, IN THE FAMILIES RECEIVING AID UNDER THE COTTAGE PLAN
| Monthly wages | Employes receiving wages specified |
|---|---|
| Less than $20 | 6 |
| $20 and less than $30 | 21 |
| $30 and less than $40 | 43 |
| $40 and less than $50 | 49 |
| $50 and less than $75 | 170 |
| $75 and less than $100 | 60 |
| $100 and less than $150 | 21 |
| $150 and less than $200 | 3 |
| “Made a living” | 7 |
| Total | 380 |
Some few are shown to have made very good incomes, but it is not known why they had been unable to acquire property before the fire. The actual wages were in most cases, because of irregularity of employment, considerably less than the amounts given above, which represent what would be the wages for regular employment. It was impossible to ascertain how irregular any given employment was. In comparing the wages received after the disaster, practically no change is found. Previous to April 18, 1906, 76 per cent of these men received less than $75 per month, while at the time of the investigation 75 per cent of them were receiving less than that amount. From the standpoint of income received by the chief breadwinner alone, many families were practically on the same financial basis as at the time of the disaster.
Of the 265 women who before the fire were either the entire support of the family or were supplementing the earnings of their husbands, 162 had been engaged in personal and domestic service, 88 in manufactures, 12 in the trades, and three in the professions. Of these women, 213 were widows. After the disaster the number of women employed was reduced to 258. Their wages before the disaster varied from less than $20 a month, received by 71 women, to “$50 to $75” received by 11, and “above $75” received by one. One woman claimed to have earned more than $75. A large proportion, 49, gave their wages as “living expenses.” After the disaster the number getting less than $20 a month was increased to 94; but on the other hand, 14 were receiving from $50 to $75. As in the case of the men, irregularity of employment meant that the actual incomes of the women were less than their own estimates. Previous to the fire, in 216 different families, or 32 per cent of the total 680, children or adults other than the principal breadwinner were contributing to the home by their outside earnings; afterwards this number increased to 271, or 40 per cent.
Sub-letting of rooms was a source of income to 113, or 17 per cent, of the families before the disaster; afterwards the number was reduced to 46, or 7 per cent. The two- and three-room cottages were hardly large enough for their own members.
TABLE 70.—ESTIMATED YEARLY INCOMES BEFORE AND AFTER THE FIRE OF FAMILIES RECEIVING AID UNDER THE COTTAGE PLAN[184]
| Estimated yearly income | FAMILIES HAVING YEARLY INCOME SPECIFIED | |
|---|---|---|
| Before fire | After fire | |
| Less than $300 | 43 | 102 |
| $300 and less than $600 | 168 | 179 |
| $600 and less than $800 | 211 | 176 |
| $800 and less than $1,200 | 119 | 100 |
| $1200 and over | 94 | 84 |
| Total | 635 | 641 |
[184] Of the 680 families investigated, 45 failed to supply information relative to income before the fire and 39 relative to income after the fire.
[Table 70] shows that after the fire the proportion of families in the lower income groups was somewhat larger, and the proportion in the higher income groups somewhat smaller than before the fire. It appears from a further study of the data that 329 families had greater incomes before the fire than after, while 215 had greater incomes after the fire, and 92 substantially the same income at both periods. Families to the number of 44 failed to report on this point.
The standard of living of the families of four to five members with a smaller yearly income was extremely low. Some were aided by relatives and others were assisted from time to time by philanthropic societies. Those who had received regularly as much as $600 a year were probably self-supporting but had put aside no savings. Only 6 per cent of this group of families had savings at the time of the fire, and only 7 per cent were to receive insurance for losses. They carried however only a small burden of debt. Afterwards, 131 were reported to be in debt, in the main for improvements made on their property or for the purchase of a lot. They had, therefore, comparatively little insurance and savings on which to draw, and received little aid from gifts and loans with which to rebuild. In fact, only 10 of the entire number stated that they had received gifts from relatives or from any other source, and an equal number, that they had obtained loans. The gifts from relatives ranged from $10 to $750, and the loans obtained, from $25 to $250. Two cases are noted of large amounts received, one of $3,300, the other of $5,000, for property sold or inherited after the fire.