A PHOTOGRAPH TAKEN BY LAWRENCE VEILLER (B)
Veiller is credited with inducing the passage
of the Tenement House Law of 1901, which outlawed further erection of dumbbell
tenements, provided bathroom facilities for each apartment, required greater
open space, and implemented strict fire-protection standards. Born
in 1872 in Elizabeth, New Jersey, Veiller became interested in improving
the lodgings of the poor after his work with the East Side Relief Committee
during the depression of 1893. Veiller went on to run the Tenement
House Committee of the Charity Organization Society as its secretary.
Started in 1899, the society helped bring about the passage of the Tenement
House Law of 1901.
At the Tenement-House Exhibition of 1899, which was held by the
Charity Organization Society, Veiller and company displayed an assortment
of maps, models, charts, diagrams, tables, and over one thousand
photographs, to support their claim that New York city laborers were "housed
worse than any other city in the civilized world." (Veiller, "Tenement
House Exhibit of 1899"). Lasting a duration of two weeks, the exhibition
not only informed the public (over 10,000 of which came to see the display)
of the tenement situation, but it also convinced Theodore Roosevelt (then
governor of New York) of the need for the creation of a state tenement
committee.
Veiller carefully laid out the proper course of action at his
exhibition:
"There are many things to be done. In the first place, legislation must be secured, absolutely prohibiting the erection of tenement houses of the present type. Then it will be necessary to put forth considerable effort to see that such a law is enforced. This will take care of the future, but negative work of this kind alone will not solve the problem. Model tenements must be built by wealthy men as investments, and on a large scale. In the last ten years two such tenements were erected in New York. In the same time nearly 15,000 tenements of a bad type were built by speculative builders. It we are to keep up with conditions, let alone get ahead of them, we must take up this work on a larger scale than has ever before been attempted. There is much that can be done by men and women of means in improving many of the old, bad tenement houses, buying them up, one at a time, altering them to suit the needs of the tenants, and then, by wise management, making them financial successes. Nor is this all that has to be done before it can be felt that New York affords decent living conditions. There is opportunity for nearly every form of social effort. The model tenement is the best kind of a social settlement. There is no other way in which so much personal influence can be exerted as in managing such a tenement." (2)
Veiller cited the many flaws of the current tenement houses, including
New York’s deadly combination of having the world’s worst tenement houses
with the highest rents. Veiller pointed out, amongst other defects, the
lack of air in the houses—particularly resulting from the extremely diminutive
air shafts. Veiller also felt there was a need for playgrounds, as well
as public parks and baths.
Veiller, along with Hugh Bonner, also complained about the lack
of fire escapes on many of the buildings, attributing this to egotism of
the architects:
There is no reason why fire escapes should be omitted on the front of such buildings except the pride of the architect and the owner, who dislike seeing cheap iron balconies upon the front of their buildings. If these balconies offend their artistic sensibilities, they have two remedies: one to make balconies artistic; the other to build their buildings fireproof. We believe that the protection of human life is of much greater importance than anything else. (3)
In addition to being a keen observer, Veiller was a reflective thinker. He not only pointed out the physical inadequacies of tenement houses, but he philosophized on the social and political implications of New York City’s current tenements as well:
"Were this city within a city composed chiefly of native born citizens speaking the same language, activated by a common patriotism, and brought up under the same influences and surroundings, the consequences of this congested population would be serious enough, but where it is in a city composed of people from nations alien to our way of life in nearly every way, ignorant of our language, and brought up under conditions social and political that are entirely foreign to the ones under which they are now living, the results are fraught with the most serious consequences for the community." (4)
Veiller was keenly aware of the role that New York City played for immigrants;
in his eyes, the status quo of the tenements were only hindering the "Americanization
process" of the newcomers.
Veiller’s ultimate achievement was the passage of the 1901 Tenement
Law. The Law not only set the aforementioned restrictions on future
tenements, but it also demanded renovations on existing tenements, such
as an upgrade in bathroom facilities and fire escapes, lighting for dark
halls, a greater number of windows, and waterproofing of floors in the
basement.