The exact character and extent of the segregation of the Negro population may be clearly seen from diagrams of this Harlem district, and of the "San Juan Hill" district in the West Sixties, based upon the latest figures of the Census of 1910. This is given in Diagrams III and IV (pp. 50-51)[42]

With such a distribution of the clearly segregated Negro population, the representative character of the 2,500 families chosen for closer study becomes evident. These families, from figures based upon the original returns of the New York State Census of 1905, were chosen from the Eleventh, the Nineteenth, the Twenty-third, and the Thirty-first districts. The last district was taken in preference to several which contained larger numbers, because it included certain streets that were typical of the Harlem section.

DIAGRAM III:
DISTRIBUTION OF THE NEGRO POPULATION OF HARLEM
Corrected To June 1911

DIAGRAM IV:
DISTRIBUTION OF THE NEGRO POPULATION ON "SAN JUAN HILL"

In all 2,639 families were tabulated. Of these 95 were excluded because the heads of these families were of the professional or business classes, 37 because they were too incompletely reported, and 7 because the heads were white. This reduced the number to 2,500 families, which consisted of 9,788 persons, exclusive of 17 white members of these families. The data from the State Census schedules of enumerators were tabulated in regular order as reported by them for each block or part of block for the Negro families that were designated as living in that street or block.

The families studied were from the following territory: Within the Eleventh Assembly District, the area bounded by Thirtieth and Thirty-eighth streets, Seventh and Tenth avenues; within the Nineteenth Assembly District, Sixty-first, Sixty-second, and Sixty-third streets, between Amsterdam and Eleventh avenues, commonly called "San Juan Hill;" within the Twenty-third and Thirty-first Assembly Districts, One Hundred and Thirtieth and One Hundred and Thirty-third streets between Eighth and St. Nicholas avenues, and One Hundred and Thirty-fourth and One Hundred and Thirty-fifth streets between Fifth and Seventh avenues. These three segregated neighborhoods in 1905 may be roughly characterized as follows: The first was probably in the lowest grade of social condition; the second did not show a decidedly predominant type, but ranged from the middle grade toward the more advanced; the third was the most advanced.

A comparison in detail of the distribution by assembly districts of the total Negro population and of the 2,500 selected families shows also that the latter are representative of the several neighborhoods and of the total population. Table X shows the distribution by Assembly Districts of the 2,500 families for comparison with Table IX above, which gave the total Negro population of Manhattan and its distribution.

Table X. Distribution by Assembly Districts of 2,500 Negro Families, State Census, 1905.

In addition to the data of the State Census of 1905, a personal canvass was made in 1909 of 73 families in their homes, having a total of 212 persons. To these were added 153 individuals at one of the evening schools of the city, a total of 365 persons. The localities within which these 365 people lived corresponded in the main to the location of the 2,500 families taken from the State Census of 1905; that is, between Twenty-fifth, Forty-fifth streets, Fifth and Eighth Avenues; Fifty-third, Sixty-fifth streets, west of Sixth Avenue and between One Hundred and Thirtieth and One Hundred and Thirty-sixth streets, Fifth and Seventh Avenues.

To sum up: The assembly districts chosen and the number of families and individuals tabulated from each district are such as to give a fairly accurate description of the clearly segregated wage-earning Negro population of the districts. The study, then, is representative of about one-fourth of the Negro population of Manhattan in 1905, and is so distributed as to be reasonably conclusive for the wage-earning element of the whole Negro population.

The next question is the composition of this toiling Negro population. The general condition of the wage-earning element of this group will now, therefore, engage our attention.

FOOTNOTES:

CHAPTER IIIToC

General Condition of Wage-earners[43]

I. SEX AND AGE OF NEGRO WAGE-EARNERS

In the 2,500 families composed of 9,788 individuals, the sex distribution and age grouping[44] throw some light upon the life conditions of the wage-earning class. That city life does not look with favor upon a large juvenile element in the population is generally believed. That the city draws mainly those of the working period of life is also generally conceded. The number of children in this Negro group under 15 years of age is 19 per cent, below normal for great cities, and the upper age limit is also quite low, being only 6.6 per cent between forty-five and fifty-four years, and 3.2 per cent over fifty-five years. Thus the bulk of the population, 70.8 per cent, both male and female, excluding 0.4 per cent doubtful and unknown, falls between fifteen and fifty-four years, or within the vigorous working period of life. This is fully set forth in Table XI, which gives the sex distribution and age grouping in assembly districts of the 9,788 individuals in these 2,500 families of the Census of 1905:

Table XI. Sex Distribution and Age Grouping of 9,788 Negro Wage-earners in Manhattan, State Census, 1905.

Figures obtained from the personal canvass made in 1909 bear comparison with those of the State Census of 1905. Substantial agreement is to be noted between the two enumerations, except for the larger percentage of those under 15 years of age in 1905 (19.6 per cent male, 18.4 per cent female), and the smaller percentages in the grouping thirty-five to forty-four years (18.4 per cent male, 16.4 per cent female). Doubtless this effect is produced because so many of the cases in 1909 were individuals attending evening school, who were required to be above 14 years of age, and because few over forty-five years of age are attracted to such a place. The other small difference in percentages is due probably to the small number of individuals, 365, in the figures for 1909. The sex distribution and age grouping in 1909 is shown in Table XII, which follows:

Table XII. Sex Distribution and Age Grouping of 365 Negro Wage-earners in Manhattan, 1909.

The results above correspond also with those of the United States Census of 1900 for the entire City of New York. Making allowance for some families of professional and business classes, probably not excluded from the Census figures for 1900, and for changes which five years interval may have caused, the agreement with the two preceding tables above confirms the representative character of the data for 1905 and 1909. For the total per cent under fifteen years in 1900 was 19.8; in 1905, 19.0; from fifteen to twenty-four years, 24 per cent in 1900, 21.9 per cent in 1905; from twenty-five to thirty-four years, 25.9 per cent in 1900, 31.6 per cent in 1905; from thirty-five to forty-four years, 16.2 per cent in 1900, 17.3 per cent in 1905; from forty-five to fifty-four years, 8.3 per cent in 1900, 6.6 per cent in 1905, and fifty-five years and over, 5.6 per cent in 1900, 3.2 per cent in 1905.[45]

Here, then, is a wage-earning group made up of persons in the younger and more vigorous working period. The small number of children under 15 years of age calls attention to the fact that the growth of this population takes place largely through recruits from other sections of the Country. They must find industrial and social adjustment to a new environment largely made up of the white population. They are either killed off by the conditions under which they work and live, or drift away from the city at a premature old age.

2. NATIVITY OF NEGRO WAGE-EARNERS

If New York has a Negro population largely composed of immigrants from other regions, the question naturally arises, From what sections or regions do they come? The State Census of 1905 gives nativity by countries only. Consequently, those born within the United States are not specified by State or territory of birth. That large numbers of the Negro population of New York City come from other sections of the United States, mainly from the South, is beyond doubt.

We get the first impression of this fact from the Federal Census of 1900. For the whole State of New York in 1900, out of a population of 100,000,[46] 44.6 per cent were natives, 24.1 per cent were from Virginia, 19 per cent were from other Southern States, with a remaining 12.3 per cent to be drawn from other parts of the United States and from other countries.

These proportions are different from those for New York City, because immigrants make up a larger part of the City's Negro population. The figures of the State Census of 1905, as well as those from a personal canvass, point in the same direction, and the evidence indicates clearly the probable condition.

The West Indian element in the Negro population of the City was noticed first. The British West Indies furnish 5.8 per cent of these foreign Negro immigrants, while the Danish West Indies, Cuba, and those islands not specified, together make up 3.6 per cent, a total of 9.4 per cent West Indian.[47] Table XIII (p. 59) gives a survey of this part of the population and shows its relation to the native born.

We are unable to get from the figures of Table XIII the sections or States of the United States from which the 89.5 per cent of American-born Negroes came. The few straws of evidence afforded by the personal canvass point to the main sources of the stream. The percentages have significance although the figures are few. The Southern States, from which there are easy means of transportation to New York, naturally furnish the larger part. Virginia supplied 29.6 per cent of the 365 Manhattan residents; South Carolina, 11 per cent; Georgia, 6 per cent, and Maryland, 4.4 per cent. Taking the Southern States by themselves, 67.5 per cent of the 365 wage-earners were born in that section. Besides 5.7 per cent of the 365 came from the British West Indies. The West Indies and the Southern States probably furnished 73.4 per cent or about three-fourths of these wage-earners in the Negro population of New York City. Table XIV (p. 60) shows in full the State and country of birth of the 365 wage-earners.

Table XIII. Nativity by Country of Birth of 9,788 Wage-earners, Manhattan, 1905.

Foreign and native immigrants predominate in the Negro population of the City. With such a stream of immigrants the question arises about their marriage and family relationships. Are they largely single people, or are there large numbers of married, widowed, or divorced persons among them? The discussion next centers upon this point.

Table XIV. Nativity by State or Country of Birth of 365 Wage Earners, Manhattan, 1909.

3. MARITAL CONDITION OF WAGE-EARNERS

The State Census of 1905 did not ask about the marital condition, but only stated relationships to the head of the family, so that the conjugal condition of women reported as heads of families, of lodgers, and of adult sons and daughters or other relatives in the family could not be ascertained. Therefore, no attempt was made to give statements about conjugal condition based on these returns. However, in the personal canvass of 326 individuals, fifteen years of age and over, the marital condition was obtained. The small number of cases included in Table XV makes the figures and percentages presented valuable for pointing only to what a larger body of data would probably make certain. It is important, therefore, to note that 113 out of 159 males, or 71.1 per cent, and 106 out of 167 females, or 63.5 per cent, were single, excluding those unknown. This suggests what the age grouping would lead us to expect, viz., that the Negro group in New York City has a large proportion of unmarried persons. Table XV, which follows, indicates this conclusion:

Table XV. Marital Condition of 326 Negro Wage-earners, Fifteen Years of Age and Over, Manhattan, 1909.

Now that the marital condition of the individuals has been indicated, we may profitably inquire into the composition of the families.

4. FAMILIES AND LODGERS

An illuminating sidelight is thrown upon the general condition of wage-earners by a study of the sizes of families and the relation of lodgers to those families. The figures used are those of the State Census of 1905 only, as the number of complete families secured in the personal canvass was too small. The points of importance are the size of the economic family, which includes lodgers and all others living under one head, and size of the natural family when lodgers are excluded. The census returns of 1905 showed relationship of each dweller in the household to the head of the family. It was thus easy to separate lodgers, except in some cases when relatives may have been lodgers but were not so designated. Taking the 2,500 families as a whole, with 9,788 individuals, the average size of the family was three and nine-tenths persons. Of these, 2,631 individuals, 26.9 per cent were lodgers, and 7,157, or 73.1 per cent, were natural members. But these aggregates do not portray actual conditions. A true picture may be obtained from a more detailed study of the figures which show that 119, or 4.8 per cent, of the economic families (which includes all persons living under one head) consisted of an individual living alone; 576, 23 per cent, of two persons; 531, 21.2 per cent, of the families had three members, while 478, 19.1 per cent, were composed of four members. Above four, the percentages of families rapidly declined; 13.4 per cent of economic families had five members; 8.3 per cent, six members; 5 per cent, seven members, down to 2.2 per cent, eight members; 1.4 per cent, nine members, and 1.6 per cent, ten or more members. But the composition of these economic families is even more striking. To illustrate, of a total of 576 economic families with two members, 488 had no lodgers, and this was 36.1 per cent of all the families without lodgers; out of 531 families of three members each, 173 had one lodger, or 37.7 per cent of all families having one lodger, and 67 families had two lodgers each, or 20.6 per cent of all the families having two lodgers. Further, 478 families of four members each contained 133 families with two lodgers, 40.9 per cent of all families having two lodgers, and 48 families had three lodgers, 27 per cent of all families having three lodgers, while only 84 families had one lodger, and 213 families, less than one-half, 44.6 per cent of all families of four members each, had no lodgers. Taking the entire 2,500 families, only 1,353 families, or 54.1 per cent, had no lodgers; 459, or 18.4 per cent of the total families, had one lodger only; 325 families, or 13 per cent of the total, had two lodgers only, while 320 families, or 12.8 per cent of the total, had from 3 to 5 lodgers. This left 45, or 1.7 per cent, with 6 to 9 lodgers. In a phrase, the increase in the size of the family means, as a rule, an increase in the number of lodgers, and the relative proportion of natural members probably decreases as the size of the family increases, the proportion of lodgers increasing with the size of the economic family.

Now this showing is not the effect of lodging-houses run as business enterprises, except probably in the families ten members or more, which constitute only 1.6 per cent of the total 2,500 families. This condition is most probably due in part to the fact—which both Census returns and personal observation indicated but could not fully determine—that many of the lodgers consisted of married couples, sometimes with one or two children, and of parts of broken families. Furthermore, the high rents[48] which Negroes have to pay, the limited area in which the opposition of whites allows them to live, together with the small income power due to the occupational field being largely restricted to domestic and personal service, play a large part in forcing families and parts of families to live thus crowded together. This last point about income will be referred to again in Chapter IV on Occupations and in Chapter V on Wages. It is a cause for serious concern that only 54.1 per cent of the families had no lodgers, and this percentage here will probably hold for the entire Negro population of the City. If we exclude the 119 individuals living alone, the families having no lodgers fall to 51.8 per cent.

This last phase of the lodger condition is emphasized if presented in another way which shows the number of families having a specified number of members, exclusive of lodgers. For the same 2,500 families, it brings out from another point of view the relation of the family to the lodgers. There is presented both the number and percent of families that had a specified number of lodgers, and also, the number and percent of families that had a specified number of members exclusive of lodgers. For example, 178 families had three lodgers each, which was 7.1 per cent of the total 2,500 families. And of these 48 families had only one other member; 57 had two other members; 36 had three other; 23 four other; 9 five other; 3 six other, and 1 seven other. Out of 1,353 families that did not accommodate lodgers, 898 families, 67.8 per cent, had three members or less. Of 1,147 families that did accommodate lodgers, 606, 52.8 per cent, had more lodgers than natural members. And if we take the totals, 392, 15.7 per cent, of the families had besides lodgers only one natural member; 909, 36.4 per cent, of the families had in addition to lodgers two members only, and 508, 20.3 per cent, had besides lodgers three members only; 329 families, 13.2 per cent of the total, had four natural members; 325, 12.9 per cent, had five to seven natural members, and 38, 1.5 per cent, had eight or more natural members. This makes it clear that 1,809 of the 2,500 families had three natural members or less, if lodgers are not counted. To take a statement in a percentage that probably will be applicable to the whole City, one may say that, even including relatives who may have been lodgers, 72.6 per cent of Negro families had three members or less, if the lodgers are excluded—a fact of almost startling social significance. All this is a cause for serious concern, and any constructive steps for social betterment should give attention to the causes and remedies for this condition as one of the first and most urgent problems.

To sum up the general condition of wage-earners: The Negro population has increased decade by decade, except from 1840 to 1850 and from 1850 to 1860, preceding and during the Abolition and Civil War crisis. It is made up of young persons and adults in the vigorous working period, and has a small number of children under fifteen years of age. The population is recruited largely by immigrants from the South and the West Indies, who do not survive or remain in the City to a very old age. Among the wage-earners probably single people predominate. Largely because of high rents and low incomes, lodgers made up of married couples, parts of broken families and of individuals seriously interfere with normal family life. The families are usually very small in size, from two to four persons, and an increase in the size of the family generally means an increase in the number of lodgers.

FOOTNOTES:

CHAPTER IVToC

Occupations of Wage-earners

I. AN HISTORICAL VIEW OF OCCUPATIONS

In the New Amsterdam Colony as early as 1628, slaves were sought as a source of labor. These slaves were employed mainly in farm labor. In that year the Dutch West India Company agreed to furnish slaves to the colonists and the Company's largest farm was "cultivated by the blacks."[49] Individuals were at liberty to import slaves for the same purpose.[50] Both slaves and freedmen were used as stevedores and deckhands for the Company's vessels. The slaves were also used in building and repairing the public highways and in the repairing of Fort Amsterdam.[51] In 1680, mention is made of Negroes being used in housebuilding.[52] About the same time Negro slaves were carrying hod for wages, and in 1699 it was said that about the only servants (probably meaning domestic servants) in the Province of New York were Negroes. Freed Negroes were indentured or hired for similar service.[53]

Negroes were mustered into the Colonial army as early as 1698, and in the battle of Lake George in 1755, the "blacks behaved better than the whites."[54]

Under the Dutch government enfranchised and slave Negroes were allowed to acquire and hold land. Some took advantage of this privilege. But with English possession of the colony it was expressly prohibited.[55] Some few Negroes were seamen as shown by the records of the so-called Negro plot of 1741, and one Negro doctor, Harry by name, was among those executed during the time of that insane public excitement.[56]

From about 1835 until 1841 a weekly newspaper, The Colored American, owned and published by Charles B. Ray, Philip A. Bell and others, was published in New York. It had an extensive circulation from Boston to Cincinnati. From this source a number of employments and business enterprises of Negroes in the New York of that period were ascertained. The occupations included three carpenters and joiners, five boot and shoe-makers, five tailors, two music teachers, four teachers of private and evening schools, one newspaper agent, one engraver, one watch and clock-maker, one sign-painter, two dress and cloak makers.[57]

In this period between 1830 and 1860, there were many engaged in domestic and personal service. Most of the smaller hotels of the times had colored waiters. The Metropolitan had about 60 or 70; other hostelries like the Stuyvesant House, the Earls, the Clifford, and a number of restaurants employed colored waiters. Some cooks and barbers, who also applied leeches, treated corns, and did other minor surgical services, were among this class of wage-earners.

Three dentists, P.H. White, John Burdell, and Joshua Bishop, two physicians, James McCune Smith and W.M. Lively, and three ministers, H.W. Garnet, Chas. B. Ray, and Peter Williams, were prominent persons of the period.

But these facts should not give the impression of unalloyed opportunity in the trades and professions, for the columns of this same Negro newspaper were filled with articles, editorials and appeals which indicate the difficulties in that direction. This is further borne out by the testimony of Charles S. Andrews, the white principal of the Manumission Society School for Negroes. He said his graduates left with every avenue closed against them and spoke of difficulties those who had trades encountered, many being forced to become waiters, barbers, servants, and laborers.[58] That domestic and personal service furnished employment for a large number of Negroes is further shown by the organization of the United Public Waiters' Mutual Beneficial Association. This effort was first started by twelve Negro caterers as a corporation to control and keep up the quality of service both by looking after the efficiency of the many waiters they employed and by preventing "irresponsible men attempting to cater at weddings, balls, parties, and some hotels on special occasions." Originally their constitution, framed in 1869, stated the objects of the organization to be "to consolidate the business interests of its members; to encourage and promote industrial pursuits followed by them; to give preference in patronage to its members."[59]

Five of the original corporators, among whom were George Morris, George E. Green, and Charles W. Hopewell, owned imported silver, china, and other caterers' "service" ranging in valuation from about $1,000 to $4,000, and all of them had ability to manage large banquets and other social functions, supplying waiters, cooks, etc. First smaller caterers, then waiters, were taken into the organization until the membership increased to more than a hundred. And in 1872 they added the mutual benefit features, "to insure both medical and brotherly aid when sick and to assist respectably interring its deceased members." One of the caterers of the early corporation, W.E. Gross, is yet in the business at the Bowery Savings Bank and still serves for special occasions, now mainly among Colored people. The organization as a benefit association continued with varying fortunes down to 1905, when it was dissolved by its remaining 33 members.

That there were many other waiters and servants of the time is certain. A head-waiter of that day estimated the number of colored hotel and restaurant waiters at between 400 and 500 in 1870.

2. OCCUPATIONS IN 1890 AND 1900

By the time of the Federal censuses of 1890 and 1900 the Negro population in New York had grown to considerable proportions, and for this increased population we are fortunate in having full occupational returns. Although these figures included all persons ten years of age and over, those under fourteen years probably formed a negligible part of the totals because the Child Labor Laws of the State of New York prohibited the employment of children under fourteen years of age.

It appears, as was expected, that the large majority of Negro wage-earners were engaged in domestic and personal service. But it is significant that in 1890 there were among the male population 236 bookkeepers, accountants, etc., 476 draymen, hackmen, and teamsters, and 427 were engaged in manufacturing and mechanical pursuits. Among the females, there were 418 dressmakers, 103 seamstresses, and 67 nurses and midwives.

The figures for 1900 show a large percentage of increase in domestic and personal service. In occupations classed under trade and transportation, Negro wage-earners increased 450.3 per cent compared with an increase of 177.2 per cent among native whites. Nor is this increase due entirely to semi-personal service occupations for the class of clerks, bookkeepers, etc., had increased from 236 in 1890 to 456 in 1900; draymen, hackmen, and teamsters numbered 1,439 in 1900 as compared with 476 in 1890, an increase of 202.3 per cent. In manufacturing and mechanical pursuits the percentage of increase during the ten years, 1890 to 1900, was 140.3 per cent, larger than that of the native whites, 137.3 per cent. Only one occupation in this class had a smaller increase of Negro workers than 75 per cent. Machinists increased from 7 to 47; brick and stone masons from 20 to 94, or 370 per cent; stationary engineers and firemen from 61 to 227, or 271.1 per cent. Other comparisons indicate clearly a similarly favorable advance in many occupations other than domestic and personal service. Large allowances, of course, must be made for the errors in gathering the figures of the two censuses; yet this does not account for all of the decided increases shown. It must be accounted for on the ground that slowly the walls of inefficiency on one side and of prejudice on the other which have confined Negroes to the more menial and lower-paid employments are being broken down. This progress has come in the face of the fact that the more ambitious and efficient individual is "tied to his group."[60]

In 1890 and 1900 a large number of occupations could not be included in the table because the figures for 1890 were not available. The comparison of the two censuses shows clearly that there is for Negro wage-earners a probable enlargement of the scope of occupations outside of domestic and personal service.

Table XVI below gives in detail the number and percent of increase of the native white and Negro wage-earners, ten years of age and over, engaged in selected occupations in New York City in 1890 and 1900:

Table XVI. Native White and Negro Wage-earners, Ten Years of Age and Over, Engaged in Selected Occupations, New York City, 1890 and 1900.[A]

NOTES FOR TABLE XVI.

OCCUPATIONS IN 1905

In the 2,500 families, composed of 9,788 persons, 1,859 were excluded because of their being under fifteen years of age and 82 were excluded because, although members of wage-earning families, they themselves were either in a professional occupation, or were engaged in a business enterprise on their own account. This left 7,847 individual wage-earners, 3,802 of whom were male and 4,045 were female. Both the male and the female wage-earners show a very large percentage employed in domestic and personal service, 40.2 per cent male and 89.3 per cent female, a large percentage of whom doubtless were married women and widows with children.[61] But it is to be noted as important that among the males, 20.6 per cent were engaged in some occupation classified under Trade and 9.4 per cent under Transportation. While some of these occupations may differ little in character from domestic and personal service, yet the occupations that are entirely removed from that classification are sufficient in number to show, as did the figures for 1890 and 1900, the possibility of Negroes in considerable numbers securing a scope of employment which includes other occupations than those of domestic and personal service.

The State Census figures are more detailed than those of the Federal Census. For example, under domestic and personal service, the Federal Census has grouped together male waiters and servants, while the State Census figures have been tabulated separately. It is also probable that the classification in 1890 and 1900 included wage-earners who were classified differently in 1905 and vice versa. And in 1905 professional occupations as well as all persons doing business on their own account were excluded. Differences in the figures may, therefore, be allowed.

Table XVII, which follows, shows the latest figures available on the scope of employment of Negro wage-earners:

Table XVII. Occupations of Negro Wage-earners, Fifteen Years of Age and Over, Manhattan, 1905.[A]

Before leaving the subject of the restricted scope of occupations among Negroes, something should be said of the far-reaching effects this restriction has upon the life of the wage-earners. Negroes are crowded into these poorer-paid occupations because many of them are inefficient and because of the color prejudice on the part of white workmen and employers.[62] Both of these influences are severe handicaps in the face of the competition in this advanced industrial community.

Restricted thus to a few occupations, there is a larger number of competitors within a limited field with a consequent tendency to lower an already low wage scale. In this way the limitations of occupational mobility react upon income, producing a low standard of living, the lodger evil, and social consequences pointed out below (pp. 80, 89, 144 ff).

To sum up the occupational condition of Negro wage-earners: The large majority of Negroes are employed to-day in occupations of domestic and personal service. This is partly the result of the historical conditions of servitude, of a prejudice on the part of white workmen and employers, which restricts them to this lower field, and of the inefficiency of Negro wage-earners for competition in occupations requiring a higher order of training and skill. The steady increase in 1890, 1900 and 1905 of numbers employed in occupations other than personal and domestic service is prophetic of a probable widening scope of the field of employment open to them.

FOOTNOTES:

CHAPTER VToC

Wages and Efficiency of Wage-earners

The question of wages and working efficiency are so closely related that they can be better treated together than separately. The material for this part of the monograph has been gathered from three sources, namely: a personal canvass, the records of employment agencies for personal and domestic help, and the statement of union rates published by the New York Bureau of Labor Statistics. It has not been possible to calculate the time loss by the worker, and therefore any estimate of annual income based upon the figures given must be made on the assumption of a full year of work. This, of course, is not the actual case, especially with many wage-earners in domestic and personal service.

I. WAGES IN DOMESTIC AND PERSONAL SERVICE

The Employment Agencies' Law of New York City requires that each agency keep a careful and accurate record of the wages of those for whom they secure situations, as well as written references from former employers of each applicant. Since inspectors from the Bureau of Licenses have access to these records at any time, they are probably carefully kept. The material on wages which has been taken largely from these sources has been arranged to show the number of individuals who receive a specified wage, beginning at less than $4.00 and running by $1.00 groups up to $9.00 and over. There follows (p. 80) a table covering 682 males in twenty-four occupations and 2,138 females in twenty-five occupations from 1906 to 1909. It will be noted that in some cases two occupations are given under one heading such as elevator and switchboard, or cook and laundress. In these cases, the individual is paid the same for the two branches of work; so far as the wage is concerned it is one occupation. It is significant that out of a total of 682 males, 513, or 75.2 per cent, received wages under $6.00 per week and that 141, or 20.7 per cent, received between $6.00 and $8.99 per week, while only 4.1 per cent received $9.00 or more per week. With the females, the showing is even more unfavorable. Out of a total of 2,138 females, 1,971, or 92.2 per cent, received less than $6.00 per week, and of these 1,137, or 53.2 per cent, received less than $5.00 per week. Of those receiving $6.00 or more per week, only 8 out of 2,138, or .04 per cent, received as much as $9.00 or more per week.

Of course, many of these wage-earners are furnished their meals in addition to wages; some have meals and room. In some cases question may arise about the effect of lodgings furnished by the employer upon the wages paid his domestic help, but both from the testimony of the employment agent and from statements made in the records, it does not appear that wages are different whether the servants "sleep in" or "sleep out." There are no data to show whether or not consideration of car-fare had any effect on the wages.

An inspection of the list of occupations for which these wages are given and the fact that they were employed in private families (see Table XVIII below) show that comparatively few of these wage-earners had opportunity to receive any considerable money from tips. This is especially true of the females. We may take, therefore, the figures of the table as probably giving an accurate statement of the wages received in domestic service in New York City during the four years, 1906 to 1909.

When one considers the probable dependents on many of these wage-earners, the high rents and high cost of food, he is not surprised to find that about half of these families take lodgers (see p. 64), and that a majority of the women are bread-winners (see p. 73). He sees the poorly-paid domestic service on the one side and on the other the cost of living as high walls bounding a narrow, restricted road that leads to a low standard of living and to social and economic disease. Table XVIII shows the picture in full relief:

Table XVIII. Weekly Wages by Groups of Wage-Earners for Selected Occupations in Domestic and Personal Service, New York City, 1906-1909.[A]

The earnings in hotel service play such an important part in the income of males of the Negro group, that some special note was taken of wages for waiters and bellmen. Records of 249 waiters in Manhattan and 46 waiters in Brooklyn showed that they received $25.00 per month, not including tips. Forty-nine bellmen received $15.00 to $20.00 per month, exclusive of tips. Out of these wages lodging and car-fares must usually be paid, and besides uniforms and laundry are not small items of expense.

2. WAGES IN OTHER OCCUPATIONS

The wages of skilled trades do not affect the larger part of the Negro population, because so small a percentage are engaged in these occupations, as reference to the occupational tables in Chapter IV will show. But the numbers are increasing, for there is a constant struggle of Negro wage-earners to rise to these better-paid occupations. Colored carpenters have a local branch of the Amalgamated Carpenters and Joiners Union; there is a street-pavers union, with about a third of the membership Colored men, and the Mechanics Association is composed of Negro artisans of all kinds who wish mutual help in securing and holding work. Since Negroes who are union men are reported to receive the same wages as white workmen, the approximate union wages in 1909 for such skilled occupations as had a considerable number of Negro males will be a good index. The approximate number of Negro union members in 1910 and union wages in 1909 were about as follows:[63] Asphalt pavers and helpers, Negro union members 350, rate of wages, pavers $2.50 per day, helpers $1.75 per day; rock-drillers and tool sharpeners, Negro members 240, employed by the hour, average daily earnings $2.77; cigar-makers, Negro members 165, piece-workers, average daily earnings $2.00; carpenters, Negro members 40, rate of wages $4.50 per day; stationary engineers, Negro members 35, rate of wages, $3.00-$3.50 per day, average weekly earnings, $21.00; bricklayers, Negro members 21, rate of wages $0.70 per hour, average daily earnings $5.60; plasterers, Negro members 19, rate of wages $5.50 per day; printers (compositors), Negro members 8, average weekly earnings, $24.00; coopers, Negro members 2, average daily earnings $2.50; lathers, Negro members 7, average daily earnings $4.50; sheet-metal workers, Negro members 1, rate of wages $4.50 per day. It is evident that compared with the large number of Negro workers few are engaged in the skilled trades, join the unions, and thus enter into the more highly-paid occupations.

3. EFFICIENCY OF WAGE-EARNERS

The efficiency of wage-earners attaches itself to the question of wages. For domestic and personal service, a rich deposit of first-hand material was available in the written testimonials, secured by employment agencies, from the former employers of each applicant seeking work. This is a requirement of the Employment Agencies' Law. The investigator found two employment agencies which had used a printed blank for securing this testimony from former employers of applicants. These blanks asked four questions which are pertinent to the matter of efficiency, and an additional space was left for further remarks. The questions called for answers on the following points: (1) length of time employed, whether applicant was (2) capable, (3) sober or temperate and (4) honest.

In all, 10,095 such blanks were sent out by the agencies during 1906-1909. About 3,000 were returned. Of these about 1,800 replies were excluded from this tabulation because they were received from employers outside of New York, because they were not completely filled out, or were not signed by the parties replying. For this study, 1,182 cases were used. Of these 139 were returned by the Post Office Department as unclaimed, 21 were returned unanswered, while 20 replied that the parties were never in their employ. So there were left 902 complete cases.

These give a fair indication of the whole. The first point of efficiency is the length of service to one's employer. The records of 100 males do not furnish a sufficient number of cases for any sweeping generalization, yet considerable light is given by the percentages. These show that 30 out of the 100 remained with one employer less than five months; that 24 remained six to eleven months, and 17 from one year to one year and eleven months, while 25 were in one place for more than two years. Special mention may be made of the five following cases: One of them remained five years, one seven years, one six years, one eight years, and one ten or eleven years, with the same employer.

For the females, the percentages will apply well to all who are wage-earners in domestic and personal service. Here, also, the largest percentage, 24.1 per cent, remained in one place from six to eleven months; 21.3 per cent remained three to five months; 16.7 per cent remained one year to one year and eleven months, and fair percentages obtain for the longer terms of service: namely, 5.2 per cent two years to two years and eleven months, and 9 per cent three years or more. Of those in one place of service for three or more years, five remained four years; two, four years and a half; nine, five years; three, six years; four, seven years; two, eight years; one, twelve years; three, fifteen years, and one, "eighteen years off and on;" in all, a total of thirty in 802 cases that were in one place of employment more than three years.

When the shifting life of such a great city and the mobile character of modern wage-earners, especially in domestic and personal service, are considered, and when it is remembered that the Negro population because of unusual need of adjustment to city life feels particularly this unstable current of influence, this showing of lengthy service for occupations which have weak tenures of service in all countries can be interpreted in no other way than favorable for the reputation of Negro domestic help.

The table, next following, gives the detailed length of service for the cases covered by the 902 testimonials:

Table XIX. Showing Length of Service for 902 Wage-earners in Selected Occupations of Personal and Domestic Service, New York City, 1906-1909.

The above favorable conclusion, seemingly biased and against the current opinion, is further borne out by the other replies as to whether the employee had been capable, sober or temperate, and honest.

Some allowances should be made in weighing employers on these last points. Many when asked to speak of former employees have either probably forgotten points of inefficiency, or do not wish to stand in the way of subsequent employment, or desire to aid the party in securing such employment. Sometimes also answers are strong commentaries on the hard character of the employers. But when these things are given due weight there still remains a decided balance in favor of the Negro employee. For, of the 100 males, 27 were certified as very capable; 68 as capable, 4 as fairly so, and only one out of 100 received the condemnation, "decidedly no." As to their sober or temperate character, 9 were regarded as excellent, 78 employers said "yes," one replied "fairly so," 11 returned the cautious statement "so far as I know" or "I think so," and one did not answer. As to honesty, they received on the whole good certificates; 12 of the 100 were considered very honest, 81 honest, 4 were placed in the cautionary class, while 3 employers gave no statement on this point.

The testimony for female help shows a tendency as favorable. Taking the percentages which are more significant than the crude numbers, 25.4 per cent were considered very capable, 8.9 per cent very temperate, and 28.2 per cent very honest. 59 per cent of the replies said "Yes" as to their capability, 81.9 per cent said "Yes" as to temperateness and 62.8 per cent gave an affirmative answer on honesty. This makes the decidedly affirmative replies 84.4 out of the hundred capable, 90.8 of the hundred temperate, and 91 out of the hundred honest. Of the employers' testimony, classified as "fairly so," there were 10.5 per cent under capable, 0.1 per cent under "sober or temperate," and 0.4 per cent under honest. Those replying "so far as I know" or "I think so," 0.5 per cent were under capable, 6.5 per cent under sober or temperate, and 7.1 per cent under honest. Those classed under "No" and "Decidedly no" show 2.4 per cent not capable, 0.5 per cent not sober or temperate, and 0.7 per cent not honest. Considering this mass of testimony in whatever light one may, coming as it does entirely from the employers, and applying to that part of the Negro group which probably has the lowest standard of intelligence and economic efficiency and independence, the conclusion is made decidedly trustworthy that Negro wage-earners in domestic and personal service in New York City are capable, sober and honest.

Table XX, following, gives in full the classified replies of employers:

Table XX. Opinions of Former Employers of 902 Negro Wage-earners in Domestic and Personal Service, New York City, 1906-1909.