From the PREFACE
The subject of congestion of population, especially in reference to New York City, has been widely discussed, but as yet the data presented have been lacking in definiteness. Wise and well known governmental commissions have held solemn conclave and have taken the testimony of eye-witnesses. They have announced their findings in well chosen but almost numberless recommendations. In spite of this mass of material the author of this monograph hopes that this contribution may still be of value.
The importance or conclusiveness of the facts and of the subsequent deductions must not be overestimated. The number of employers interviewed has not been large but is representative. The number of workers included forms a comparatively small proportion of the great total in New York City, but they are not unlike other workers. While he recognizes certain limitations in his methods of investigation and in his manner of presentation, the author still hopes that his work will be valuable as throwing light on the big problem of congestion. His study does not pretend to be exhaustive, but aims to segregate and examine intensively a small but important part of the whole,—a part which is closely related to other phases of the problem of which the author has not treated.
Undoubtedly the most valuable portion of this work is the statistical matter. Some of the tables have been placed in Appendix II merely for the sake of convenience as they are referred to frequently in the text. Percentages have been used almost wholly. In many cases where the number of frequencies is very small a comparison of them means little, but it was thought best to pursue a uniform plan throughout.
This study was originally undertaken for the Exhibit of Congestion of Population which was held in the spring of 1908. A bit of the material was shown at that exhibit; later the study was considerably enlarged while the author was a Fellow in the Bureau of Social Research in the New York School of Philanthropy. At all times the ready advice and helpful counsel of Professor Henry R. Seager of Columbia University has been invaluable. The author's obligations to Professor Roswell C. McCrea of the School of Philanthropy can scarcely be discharged by this acknowledgment. The author is also indebted for help, criticisms and suggestions to Professors H. L. Moore, E. R. A. Seligman, J. B. Clark, S. M. Lindsay and E. T. Devine of Columbia University. Many of the statistical tables have been compiled by Miss Dora Sandowsky, whose work has been painstaking and careful. To the Russell Sage Foundation are due sincere thanks for making possible whatever breadth of scope this study has attained.
