The Project Gutenberg eBook of The future of Brooklyn

This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this ebook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this eBook.

Title: The future of Brooklyn

Author: Alfred Clark Chapin

Release date: August 7, 2011 [eBook #36994]

Language: English

Credits: Produced by The Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
http://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images
generously made available by The Internet Archive)

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE FUTURE OF BROOKLYN ***

THE FUTURE OF BROOKLYN.

THE CITY'S PROMISED GROWTH AND INCREASE,
WITH COMMENTS ON THE BUILDING STATISTICS
FOR THE YEAR 1888.

MESSAGE

OF THE

HON. ALFRED C. CHAPIN,

MAYOR.

DECEMBER 13, 1888.

Mayor's Office,
Brace

City Hall, Brooklyn

December 13, 1888

To the Honorable, the Common Council:

Gentlemen:

In this message I shall attempt a general statement of the condition of the city, and of its building operations. For the purpose of broadly considering the city's present condition and standing among similar communities, the returns of the recent Presidential election furnish valuable data. Presidential elections call out a full vote, and thus afford an indication of the relative growth of the different cities of the country. The following table is believed to correctly state the total number of votes cast in the four leading cities for President at the recent election:

Total vote cast in 1888.

New York |  | 270,194
Philadelphia |  | 205,747
Brooklyn |  | 148,868
Chicago |  | 123,475

In 1880 the vote of these several cities in the Presidential election bore the following proportion to the population as shown by the census of the same year:

Number of population to each voter in 1880:

New York |  | 5.87.
Philadelphia |  | 4.92.
Brooklyn |  | 5.29.
Chicago |  | 6.06.

The following table contains the population of each city in 1880, and the apparent population at present, basing the estimate upon the vote of this year, and assuming the ratio of population to the numbers of voters to remain the same as in 1880:

|  | Apparent
| Population in 1880. | population in 1888.
New York, | 1,206,299. | 1,585,529.
Philadelphia, | 847,170. | 1,014,332.
Brooklyn, | 566,663. | 782,221.
Chicago, | 503,185. | 748,258.

The method of reaching this conclusion cannot be called unduly favorable to our city. The difference in the ratio existing between the population and the voters in 1880 in Chicago and in Brooklyn would seem to indicate either that Chicago possessed an unusually large unnaturalized population, or else that it did not poll its full vote. If the unnaturalized population of our own city is larger than it was in 1880, the above estimate may be too small. If the increase of population since 1880 has been one that brought with it a larger proportion of women and children than the increase before 1880, the above estimate is too small. Whether either of these possible modifications should be given serious consideration is a matter of conjecture upon which some light may be thrown by what will be set forth in this communication.

The twenty-six wards now comprising the city of Brooklyn, contained in 1880 a population of 580,313; if, therefore, their present population as above estimated is 782,221, there has been an increase in eight years of 201,903, or an average annual gain for each of those years of 25,237. But the population in 1870 was 396,099, and in 1875, as enumerated by the State Census, it was 484,616, showing a gain for the five years of 87,518, or an average annually of 17,500. Between 1875 and 1880 it rose to 566,663, the total gain for the five years being 82,047, the average annual gain being 16,400. It should, therefore, first be noticed that the rate of increase of the last decade was more rapid during its first half than during its closing half. The present decade began in a period of more moderate growth than that of some years previous. We may, I think, safely assume that the falling off in the gain between 1875 and 1880 was largely due to the opening of the system of elevated roads in New York City in 1878. Making all necessary allowance for the increase due to the Twenty-sixth Ward, which was not a part of the city in 1880, it is still impossible to believe that the average annual gain of 16,400 which prevailed from 1875 to 1880 could have been abruptly changed to the average annual gain of 25,237 which has prevailed from 1880 to the present time. We must, then, assume that during the years since 1880 the rate of growth of the city has advanced quite materially; and that the average increase of the first three or four years of the present decade may not have been much in excess of the average increase of the five years from 1875 to 1880. A sufficient cause for the change of the rate of growth is furnished in the opening of the Bridge in 1883.

A further promoting cause is found in the opening of the Brooklyn Elevated Railway in 1885. We must, therefore, assume the average annual gain for the past eight years (of 25,237) to be greater than the average gain of the three or four years following 1880. If so, it is obvious that the gains for the present year and for the years immediately preceding must have been greater than 25,000. That the two causes suggested contributed to change the rate of growth is not likely to be questioned by any one. But they are only the accompaniments of a broader and more persistent cause, which is the fundamental reason of the existence of the bridge and of our present system of rapid transit. This larger cause is a general change in the relation between New York and Brooklyn, gradually manifesting itself as a necessary result of the development of the whole metropolitan community surrounding the port of New York. The first two causes, therefore, though permanent, were auxiliary and specific. The last is a general, continuous condition, whose force seems unlikely to decline, but more likely to augment from year to year. The first two causes, also, may be said to have a fixed or, at all events, an ascertainable maximum influence, based upon their respective capacity to transport passengers. They are merely methods of transit. Their capacity may in time be exhausted. In such case they may be supplemented; new bridges can be built, and doubtless will be; newer elevated railroads have been built and opened for business since the construction of the one already mentioned. More elevated railroads are to be built. In addition to the Brooklyn Elevated Railroad Company, already named, now operating six and three-fourths miles of railroad, the Kings County Elevated Railroad Company is operating five and one-half miles of railroad, and the Union Elevated Railroad Company is operating four and three-fifths miles, forming together a system of nearly seventeen miles, which promises to increase its capacity as well as its mileage. Construction is still progressing upon these lines, and it is reported that at the close of the year 1889, or earlier, there will be twenty-five miles of elevated railroad in operation in the city.

These features of the city's condition call attention to the fact that we have reached a period of development, at which it is our duty to provide clearly and understandingly for the needs of a far greater population than that now included within our limits.

In earlier days Americans did much empty boasting and made many glorious predictions. At the same time, so far as material preparations are concerned, they could do little for those coming after them. The art of living had not then been studied as it since has been. Sanitary science can hardly be said to have been in its infancy, for in this country it seemed to have no existence whatever. In the establishing of enduring and fundamental principles of government, and in the field of law much was done for us and for our posterity by the men of previous generations, but it was necessary that there should be a gradual education of the business sense of the country before men could appreciate the nature and import of the problems now presented in the growth of cities. It was necessary that a more leisurely aspect should come over life; that comfort and health should be more highly prized. The more purely intellectual side of our ancestors' work was well done; but the needs of the by no means distant future, the inheritances which our successors should receive from us, are of a different description. Pavements, sewers, sufficient water supply, parks, schools, public buildings, an enlarged application of the results attained in sanitary science, and the solid work of masonry are the inheritances we should transmit, rather than far reaching adjudications, such as that of the Dartmouth College case, or comprehensive enactments, such as the ordinance establishing the Northwest Territory. Naturally, the greatest and most pressing need will arise here at the centre of the greatest population. How great that need may be, or how great a population may congregate within our area or upon the borders of the bay of New York, we cannot indeed actually estimate, but to some extent we can forecast it. Such forecasts are not useless. In his message of December, 1861, President Lincoln said: "There are already among us those who, if the Union be preserved, will live to see it contain two hundred and fifty millions." Such a vision of the future, at a time of extreme trial, seemed to him neither vain nor fanciful. Its utterance was evidence that he possessed the sort of political imagination which a statesman should possess if he is to discern the drift of public thought, or to picture the future material condition of his country. When compared with other estimates, his outlook was not extravagant, though it may not be realized. Its concern for us is direct and unavoidable. For the course of history, in our own land and abroad, makes it clear that the population about the port of New York is to hold a place of high importance in the nation, both numerical and otherwise.

The State of New York passed to the first place in population in the nation in 1820. Since that day the population of the Union, of the State of New York, and the combined population of the cities of New York and Brooklyn, at each decade from 1820 to 1880, and the percentage of increase in each decade, have been as follows:

Year. | Population of New York and Brooklyn | Increase per cent. | Population of the State of New York. | Increase per cent. | Population of the United States. | Increase per cent.
1820 | 130,881 |  | 1,372,111 |  | 9,633,822
1830 | 215,049 | 64.3 | 1,918,608 | 39.8 | 12,866,020 | 32.51
1840 | 348,943 | 62.2 | 2,428,926 | 26.5 | 17,069,453 | 33.52
1850 | 612,385 | 75.5 | 3,097,394 | 27.5 | 23,191,876 | 33.83
1860 | 1,072,312 | 75.1 | 3,880,735 | 25.2 | 31,443,321 | 35.11
1870 | 1,338,391 | 24.8 | 4,382,759 | 12.9 | 38,558,371 | 22.65
1880 | 1,772,962 | 32.4 | 5,082,871 | 15.9 | 50,155.783 | 30.08

Thus the combined population of New York and Brooklyn has at all times since 1830 grown at a rate much more rapid than that of the growth of the State of New York; the rate of growth of the two cities has at all times exceeded the rate of growth of the population of the whole Union, although the rate of growth of the population of the State of New York has not kept pace with that of the population of the United States since 1830. But for the growth of the two cities, the State would, before this time, have ceased to hold the first place. The degree to which the population of the two cities has gained upon that of the State in the whole period, is quite notable. Their proportion of the population of the State in 1820 was less than one-tenth; while in 1880 more than one-third of the population of the State lived in Brooklyn and New York. On the other hand, in 1820, the State of New York included more than one-eighth of the population of the whole Union; while in 1880 it embraced a little less than one-tenth of that population. At present, adopting the estimates already given, based upon the Presidential vote for this year, New York and Brooklyn include nearly, if not quite, two-fifths of the population of the whole State.

Without adopting Lincoln's prediction, we need only look forward to a time when the country may contain one hundred and fifty million people. Even then, the density of its population will be much less than that of older countries or of some States of the Union. If the population of the State of New York failed to hold its present relation, and fell off until it numbered but eight per cent. or about one-twelfth of the population of the Union, it would still contain more than twelve millions of people, of which a population surpassing one-half might be found in or near these two cities. As the two cities grow, apparently an increasing proportion of that growth must come to Brooklyn. The mere question of area goes far to determine such a result. Each mile of departure from the New York City Hall emphasizes the inequality in the quantity of residence area lying respectively upon Manhattan Island and within our limits. It is four miles from the New York City Hall to Sixtieth street; and the capacity of the area below that street for purposes of residence may be said to be well nigh exhausted. The encroachments of business below that division line seem likely to diminish its capacity to furnish homes nearly as rapidly as improvements in building methods may augment such capacity. Of the twenty-four Assembly Districts in the City of New York, nineteen—to wit, one to eighteen inclusive, and the twentieth—lie wholly below Fifty-ninth street. In these nineteen districts the increase of registration in 1888 over that of 1884 is 13,641. The remaining five districts lie almost wholly above Fifty-ninth street; and in them the increase is 32,110. Apparently more than seventy per cent. of the growth of New York during the past four years has been north of Fifty-ninth street. Not only must this comparatively fixed condition of New York below Fifty-ninth street remain or become more and more marked, but the line of division between the growing and the fixed parts of the city must rapidly shift from Fifty-ninth street to One Hundred and Tenth street. For of the area between Fifty-ninth street and One Hundred and Tenth street a substantial part is devoted to Central Park, and is unavailable for residences. Furthermore, the presence of Central Park causes land east and west of it to be much sought after, and to command high prices. That part of New York, therefore, which lies between Fifty-ninth street and One Hundred and Tenth street is to be largely taken by people whose means are abundant, and of the space not already occupied, but a small part will be left for the sort of population from which Brooklyn draws its chief and characteristic growth.

How far existing conditions may be disturbed by new means of transit or by new works of life in New York City, no one can now tell. At present, the broad fact is, that the whole area of Brooklyn (excepting only the more remote parts of the Twenty-sixth Ward, the former town of New Lots) is nearer in distance to the New York City Hall than that part of New York City lying above One Hundred and Tenth street.

Furthermore, the residence area lying between Fifty-ninth and One Hundred and Tenth streets in New York is not one-seventh of that lying between lines of like distance in Kings County.

To attempt a close estimate of the future population of New York and Brooklyn might be neither wise nor profitable. Some conception of the general course or character of that development is the most that is practicable. All nineteenth century progress discloses a tendency to concentration of population. In our own country the inhabitants of cities formed one-thirtieth of the population in 1790; one-eighth in 1850; and nine-fortieths or half way between one-fifth and one-fourth in 1880. In this State a full one-half of the population dwelt in cities in 1880. The proportion now is not less than three-fifths, and is rapidly approaching, if it has not already reached, five-eighths.

The population of the Union since 1820 has increased at a rate varying by decades from over 35 per cent. to 22.65 per cent. The lowest rate was that of the war decade. The rate per decade since 1870 has been more than 30 per cent. The population of the cities of New York and Brooklyn has at all times increased more rapidly than that of the nation. This was true even during the war decade, although the marked falling off of their rate of growth in that decade disclosed a decided sensitiveness to whatever influences accelerated or retarded national growth. New York and Brooklyn, indeed, have at all times shown by their rate and character of progress and growth that they are reflections of the development of the nation rather than of that of any State or locality. We may, therefore, safely say that the growth of the united population of New York and Brooklyn hereafter, as in the past, will depend chiefly upon the general progress of the whole nation. How rapid this progress will continue, how great proportions it may finally attain can only be vaguely conjectured. Lincoln's forecast of two hundred and fifty millions of souls during the life time of people who were in existence in 1861, would seem to have been over-sanguine, although it was not without parallel or precedent. The decade between 1850 and 1860, at the close of which he was speaking, had witnessed a most rapid national growth, that is, a rate of more than thirty-five per cent. for the whole Union. Percentages decline as aggregates increase. The rate of thirty per cent. which has prevailed since 1870, would not produce two hundred and fifty millions (250,000,000) of people until after 1940. It is too much to assume that such a rate of national growth will continue. Its continuance for so long a period would involve an increase of over forty millions (40,000,000) between 1920 and 1930, and over fifty-five millions (55,000,000) between 1930 and 1940. It seems more reasonable to expect a gradual decline in the rate of increase, and that the relation between this country and Europe will more closely approach an equilibrium, accompanied or followed by a diminution of the force of immigration as a factor in our national growth. Immigration in the past has fluctuated widely. The total number of immigrants landing in this country for the whole decade closing in 1880, was less than that for the first five years of the present decade. To what degree the population of the future will dwell in cities can perhaps best be foretold by present indications in our own land, or by the conditions prevailing in more thickly settled nations. Present indications here, as has been pointed out, suggest a city growth more rapid than that of the remainder of the population. Among the older nations, the population of the British Isles may be said to resemble our own most closely. The population of Great Britain and Ireland in 1881 was thirty-five millions (35,000,000). More than one-tenth of this population was contained in London alone. Such an urban population manifestly sustains itself largely if not chiefly upon the commercial and maritime importance of the nation containing it, and only to a minor degree upon the community surrounding it. This condition of existence may never be as emphatically true of the population about the port of New York as it is of the population of London, yet it has always been believed that the final commercial position of our nation must be one of commanding importance. That belief compels the inference that the great port of the nation and of the continent must continue to attract an enormous population. That the present rate of growth, which adds 30 per cent. to the population of New York, and more than 40 per cent. to that of Brooklyn, in every ten years, will endure, need not be expected. The results of a computation upon such a basis seem incredible, since they call for a population of three million five hundred thousand (3,500,000) in New York in 1920, and of two million two hundred thousand (2,200,000) in Brooklyn at the same time. But we may well believe that in the nation there will be a gradual approach to the density of population now maintained in older countries; that this port will hold its place as a general point of concentration and distribution for the nation, the continent, perhaps for the world; and that the excess of residence area in and about our own city over the corresponding area of New York must continue to tell in our favor, probably with increasing force.

Looking back no further than 1850, and comparing the two cities with each other, the following table shows their numbers and rate of growth in the successive decades:

Years.
Population
of
New York.
Increase,
per cent.
Population
of
Brooklyn.
Increase
per cent.

1850
515,547

96,838

1860
05,651
56.2
266,661
175.3

1870
942,292
16.9
396,099
48.5

1880
1,206,299
28.0
566,663
43.0

As the present Twenty-sixth Ward of Brooklyn was not a part of the city in 1880, a comparison of the population of Brooklyn, as the city is now constituted, with the population of the City of New York would be as follows:

The figures for 1888 for both cities are estimated on the basis already stated.

Year.
New York.
Increase
per cent.
Brooklyn.
Increase
per cent.

1880
1,206,299

580,318

1888
1,585,529

782,221

379,230
23.9
201,903
34.7

3 pr. cent.
per year.

4.3 pr. cent.
per year.

The records of the Building Department aid in testing the estimates already submitted, and more strikingly in disclosing the character of the population now coming to us. During the twelve months ending on November 30 of this year, 4,226 permits were granted for buildings of all varieties, estimated by their projectors to cost $22,377,825. The estimated value of this proposed construction has not been exceeded during any similar period in the City's history. The buildings of a residence description were to furnish accommodation for 10,457 families. Not every building for which a permit is issued is afterwards completed, but the magnitude of the volume of the business of this department—even after making all reasonable deductions for the plans not carried out—at least justifies all that has been said thus far concerning the City's present proportions and rate of progress. The United States census of 1880 declared the City's population of 566,663 to be contained in 115,076 families; thus fixing the average membership of each family at 4.92. It is hardly credible therefore that the permits issued for residence purposes during the past year represent the City's actual growth during any given period of twelve months. If families now average as then, these permits would furnish homes for more than 51,000 souls—a number, to my mind, in excess of the City's yearly growth. We must, therefore, assume that there is some discrepancy between the methods of designation employed in 1880 by the United States officials and those of the building department, or that the average number of persons in each family is now less than in 1880, or that these permits represent more than the actual needs of the period during which they were granted. Probably the last supposition is best founded. Like New York, the City may have been overbuilt during the past two or three years, and this record, no doubt, exhibits some permits not acted upon and some construction due to the impetus of the speculative ardor of 1885, 1886, and 1887. This view is confirmed by the statement of the number and cost of the buildings actually completed during the calendar years 1886 and 1887, and the first eleven months of the present year.

Year.
No. of
Buildings.
Estimated
Cost.

1886.
3,990.
$20,318,485.

1887.
3,875.
18,008,325.

1888 to Dec. 1.
3,155.
15,711,070.

While these figures, together with the record of the twelve months ending upon November 30, 1888, as already given, can not, from their nature, lead to a precise mathematical conclusion, they indicate most clearly a degree of activity in construction in which a slight decline in rapidity might be a cause for congratulation rather than for regret. The substantial prosperity of the City was at one time threatened by the over-speculative temper of builders. Conservative witnesses now think that the normal relation of supply and demand has been partially restored. The interests of labor are directly concerned to avoid premature and forced development in so important an industry. Those who lend upon real estate security, and all who deposit in savings banks which make such loans, are not less concerned that our growth should represent the response to actual demand, and not inconsiderate and headlong enterprise.

Further analysis of the permits issued during the twelve months ending November 30, 1888, is of interest.

Of the 10,457 families for whose accommodation residence permits were issued, nineteen were to live in factories, stables, shops, or business offices, three thousand six hundred and seventy-two (3,672), were to live in 1,011 flats, to be erected at the estimated cost of $4,903,513. The average investment of capital to furnish a home for each of these families would seem to be $1,338, plus the cost of the land. 2,456 families were to live in 713 buildings described as flats and stores, to be erected at a cost of $4,303,784, calling for an average investment for each family of $1,752 less the cost of the store, plus the cost of land. It may be safely stated that the distinction between these two variety of residences is in general not great. If, therefore, we call the average cost of the flat the same in each case, $1,338, plus the cost of the land, we shall not be far wrong. Neither do we err much if the value of the land is estimated to be one-third that of the building. It would thus appear that 6,128 families were to be given homes representing on the average an investment of $1,784. The owner of such property would probably demand $175 per year average rental, and since rent may be reckoned as forming one-fourth of the cost of living with these families, it would follow that the 6,128 families now under consideration should possess an average income of $650 or $700. This body of inhabitants forms a full six-tenths of the growth of the City as the builders anticipated it.

The next most important element in that growth consists of (3,055) three thousand and fifty-five families who are to occupy 505 tenements, to be constructed at a cost of $2,629,026, the average investment to provide a home for each family in this case being $806, plus the cost of the land. Allow one-third as before to this latter item, and the cost of each home becomes $1,075. Assume $120 to be the average rent asked for such dwelling places, and it would appear that these 3,055 families do not command an average income in excess of $450. These families form three-tenths of the City's growth for a year as foreseen by its builders. Thus, nine-tenths of the expected increase has been classified with a reasonable approximation to accuracy. The averages thus far submitted are not likely to be seriously misleading, since they represent varieties of construction and modes of life in which a uniform type is closely followed. Among those inhabitants composing the remaining tenth, incomes cover a wider range, but a comprehensive view even of these is by no means unprofitable. For 1,168 families the same number of private dwellings were built, costing $4,660,388, the average cost of each dwelling being $4,000. In order that these averages might not be misleading, the Commissioner of Buildings has, at my request, examined every permit issued by him during the year, and has arranged them upon certain suggestive bases of classification. This last group of 1,168 families includes no permits for private dwellings whose construction cost over $10,000. The average cost of dwellings costing less than $10,000 each, occupied by one family is, therefore, $4,000. While this figure represents the average cost of dwellings of this class, it would appear that the actual cost of the greater number of these dwellings was considerably less than the average. Otherwise the average would not have been drawn to a point so far below the maximum cost of $10,000. These 1,168 families may be safely assumed to stand upon lots worth one-third of their cost. Thus, these 1,168 dwellings are to dwell in homes representing an average investment of $5,333. Upon the basis of computation before employed the income of these families should average not far from $2,000 per year. In fact, for reasons just suggested, these incomes range from a minimum of $1,000 or less to a maximum rarely exceeding $5,000 or $6,000. And a greater number of these incomes undoubtedly falls below the average point of $2,000. Perhaps the greater number would be found to be not far from $1,500.

There remain 87 families, for whom 87 private dwellings, each costing $10,000 or more, as estimated, were to be constructed. The aggregate value of these dwellings is $1,135,500. The average value is $13,000. Since the average rises so slightly above the minimum, it is clear that but few dwellings costing much more than $10,000 were to be constructed. The detailed report of the Commissioner mentions but three residences of high cost to be built respectively for $35,000, $40,000 and $50,000. These 87 families represent an average investment for both the land and the house of $17,333. An attempt to average the income of this class would be attended with less success than in any of the prior instances. The minimum cost of living for a family dwelling in one of these residences would not be far from $6,000. Doubtless but a few of them spend as small a sum as this in a year.

The surmise that in some of its features building has been overdone is apparently verified by a study of the remaining permits. The 63 factories costing $579,580, and the 158 shops costing $121,445 call for so small a part of such a population as would be contained in the flats and tenements to be constructed, that we must believe that some of these latter will not be occupied at once. This conclusion accords with observation. At the same time the general magnitude of this sort of construction indicates the operation of those causes already spoken of which embarrass the growth of New York and promote the growth of Brooklyn. Manifestly the tenants of these numerous flats and the 1,168 families who are to dwell in the more modest residences belonging in part at least to the class which will not live in lower New York and which cannot endure the journey to the region above One Hundred and Tenth street.

For the twelve months ending November 30th, 1887, permits were issued for 4,246 buildings, to cost $19,983,414. Among these are found dwellings for 9,585 families. Of these families, 2,856 are to dwell in 922 flats costing $3,978,592, the average investment for each family being $1,390 as against $1,338 in 1888. Two thousand eight hundred and sixty-eight families are to dwell in buildings described as stores and flats, numbering 714, and costing $4,838,938, the average investment for each family being $1,691 as against $1,752 in 1888. Two thousand three hundred and ninety-one families are to dwell in 377 tenements costing $1,879,001, the average investment for a family being $785 as against $806 in 1884. There remain 1,372 families who are to dwell in the same number of dwellings, each costing less than $10,000, and the aggregate cost being $5,320,607, the average cost per family being $3,877, as against $4,000 in 1888. Finally, there are 97 families provided for by the same number of residences, each costing over $10,000, and costing in the aggregate $1,197,400, or on the average $12,344 as against $13,000 in 1888.

It will be noted that a general survey of these twelve months is decidedly like that for the twelve months ending upon November 30th, 1888.

Since December 1, 1886, therefore, permits have been issued for the accommodation of 20,042 families The conclusion hinted at early in this message that present rate of growth of this city is in excess of 25,000 per year is more than supported by these figures.

The conclusions thus arrived at as to the present and future of Brooklyn are reinforced by observation of the life of the people as it ebbs and flows about us. Closer union with New York has—to put it paradoxically—removed us further from New York. The increased population, whose growth is undoubtedly stimulated by improved transit, consumes such a volume of home supplies that our local business has vastly augmented and varied. The tendency to visit New York for every sort of purpose declines. Closer alliance with New York means a more discriminating alliance and less general indiscriminate dependence on that city. This must ever be the rule of growth in great communities. It is the rule of national growth. Of the products of the West some must be shipped in undiminished bulk, but even these are so handled that a small room in New York suffices to accommodate enough buyers and sellers to dispose in one day of a year's crop. Other forms of product reach the East for consumption or export in a concentrated form. By the natural law of growth the process of concentration is constantly moving Westward in its place of performance to intercept the raw material at a point as near as possible to that of its production. Similar laws apply to New York and Brooklyn with unusual intensity. Obviously New York must be the clearing house and the site of the finer and more costly grades of industry. That it cannot be the abode of large industrial activity demanding bulk or space is not less clear. Manufacturers who are to occupy much of the earth's surface, or whose products are bulky, must establish themselves elsewhere. Some of them must and will come to Brooklyn, and the population growing up about them will hereafter depend less and less upon New York for any except the finer bonds of relation which unify the diverse purposes and interests clustering around our majestic bay.

It has seemed best to dwell upon this topic of the City's present magnitude and general condition. Such a study of the people can hardly fail to enlighten those who conduct their affairs, or to arouse and stimulate a collective and aggressive public spirit, and a sentiment of just local pride, such as become a great community. Few revelations of the future are as clear as that the commanding, if not the overwhelming problems of politics, are to spring hereafter from such communities. The necessities of compact and highly-organized bodies of people; the vast private enterprises, as well as public works, which must minister to their daily wants; the stress of industrial competition among them; the pressure of class upon class; the jarring of interest upon interest; the demand for comprehensive, honest and far-sighted administration of their public affairs; the absolute need to maintain order upon its established foundations; the fierce contentions and uneasy vitality which accompany hasty or irregular municipal growth; these and other features of city life, suggests much food for thought for the present and approaching generation of Americans. Since cities are to be so great a factor as well as so great a product in our material expansion, it follows that the government of cities is the one quarter of the political field in which American institutions must not fail; for if popular self-government fails there it fails at the heart, at the centre and source of vital and nervous power. In cities, therefore, are to be met those trials whose issue will determine in what characters the later pages of American history are to be inscribed. To designate great cities as an evil, or as a peril, is to note but half their significance. If men, when massed together, are accessible to evil suggestions they are likewise accessible to that which is good. At all events, the problem is not obscure or hard to find. One might go farther and say that in the question of the future of our cities is involved more even than the destiny of popular self-government. It involves the success or the failure of all the agencies of progress and of enlightenment. The moral and spiritual interests of the people cannot be separated from those which fall within the scope of governmental influence. Moreover, these great populations will not remain at rest either materially or otherwise. Their condition will be one of advancement or of progressive demoralization and decay.

In its practical suggestions such information as is given by these statistics is of much value. In earlier days the forecasts of coming greatness were not and could not be accompanied by material provision for the future. They formed no basis for definite concrete policy. To-day the situation is changed. The vision of an approaching multitude casts before it the shadow of responsibility. Their well-being must be made secure. Nor is this obligation remote or of little present moment. Already our numbers and rank place us among the great, advanced and interesting communities of the civilized world. On the continent of Europe there can be found but six cities more populous than our own. The British Isles contain but one. Our place is surpassed only by that of the capitals of the great powers. What is done now, therefore, by way of provision for the Brooklyn of to-day as well as for the Brooklyn of the future, should be done in a manner befitting the character and needs of a numerous, permanent and expanding population. Heretofore the public works not less than the private enterprises of our countrymen have often been experimental and insufficient. Even those who dimly foresaw the magnitude of the future dared not prepare for all that seemed to them probable. Hence the varieties of effort to supply the people have usually proved inadequate. Demand has speedily overtaken the new methods of supply. There is more than one reason why this has been true. Not infrequently the means with which to make adequate provision did not exist. Often the drift of population or the general desire for some new product or convenience has set all previous calculations at defiance. In public matters the necessity of submitting large propositions to minds not familiar with them has operated to the public disadvantage. Such a project as the Erie Canal or the Brooklyn Bridge is denounced for years as wild and extravagant. When completed, its capacity may almost at once be taxed to the utmost. It is now time to recognize that cities like ours are to be the homes of multitudes for successive generations—that the battle of civilization, of progress and of all that gilds the future with the light of hope must be fought out on this field. Here must be established the broad and sure foundations of systematic provision for those vital daily needs upon whose gratification depend comfort, health, contentment and peace of mind.

Neither is there now the excuse that resources are not at hand. Our credit is second to that of no existing community; the labor of those dwelling among us is not to be surpassed in intelligent and conscientious effectiveness; our frugality has produced at least one good result, for the cost of government to the citizen is less than in almost any other city. Comprehensive effort and manly determination alone are needed to begin the task of supplying Brooklyn with what is due to the city and its visible future. This task does not immediately involve any gigantic project. Extraordinary outlay, such as attended the establishment of the Park and the construction of the Bridge, need not at once be contemplated. Doubtless other bridges will some day be built—and that day may be nearer than some imagine—but I speak now only of such general forms of improvement as are necessary to the prosperity of the whole city. In a previous message I have outlined one such proposition to your honorable body. In other communications I shall complete the list.

Respectfully,

ALFRED C. CHAPIN,
Mayor.

*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE FUTURE OF BROOKLYN ***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE

PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works

1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™ electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property (trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the United States and you are located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed:

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg™.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project Gutenberg™ License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works provided that:

• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.”

• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ works.

• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of receipt of the work.

• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™

Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works

Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search facility: www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™, including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.