Columbia University Libraries Digital Collections: The Real Estate Record

Real estate record and builders' guide: v. 77, no. 1980: February 24, 1906

Text version:

February 24, rgofi RECORD AND GUIDE M^ 321 ESTABUSHED'^ i^ftRPHSl'J^ 1868. Dev&TED 10 RpA,LEsTM¥.BuiLDI|/g Ap,aflTEeTUR.E,KoiJS£:iiOLDDEGaF;ftTOlf, BositiEss ai/d Themes of Oi^Ieki^ Ii^erest. PRICE PER YEAR IN ADVANCE EIGHT DOLLARS Published every Salurdap Cfimmnnicntlona abould be addressed to C. W. SWEET. 14-lG Vesey Street, New York > ■le lepnone. ijorlla jot iio, "Entei-ed at Ike Post Q^ct at AVio Yorl- H. r. as second-das. mailer." Vol. LXXVIL FEBRUARY 24, 1906. No. 19S0 INDEX TO DEPARTMENTS. Advertising Section, Page. Pago, Cement......................xxiii Law.........................xi Clay Products.................xxii Lumber ...................xxviii Consulting Engineers.........vii Maehinery.....................Iv Contractora and Builders......vi Metal Work ..................xix Electrical Interests...........viii Quick Job Directory.........xxvii Fireproofing ..................iii Real Estale..................xiv Granite.....................xxv Roofers & Rooting Materials----x Heating .......................sx Stone ......................xxiv Iron and steel...............xviii Wood Products...............xxix THE Mortgage Tax Law, which took effect July 1, 1905, has proved to be one of the most unsatisfactory measures that has been on the statute book in recent years. It has been al¬ ready pointed out by the Register of New York County that for several weeks prior to the first of July new mortgages in enormous number were made and recorded, a lai'ge part repre¬ senting contemplated transactions, which were thus anticipated for the purpose apparently of evading payment of the mort¬ gage tax. Other transactions which followed were on the prin¬ ciple of avoiding payment of the tax until it could be repealed. No doubt remains as to the sentiment in New York City, the Metropolis being unqualifiedly in favor of repealing the annual tax, and up-State sentiment is almost identical with that which prevails here. Protestation is strongest in the cities where building operations are most active, as the tax has been per¬ ceived to be a hindrance to such operations, by raising the interest rate and so increasing the carrying charges. Build¬ ing construction has, in many instances, been suspended or entirely abandoned, on account of the law, A -similar condition prevails in rural localities where tlie antagonism to tlie tax is greater than last year. It was contended by the opponents of the law before it passed that it would have the effect of raising interest rates. Many farmers throughout the State re¬ fused to believe that this would be the case, and relied upon the opinion of the state executive that so much new money would be attracted to the market that interest rates would not rise. The fact that interest rates have risen has resulted in a decided change of sentiment in the rural districts, and in such counties as Cattaraugus, Chautauqua, Fulton, Herl\imer, Steu¬ ben, Oi'leans, Montgomery, Genesee, Lewis, Chenango, Yates and Seneca, all of which are agricultui'al regions, and where aggressive action has developed for the repeal of the tax. Moreover, a number of the new assemblymen elected last spring to talie the place of legislators who voted for the bill are quoted as opposed to the measure, and as being desirous of its modification, if not repeal. it is a great improvement over anytliing that is at present in use. Can the architect and"the builder adopt it freely? Noth¬ ing of the sort. The new material is not yet recognized by tbe law. The first thing that has to be done is to obtain the legal approval of the Building Department. Will this be granted? Possibly! Possibly not! Now, mind you, the Build¬ ing Department, as is the case with other city departments, is not a bit more immoral or less intelligent than the vest of us. Govei'nment everywhere is an institution of averages, and people who throw stones at their officials are really casting refiections upon themselves. No doubt commissions inquiring into the con¬ duct of our city government from time to time have not re¬ vealed any very edifying spectacles; but were the pictures any more smudgy than those disclosed by, say, the Insurance in¬ vestigation? It will be difficult to affirm this. No doubt some people have a fine capacity for distinctions, but the ordinary man finds it hard to see wherein the commercial code of our most conservative financiers differs from the official code of, say, our police captains. This being the case, it is easy enough to guess the exact kind of impediments that are likely to stand in the way of the introduction of new building materials or improvement in building matters so long as we have a law that dictates to the architect and builder more or less exactly what he may use and exactly what he must do, leaving it, how¬ ever, to official discretion to modify and amend. We believe it is worth considering whether the Building Code can-not be con¬ structed upon a different principle. Can we not have a Build¬ ing Code composed entirely or largely of general requirements? Then, as Mr. Hopper says, "Let the architect and builder prove their fitness, and give them a free hand, aud hold them respon¬ sible. It is not more building laws or restrictions that we want, but rather a fair field and full competency of those in charge." Ml'. Hopper is certainly a competent witness. He is a builder of large experience, and—has been at the head of the Building Department, ELSEWHERE in this issue we publish a letter from Mr. Isaac A. Hopper, the former head of the Building Depart¬ ment, Our correspondent approves of certain ideas which have been expressed in these columns in regard to the revision of the Building Code, Evidently he thinks, as does the Record and Guide, that a Building Code can be made upon a principle other than the one tliat has operated in the past. The old method dictates to the architect and the builder more or less precisely how a building shall be erected. It is a sort of legal specification which everybody is required to follow. It com¬ mands, in substance, that so many bricks shall be put here, so many there, such and such material shall be used in this position, such and such others in that. It is a motherly sort of law. It treats architects and builders as though they were a little deficient in their thinking apparatus and decidedly wrong in their morals. Perhaps the real beauty of the whole scheme is that it affords endless opportunities for graft. It acts as an impediment to invention and improvement. Let us suppose a new building material is introduced, say, to-morrow, Suppose THE Chinese wall that has gradually been built around the building trades of New York City is now to be attacked in the courts. The National Fireproofing Company has commenced suit against the Mason Builders' Association and others In order to discover whether tlie wall is a legal structure. Some people consider a trade enclosure of the kind a very proper edifice. If this be really the case, and we can only get this new trade- device talked about loudly enough, the entire country will be put in possession of advantages upon which New York City has so far enjoyed a sort of patent. Boston will then "get together" and shut out any builder or building material firm that hails from New York City, Chicago will prohibit Boston, and Phila¬ delphia will anathematize both. "Restraint of trade" will be¬ come a recognized principle for making money in every locality in the land, and we doubt not ^erybody will be made very much happier thereby. It has been said, "We are all Socialists" to-day. It may also be said that "we are all members of some sort of a trust." In¬ deed, it is getting to be the case that the institutions which are denounced as "trusts" are not the only trusts or even, the most thorough trusts. There are the unnamed trusts. For instance, the building trades are literally honeycombed with trusts- little and big. But they wear such a demijre innocent look in public that no one would think they could even spell the word "Trust," Nevertheless, the Unions and the Employers alike are working the "Trust principle" for all they are worth. Each is putting upon the other all pressure possible In order to create a tyrannical counter over which tlie public must trade, paying whatever price is demanded for goods required. It will, indeed, be a strange bit of irony if by-and-by it comes to pass that a concern like the Standard Oil Company will stand forth as a model among trusts for frankness and generosity. Certainly to-day that company is scarcely less open and obvious in its conduct than many another institution that is iu reality work¬ ing double tides upon the exclusive Hue of action. Some people think the trusts are permanent institutions. Certainly, the (rust may well be a logical extension of the aggregating process which began in business many years before the trust was heard of, and produced at first the partnership, then the corporation. It may be that in the long run the entire world will be divided into two classes—the "trusted" aud the "busted," But while Ihe process is being carried out, why cant about it? The labor unions are big trusts. Their methods and their morals are not one whit cleaner or better than the morals of any other big trust. The builders of this city constitute a species of trust, every finger of their hands, so to speak, being linked with some trade or industry for "protective" purposes. Even the National Fireproofing Company itself is essentially a trust.