Full text of Financial Statistics of Cities : Financial Statistics of Cities Having a Population of Over 30,000 : 1911

View original document
The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
BUREAU OF THE CENSUS
WM. J. HARRIS,

DIRECTOR

SPECIAL REPORTS

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION
OF OVER 30,000: 1911




PREPARED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF LE GRAND POWERS,
CHIEF STATISTICIAN FOR FINANCE AND MUNICIPAL STATISTICS

WASHINGTON
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
1913




CONTENTS.
TEXT.
Face.
INTRODUCTION

15

Character and importance of municipal statistics
Scope of report
Increase in the number and population of cities
-.
Statistics of cities having a population of over 30,000
Governmental costs of cities and of the Nation
Comparative indebtedness of cities and of the Nation
Cities having a population of over 30,000 in 1911
Difficulties in compiling report
Difficulties arising from differences in governmental organization
Difficulties arising from differences relating to the custody and expenditure of money
Difficulties arising from differences in accounting for administrative funds
Difficulties arising from the use of antiquated and diverse methods of classifying revenues and governmental costs or receipts
and payments
Difficulties arising from the collection of State and county revenues by different governmental units
Difficulties arising from the general use of cash accounts by the comptrollers and treasurers
Difficulties arising from lack of proper accounts with materials and supplies
Difficulties arising from confounding expenses and outlays with contingent liabilities incurred
Difficulties arising from different methods of accounting for interdepartmental services
Difficulties due to lack of accounting for depreciation
Difficulties arising from faulty accounting for interest chargeable as outlay or expense
Difficulties arising from auditing claims after the close of the year to which they relate
State supervision of municipal accounts decreasing the difficulties of compilation
Introduction of improved accounts as a factor decreasing the difficulties of compilation
The value of uniform accounting terminology in lessening difficulties
ACCOUNTING TERMINOLOGY

Accounts and accounting
Accounts
Accounting
Municipal revenues and governmental costs
Municipal revenues
Taxes and the sovereign power of taxation
Subjects, objects, and methods of taxation
Classification of taxes
Property taxes
The general property tax
Special property taxes
Poll or personal taxes
Business taxes
License business taxes
Nonbusiness license taxes
Special assessments
Fines and forfeits
Escheats
Subventions and grants
Donations and gifts
Pension assessments
Fees and charges
Tolls
Rates
Highway privilege dues
Major highway privilege dues
Minor highway privilege dues
Other revenues
Municipal governmental costs
Municipal expenses
General expenses of municipalities




15
15
15
16
16
18
20
21
21
21
21
22
22
23
24
24
25
26
26
27
27
29
29
30

30
30
30
30
30
30
30
31
32
32
32
32
32
33
33
33
34
34
34
34
34
34
35
35
35
35
36
36
36
36
36

1

*

:
._.— -... -

-.,
(3)

CONTENTS.

4
ACCOUNTING TEBMINOLOGY—Continued.

Municipal revenues and governmental costs—Continued.
Commercial expenses of municipalities
Municipal interest
Municipal outlays
•
Revenue charges or revenue expenditures
Summary of municipal revenues and governmental costs
Summary of revenues and expenses and interest
Municipal receipts and payments
Receipts and payments in Census statistics
Receipts
Payments
Municipal receipts and payments
Municipal revenue receipts
Municipal nonrevenue receipts
*
Municipal governmental cost payments
Municipal nongovernmental cost payments
Significance of primary classification of municipal receipts and payments
Secondary classification of municipal receipts and payments
Municipal receipts from the public
Municipal payments to the public
Municipal transfer receipts
Municipal transfer payments
Significance of the secondary classification of municipal receipts and payments
Subordinate classes of municipal receipts and payments
General transfer receipts and payments
Service transfer receipts and payments
Interest transfer receipts and payments
Investment transfer receipts and payments
Major transfer receipts and payments
Minor transfer receipts and payments
Summary of all receipts and payments
Summary of revenue receipts and governmental cost payments
Summary of revenue receipts and payments for expenses and interest
Summary of budgetary receipts and payments
Municipal assets, properties, public improvements, liabilities, and proprietary interests
Assets in private accounts.
Assets in governmental accounts
Municipal assets
Classification of municipal assets
1
Current assets of a municipality
Invested assets, or investments
Municipal properties
Municipal public improvements
Accounts with assets, properties, and public improvements
Liabilities in private and governmental accounts
Debts or debt liabilities
Trusts
n
Private trusts
Public or charitable trusts
Municipal debts or debt liabilities
Actual debts or debt liabilities of municipalities
Current debts or current liabilities of municipalities
Fixed or funded debts of municipalities
Floating debts orfloatingdebt liabilities of municipalities
Gross and net debts
Proprietary interests in private accounts
Municipal proprietary interests
Balance sheets in private business
Municipal balance sheets
Current municipal balance sheets
General municipal balance sheets
Consolidated balance sheets
Comparative value of different summaries




-

***£*•
36
36
36
37
37
37
37
37
37
38
38
38
38
38
38
39
39
39
39
39
40
40
40
40
40
40
41
41
41
41
41
41
41
41
41
41
41
42
42
42
42
43
43
43
44
44
44
44
44
45
45
45
45
45
45
46
4$
47
47
47
4g
48

CONTENTS.

5
Page.

DESCRIPTION OP GENERAL TABLES

Number and character of general tables
Table 1—
Date of incorporation as a city.
Population
Area
i
Table 2—
Summary of all receipts and payments
Summary of cash balances
Table3—
Summary of revenue receipts and governmental cost payments
Summary of net and transfer revenue receipts and governmental cost payments
Divisions of the governments of cities
Summary of revenue receipts, by divisions of the governments of cities
Summary of revenue receipts, by states
Comparison between revenue receipts and all governmental cost payments
Comparison between revenue receipts and payments for expenses and interest
;
Comparative summary of the revenue receipts and governmental cost payments of 146 cities: 1902-1911
Table 4—
Per capita revenue receipts and governmental cost payments
Comparative summary of per capita net revenue receipts and per capita net governmental cost payments: 1902-1911
Changes in per capita net revenue receipts: 1902-1911 .*
Changes in per capita net governmental cost payments: 1902-1911
Comparative summary of per capita net revenue receipts other than of public-service enterprises: 1902-1911
Table 5—
Character of table
Per cent distribution of revenue receipts, by cities
Per cent distribution of revenue receipts, by divisions of the governments of cities
Per cent distribution of revenue receipts, by states
Comparative summary of per cent distribution of net revenue receipts: 1902-1911
Per cent distribution of governmental cost payments in 1911, by cities
Comparative summary of the per cent distribution of net governmental cost payments: 1902-1911
Per cent relation of revenue receipts to governmental cost payments
Table 6—
Character of table
Receipts from the general property tax
Receipts from special property taxes
Connecticut
Delaware
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
Ohio
Virginia
Wisconsin
Receipts from poll taxes
Receipts from taxes on the liquor traffic
Receipts from business taxes other than on the liquor traffic
Receipts from license taxes on dogs
Receipts from general license taxes
Receipts from permit taxes
Receipts from special assessments
Receiptsfromspecial assessments for expenses
Receipts from special assessments for outlays
Receipts from special charges for outlays
Receipts fromfinesand forfeits
,
Receipts from escheats
Table 7—
Receipts from subventions and grants
Receipts from donations and gifts for meeting expenses
Receipts from donations and gifts for meeting outlays
Receipts from donations and gifts for establishing trust funds
Receiptsfrompension assessments




49

49
49
49
49
50
60
50
50
52*
53
54
55
55
56
57
58
58
58
59
59
60
60
60
61
62
62
62
63
63
63
63
63
63
63
63
63
63
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
64
65
65
65
65
65
66
66
66
66
66
66
68
68
69

CONTENTS.

6
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES—Continued.

Tables%
Classification of general departmental receipts
Character of receipts tabulated as from earnings
Receipts from fees and charges
Receipts from rents and sales
Receipts from other sources
Service transfer receipts of general departments
Table 9—
Receipts from major highway privileges
Receiptsfromminor highway privileges
Receipts from rents of municipal investment properties
Receipts from interest
Table 1 0 Public-service enterprises
Receipts of public-service enterprises
Service transfer receipts of public-service enterprises
Table 11—
Payments for general departmental expenses
Imperfect statements of expenses
-\
Comparability of statistics of expenses of 1911 with those of previous years
Per capita payments for expenses
Payments for expenses of miscellaneous general executive offices
Payments for expenses of inspection for protection to person and property
Payments for expenses of miscellaneous protection to person and property
Payments for expenses of educational recreation
Payments for miscellaneous expenses
Payments for city pensions and gratuities
Payments of judgments and in settlement for personal injuries
Losses by defalcation and bank failures
Payments for undistributed expenses
Exceptional payments for expenses by Massachusetts cities
Comparative summary of payments for general departmental expenses of 146 cities: 1902-1911
Table 12—
Payments for salaries of governmental employees
Table 13—
Payments for the principal general departmental expenses, total and per capita
Comparative summary of the per capita payments for the principal general departmental expenses: 1902-1911
Table 14—
Per cent distribution of general departmental expenses by general departments, by object of payment
Comparative summary of per cent distribution of general departmental expenses of 146 cities: 1902-1911
Table 15—
Payments for expenses of public-service enterprises
Table 1&Municipal service enterprises
•
Table 17—
Payments for interest on city debts
Exceptional payments of interest by Massachusetts cities
Table 18—
Payments for outlays
.
Service transfer payments for outlays
Table 19—
Summary of nonrevenue receipts
Summary of nongovernmental cost payments
Secondary classification of nonrevenue receipts and nongovernmental cost payments
Table 20—
Receipts from the sale and payments for the purchase of investments
Receipts from the sale and payments for the purchase of supplies
'.
Transfers of investments and supplies
Table21—
Receipts which increased and payments which decreased indebtedness
General transfer receipts and payments on debt account
Receipts from and payments to the public on debt account
Transactions which increased the debts of Massachusetts cities to the state
Transactions which decreased the debts of Massachusetts cities to the state
Table22—
Counterbalancing receipts and payments
General transfer receipts and payments




^
jY
'®
'jj
*~
'2
73
73

73
74
74
75
75
77
78
78
78
79
79
79
80
80
81
82
83
83
83
83
84
84
84
85
86
87
87
88
89
89
90
91
91
91
91
91
91
91
92
92
92
93
93
93
94

CONTENTS.

7

DESCRIPTION OP GENERAL TABLES—Continued.

Table 23—
Summary of all receipts, payments, and cash balances, by divisions and funds of city government: 1911
Table 24—
Sinking funds of two distinct types
Transactions of sinking funds
'
Table 25—
Public trust funds for municipal and nonmunicipal uses
Transactions of public trust funds for municipal uses
Table 20—
Amount of specified assets and value of public properties at close of year
Assets of sinking funds
Assets of public trust funds for municipal uses
Assets of investment funds and value of miscellaneous investments
Assets of public trust funds for nonmunicipal uses
Assets of private trust funds
i
Table 27—
Value of properties employed or held for specified purposes
Valuation of municipal properties
Comparison of increase in value of municipal properties with municipal outlays
Value of properties of general departments
Value of properties of municipal service enterprises
Value of properties of public service enterprises
i
Table 2 8 Replacement value of public improvements
Table 29—
Gross and net indebtedness of cities
Indebtedness classified by the governmental unit by which incurred
Indebtedness classified by character of the outstanding debt obligations
Indebtedness classified as funded
Indebtedness classified as
floating
Special debt obligations to public trust funds
Indebtedness of Massachusetts cities to the state
Indebtedness classified as current
Indebtedness classified by creditor
Indebtedness classified by purpose for which incurred
Per capita gross indebtedness incurred for specified purposes
Total and per capita net indebtedness at close of year
Increase in net indebtedness during year
Table 30—
Funded and special assessment indebtedness classified by purpose for which incurred
Comparison of funded and special assessment indebtedness with the value of municipal properties
Table 31—
Funded and special assessment indebtedness classified by year of maturity
Table 32—
Interest-bearing debt classified by rate of interest
Nominal and actual rates of interest
Table 33—
Par value of debt obligations issued and redeemed during the year
Table 34—
Assessed valuation of property
Reported basis of assessment in practice
Tax rates
*.
Cities with two or more tax rates
Special property taxes in New York cities
Table 35—
Summary of appropriations, receipts, payments, and balances for schools
Revenue appropriations of city and receipts from the general property tax
Liquor taxes as school revenues
Miscellaneous taxes as school revenues
Subventions by other civil divisions
School fees and charges, including tuition fees
Interest and rents as school revenues
Other general fund revenues of schools
Nonrevenue receipts of schools
School receipts from issue of debt obligations
School receipts from sales of property, investments, and supplies
School receipts from other sources




Page,
94
94
95
96
96
98
98
99
99
99
99
100
100
100
101
101
101
102
103
103
104
104
104
104
104
105
105
106
106
106
106
106
108
109
109
110
110
Ill
112
112
112
115
115
115
115
115
115
115
115
116
116
116
116
116

CONTENTS.

8
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES—Continued.

Table 35—Continued.
School payments
School payments for governmental costs
Nongovernmental cost payments of schools
Receipts and payments of independent school districts
Table 36—
Payments for school expenses
Payments for expenses of general administration of schools
Payments for expenses of instruction
Payments for expenses of operation of school plant
Payments for expenses of maintenance of school plant
Payments for miscellaneous school expenses
Payments for expenses of schools for colored pupils
School expenses and interest on the value of school properties
Table 37—
Payments for expenses of general administration of schools
Payments for expenses of business administration of schools
Payments for expenses of educational administration of schools
Payments for expenses of general administration of schools for colored pupils
Table 38—
Payments for school outlays
Payments for school outlays classified by object
Payments for outlays classified by kind of educational activity
Payments for outlays for miscellaneous schools and educational activities
Payments for outlays for schools for colored pupils
Table 39—
Average attendance at schools
School attendance and population
Cities with highest and lowest average attendance
Per cent distribution of school attendance, by kind of school
w
Average attendance at elementary day schools
Average attendance at secondary day schools
Average attendance at normal schools
Average attendance at other day schools
Average attendance at night schools
Number of school sittings
Number of school buildings
Number of schoolrooms
Number of rooms for night schools
Table 40—
Average payments for school expenses.
Average payments per 100 inhabitants
Inaccurate averages per 100 inhabitants
Average payments for schools for colored pupils
Average payments for normal and night schools for colored pupils
Table 41—
School employees
!
School administrative officers
*.
Supervisors, teachers, and other school employees
Table 42—
Teachers'pensions
Cities without permanent teachers' pension funds
Cities with permanent teachers' pension funds
School pensions in cities classified according to population

*■**
jj
-116
J1J
*1*
117

H?
.H8
118
118
118
118
120
121
121
121
122
122
122
122
122
123
123
124
125
125
125
126
126
126
126
126
127
127
127
127.
127
128
128
128
120
120
129
120
129
129
130

GENERAL TABLES.
Table 1. Date of incorporation, population, and area of cities having an estimated population of over 30,000 on July 1,1911
Table 2. Summary of receipts, payments, and cash balances: 1911
Table 3. Summary of revenue receipts and governmental cost payments, by divisions of city government: 1911
Table 4. Per capita revenue receipts and governmental cost payments: 1911
Table 5. Per cent distribution of revenue receipts and governmental cost payments, by principal classes: 1911
Table 6. Revenue receipts from taxes, special assessments, fines, forfeits and escheats: 1911
. Table 7. Revenue receipts from subventions, grants, donations, gifts, and pension assessments: 1911
Table 8. Revenue receipts from earnings of general departments, by principal divisions of the general departmental service: 1911.
Table 9. Revenue receipts from highway privileges, rent of investment properties, and interest: 1911
Table 10. Revenue receipts from earnings of public service enterprises: 1911




133
136
140
158
161
164
170
174
180
183

CONTENTS.

9
Page.

Table 11. Governmental cost payments for expenses of general departments, by principal divisions and subdivisions of the general
departmental service: 1911
Table 12. Governmental cost payments for salaries of persons employed in the service of the General Government and in that of
protection to persons and property: 1911
Table 13. Governmental cost payments for expenses of general department, by principal divisions of the general departmental
service, total and per capita: 1911
Table 14. Per cent distribution of the general departmental service of the expenses of general departments by principal divisions:
1911
J
Table 15. Governmental cost payments for expenses of public service enterprises: 1911
Table 16. Municipal service enterprises—Payments for outlays and expenses, offsets to payments for expenses, and undistributed
expenses or gains: 1911
J
Table 17. Governmental cost payments for interest: 1911
Table 18. Payments for outlays by principal divisions and subdivisions of governmental service: 1911
Table 19. Summary of nonrevenue receipts and nongovernmental cost payments: 1911
Table 20. Nonrevenue receipts from the sale of investments and supplies and nongovernmental cost payments for their purchase:
1911
Table 21. Nonrevenue receipts which increased and nongovernmental cost payments which decreased municipal indebtedness: 1911.
Table 22. Miscellaneous nonrevenue receipts and nongovernmental cost payments: 1911
Table 23. Receipts, payments, and cash balances, by divisions and funds of city government: 1911
Table 24. Sinking funds—Receipts and payments: 1911
Table 25. Public trust funds for municipal uses—Net revenue receipts and net governmental cost payments, and excess of transfer
receipts over transfer payments: 1911
Table 26. Amount of specified assets and value of public properties at close of year: 1911
Table 27. Value at close of fiscal year of properties employed or held for specified purposes: 1911
Table 28. Replacement value of public improvements: 1911
Table 29. Total and per capita of all debts, and of the principal classes thereof, at close of year, together with changes during the
year in funded andfloatingdebt, net debt, and sinking fund assets: 1911
Table 30. Funded and special assessment debts at close of year, classified by purpose for which incurred: 1911
Table 31. Funded and special assessment debts at close of year, classified by year of maturity: 1911
Table 32. Interest-bearing debt, classified by rate of interest: 1911
^_
Table 33. Parvalueof debt obligations issued and redeemed during the year: 1911
.
Table 34. Assessed valuation of property, basis of assessment, and taxes levied: 1911
Table 35. Summary of appropriations, receipts, payments, and balances for schools: 1911
Table 36. Payments for expenses of schools classified by kind of school or other educational activity and by object: 1911
Table 37. Payments for expenses of general administration of schools: 1911—^
Table 38. Payments for school outlays: 1911
Table 39. Average daily school attendance and number of school sittings, buildings, and rooms: 1911
Table 40. Average payments for expenses of elementary day, secondary day, normal, and night schools per 100 inhabitants and per
100 pupils in regular attendance: 1911
Table 41. School employees: 1911
."
Table 42. Receipts and payments on account of teachers' pensions, and assets of pension funds: 1911

186
204
210
216
219
222
224
228
234
237
240
246
249
277
280
284
290
296
300
306
312
318
321
324
340
346
378
381
384
390
393
396

DIAGRAMS.
Diagram
Diagram
Diagram
Diagram
Diagram
Diagram

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Per cent of total population in cities having over 30,000 inhabitants and per cent outside such cities: 1790-1911
Net governmental cost payments of the United States and 146 cities: 1902-1911
Net payments for outlays of the United States and New York City: 1902-1911
*
Net indebtedness of 146 cities, the United States, and New York City: 1902-1911
Per capita net indebtedness of New York City, 146 cities, and the United States: 1902-1911
Per capita revenue receipts and per capita payments for expenses and interest, and outlays, in groups of cities with
specified excesses of revenue receipts over payments for expenses and interest
Diagram 7. Net revenue receipts and net governmental cost payments of 146 cities: 1902-1911
Diagram 8. Per capita net payments for principal governmental costs for 146 cities: 1902-1911
Diagram 9. Per capita net receipts from principal revenues of 146 cities: 1902-1911

16
18
18
19
19
57
57
59
59

MAP.
Location of cities in the United States having a population in 1911 of over 30,000




facing

20




LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE,
BUREAU OF THE CENSUS,

Washington, D. C, November 15,1918.
SIR: I have the honor to transmit herewith the annual report on financial statistics of cities having a
population of over 30,000 in 1911, this being the tenth annual report on this subject prepared by the Bureau
of the Census.
The statistical tables contained in this report show in detail the financial transactions of the municipal
governments, their indebtedness and assets, and the assessed valuation of taxed property. The statistics on
financial transactions arc analyzed and so presented as to show, both for the whole city and for its important
departments, the net costs of conducting the city's business, together with the net revenue collected and the •
indebtedness incurred for meeting these costs. The rapid increase in the cost of city government and the great
interest now taken in city affairs by the general public make these statistics of great importance at the present
time. In connection with the financial statistics, the report presents a discussion of accounting terminology
with the hope that the continued consideration of this important subject may lead to greater uniformity in the
use of technical accounting terms.
The report was prepared by Le Grand Powers, chief statistician forfinanceand municipal statistics, assisted
by William J. Barrows, Starke M. Grogan, Morris J. Hole, and Lemuel A. Carruthers, whose efficient work in
the preparation of the report it is desired to acknowledge.
Very respectfully,

Director of the Census.
Hon.

WILLIAM C. REDFIELD,




Secretary of Commerce.
(ii)




FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES




1911

(13)




FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES HAVING A POPULATION
OF OVER 30,000: 1911.
INTRODUCTION.
CHARACTER AND IMPORTANCE OP MUNICIPAL STATISTICS.

which constituted 7.3 per cent of the national popula
tion. At the end of a second sixty years, in 1910, the
cities of the United States having a population of over
30,000 each numbered 184 and had an aggregate popu
lation of 27,316,407. This was 29.7 per cent of the
91,972,266 inhabitants of continental United States.
In 1910 the population of the nation was 23.1 times its
population in 1790, while the number domiciled in the
cities containing over 30,000 inhabitants each was
824.5 times as great as that dwelling in the one city of
that size 120 years before. The population of the cities
of theorize here considered increased from 1790 to 1910
something more than thirty-five times as fast as did
the population of the nation exclusive of its outlying
possessions. Table I, which follows, exhibits the pop
ulation of the nation, exclusive of outlying possessions,
and the number and population of cities having over
30,000 inhabitants each, as the same is reflected in the
enumeration of the Federal Census at each census year
beginning with 1790 and ending with 1910. There is
included in the same table the number of cities which
in 1911 had an estimated population of 30,000 each
and the total estimated population of such cities.

Scope of report.—The present report of the Bureau
of the Census is limited to a presentation of statistics
of the financial transactions of the 193 cities, having
a population of over 30,000 on July 1, 1911, during
what is here called the fiscal year 1911, and of the
financial condition of those cities at the close of that
year. The report presents statistics as accurate and
comparable as it has been feasible to compile from
the records of the cities, relating to a number of sub
jects, the principal of which are (1) the total and per
capita receipts of revenue and of each of its principal
classes; (2) the total and per capita expense for all
governmental activities and for each principal munici
pal service, such as those for police and fire protection
and for the education of children in the public schools;
(3) the total and per capita interest on public indebt
edness; (4) the total and per capita outlay for the
acquisition and construction of public properties, im
provements, and equipment; (5) the total and per
capita value of public properties, improvements, and
equipment; and (6) the total and per capita municipal
indebtedness.
CRIES "WITH OVER 30,000
Increase in the number and population of cities.—TheTabic I
UNITED 8TATES. 1
INHABITANTS.
growing importance of a report such as that described
above is shown by one of the most striking social
Population.
TEAS.
facts of the last century—the greater increase in
Number.
Population.
Percent
the population of cities than of smaller places or
Total.
of
national.
of farming communities. In 1790, when its first
census of population was taken, the United States 1911
30.4
93,927,342
193
28,559,140
91,972,266
134
29.7
27,316,407
had but one city with a population of over 30,000. 1910
1900
75,994,575
135
19,050,921
25.1
62,947,714 1
103
20.0
12,612,389
.
That was New York, N. Y., which at the time had 1890
15.3
50,155,783
63
18S0
7,677,766
44
13.5
38,558,371
5,210,397
1870
33,131 inhabitants. The two cities which ranked I860
10.3
31,443,321
3,246,736
23,191,876
7.3
1,703,302
26
next to New York in number of inhabitants were 1850
4.6
17,069,453
784,323
1840
19
3.9
12,866,020
501,434
Philadelphia, Pa., with 28,522, and Boston, Mass., 1830
3.0
9,638,453
293,544
1820
•
3.2
7,239 881
230,437
with 18,320. In 1790 the national population num 1810
A
1.9
5,308,483
101,735
1800
0.8
3,929,214
33,131
1
bered 3,929,214, and the population of New York City 1790
constituted only 0.8 per cent of that of the nation.
Sixty years later, in 1850, when the population of the
The number of cities given for each census year is
country numbered 23,191,876, there were 19 cities the number of those with separate organizations at
each having a population of over 30,000. The largest the time of enumeration. Of those cities it should be
of these was New York, with a population of 515,547. mentioned that Brooklyn, N. Y., which was a separate
The 19 cities had an aggregate population of 1,703,302, |I municipality with over 30,000 inhabitants at each




(15)

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

16

and relative number and the actual and relative popu
lation of cities having over 30,000 inhabitants has
given rise to many andgrave administrative problems.
To assist, so far as the same could be done by the aid
of exact statistical information, in the solution of these
problems, Congress in 1898 authorized the Department
of Labor to compile and publish annually the statistics
of cities having a population over 30,000. Later,
after the establishment of the Department of Com
merce and Labor, the compilation of these statistics
was transferred by executive order to the Bureau of
the Census, and this governmental office published its
first statistics on this subject for the year 1902. Sim
ilar statistics have been compiled and published for
San Jose, Cal.
Lorain, Ohio.
each year up to and including this report for the year
Aurora, 111.
Muskogee, Okla.
1911. Of the 193 cities to which this volume relates,
Council Bluffs, Iowa.
Austin, Tex.
New Rochelle, N.' Y .
Lynchburg, Va.
statistics have been presented in all of the 10 reports
Orange, N . J.
mentioned for only 146 cities. In this statement of
The accompanying diagram shows for each census numbers the two cities of Pittsburgh and Allegheny,
year the percentage of the total population of the Pa., which were consolidated into the present city of
nation that was domiciled in cities having over 30,000 Pittsburgh, are counted as one for all years. The
inhabitants and the percentage of such population growth in population of the 146 cities for which the
that resided outside of those cities.
Bureau of the Census has now compiled comparable sta
tistics for 10 years is shown in the following statement:
DIAGRAM 1 . — P E R CENT OP TOTAL POPULATION IN CITIES HAVING
census year from 1840 to 1890, was consolidated with
New York, N. Y., prior to 1900; and Allegheny, Pa.,
which is included in the table as a separate city from
1860 to 1900, was consolidated with Pittsburgh, Pa.,
prior to 1910.
Of the 193 cities for which statistics are presented
in this report, nine, which had an estimated population
July 1, 1911, exceeding 30,000, had an enumerated
population April 15, 1910, of less than that number,
and hence no statistics for them have previously been
included in the census statistics for cities having over
30,000 inhabitants. The names of these cities are as
follows:

OVER 30,000 INHABITANTS, AND PER CENT OUTSIDE OF SUCH
CITIES: 1790-1911.

Tzm w//w////w///wtfWMW/m
Tzmy//M/////Ww^W^m
ww/z/Mmw^
WM////A W&A
w///ww////MmWP77&
^y^/y^^^
V///M///AV////////////X///^
V/////)/////^
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ^
^ 4 * & 0 ^ ^

mm

w///w//^////w/w^m^^

\**oW///W#WMW/WM

^

iaio ^ 7 > f / / / y 7 ^ ^

xzMVZZ&ZZZWmZ^mZ^^W^Z^ZZZA
m*
i7gor//M//^^^
^

m

PER CENT IN CITIES WITH S0.000 Oil MORE INHABITANTS

1J/////A

PER CENT OUTSIDE 8UCH CITIES •

The estimated population of each city June 1,1911,
is given in Table 1, and the number and population of
cities in each of the nine geographic groups are shown
in Table II, which follows.
Table I I
Cities.

GEOGRAPHIC DIVISION.

Population.

United States

193

28,559,140

New England
Middle Atlantic
East North Central
West North Central
South Atlantic
East South Central
West South Central
Mountain

32
47
39
19
18
11
11
4
12

3,057,751
10,846,499
6,301,601
2,359,330
1,891,059
910,047
969,837
406,213
1,816,803

*Mx . ^

Statistics of cities having a population of over
80,000,—The unprecedented increase in the actual




1
TXAft.
1911
1910
1909
190S
1907

Population,
26,7S8,017 1906
25,904,769
25,103,590 I 1901
23,608,858 190R
23,107,777 1902

YRXR.

*

Population.
22,530,736
21,973,431
21,434,324
20,fTO,155
20,309,308

Governmental costs1 of cities and of the Nation,—The
figures given in Table I showing the greater relative
growth of the population of cities having over 30,000
inhabitants than of the population of the United States
as a whole are very striking. They do not, however,
show the real nature of the administrative problems
which have developed in connection with that increase
as do thefiguresin Tables HE and IV which .follow.
Table HE gives for each of the 10 years from 1902 to
1911, inclusive, the total and per capita net govern
mental costs of the 146 larger cities for which the
bureau has compiled statistics, and the corresponding
costs of the National Government, together with the
net total and per capita outlay payments for New
York City for its public works, and those of the
National Government for the Panama Canal, public
buildings, forts and fortifications, and river and har
bor improvements.
The net governmental costs of the United States
Government for current operation, by which is meant
costs exclusive of pensions, for the 10 years covered
by the table exceeded those of the 146 cities by
8233,465,269, or only 3.5 per cent. In 1911 the costs
of these 146 cities exceeded the current costs of the
National Government by $56,124,828, or 7T>cr cent.
If comparison is made between the total governmental
*For definition of "governmental costs," see page 36.

INTRODUCTION.
costs of the United States, including those for pen
sions, it is seen that the total for the United States
exceeded that for the 146 cities for the 10 years by
only $1,709,336,607, or 25.8 per cent; and that in 1911
it exceeded it by only 11.8 per cent. Comparing these
Table I I I

17

net governmental costs of the United States with those
of the 193 cities having a population of over 30,000,
it is found that the total costs of the United States
Government for that year exceeded those of the 193
cities by only $54,235,755, or 6 per cent.

NET GOVERNMENTAL COST! PAYMENTS.

United States.
146 cities for all
purposes.

TEAB.

Total.
$6,614,932,651
1911
1910
1909
1908
1907
1906
1905
1904
1903
1902

*

Per
capita.

For all purposes.

Total.

$28.55 $8,324,269,258

862,229,808
807,224,695
761,562,037
761,527,311
691,049,439

32.19
31.16
30.33
32.26
29.91

600,383,766
583,646,656
566,509,115
518,225,379
462,574,445

26.65
26.56 !
26.43
24.83
22.71

964,085,555
950,795,418
1,002,303,040
924,566,889
818,541,147
763,103,908
746,568,098
776,802,225
694,111,489
683,391,489

Per
capita.

New York City for
For Panama Canal, permanent
properties
public buildings,
and
publicImprove
For all purposes other forts and fortifica
ments.
tions, and river and
than pensions.
harbor improvement.

For pensions.

Total.

$9.62 $1,475,871,338

Per
capita.

Total.

$1.71 $6,848,397,920

Per
capita.

Total.

$7.92 $637,027,544

Per
capita.

TotaL

$0.74 j $695,197,843

Per
capita.
16.40

10.28!
10.32
11.07
10.40
9.37

157,980,575
160,696,416
161,710,367
153,892,467
139,309,514

1.68
1.74
1.79
1.73
1.60

806,104,980
790,099,002
840,592,673
770,674,422
679,231,633

8.59 |
8.57
9.28 1
8.67 ;
7.78

91,454,237
86,997,396
83,760,608
82,161,537
62,528,589

0.98
0.94
0.92
0.92
0.72

88,424,126
75,379,758
69,959,555
83,417,149
75,481,437

17.84
15.81
15.11
18.65
17.86

8.90
8.88
9.42
8.59
8.63

141,034,562
141.773,965
142,559,266
138,425,646
138,488,560

1.65
1.69
1.73
1.71
1.75

622,069,346
604,794,133
634,242,959
555,685,843
544,902,929

7.26 ! 56,468,527
7.19 j 39,948,415
84,723,534
7.69
28,362,054
6.87
20,622,647
6.88

0.66
0.48
1.03
0.35
0.26

64,890,253
62,309,540
68,591,402
64,422,050
42,322,573

15.78
15.58
17.64
17.34
11.68

1
For definition of" governmental costs," see page 36.
* The amounts tabulated under this heading are also included under headings " For all purposes" and " For all purposes other than pensions."

The most striking figures of the tables showing the
great financial problems with which the cities are
forced to deal are those giving the outlay payments
of the city of New York as compared with similar
payments of the National Government for (1) the
Panama Canal, including payments on account of that
structure to the French Company in 1904; (2) public
buildings; (3) forts and fortifications; and (4) river and
harbor improvements. In 10 years the United
States Government expended for all these purposes the
total of $637,027,544, while the single city of New
York expended for permanent properties and public
improvements the aggregate of $695,197,843, or 9.1
per cent more than the National Government.
The population which bore the burden of national
governmental costs was 3.5 times as great as that of
the 146 cities, and nearly nineteen jbimes as great as
that of the city of New York. The totals of the table,
therefore, do not exhibit the relative burden of
national and municipal governmental costs. That
burden is measured approximately by the per capita
figures of the table. The per capita governmental
costs of the 146 cities for the 10 years average three
times those of the National Government for all pur
poses and were three and six-tenths times those of the
National Government for purposes other than pen
sions; and the per capita of outlay payments for New
York City for the same period was 22.2 times those of
the National Government for all public works of
which the table makes specific mention.
6127°—13




2

The table further shows that the relative burden of
governmental costs as measured by per capita pay
ments therefor are increasing much faster for munici
palities than for the National Government. Com
paring the figures for the total costs in 1902 and 1911,
it is found that those of the National Government for
all purposes increased from 88.63 to $10.28, or 19.1 per
cent; while those of the 146 cities increased from $22.71
to $32.19, or 41.7 per cent. These figures disclose at
once the great relative importance of the proper admin
istration of city affairs and the necessity of such a
system of accounting and reporting as will best assist
in securing and maintaining economy and efficiency
in city government. The necessity for this account
ing and reporting is much more pressing in the
case of cities than in that of the nation, owing to
the greater relative per capita governmental costs of
the cities.
The two diagrams on the next page are designed to
present graphically the most important facts shown in
Table III. They present for each year (1) the total
payments for all governmental costs by 146 cities; (2)
those by the United States for pensions and for all
purposes other than pensions; (3) the total payments
of the United States Government for the construction
of the Panama Canal, public buildings, forts and forti
fications, and river and harbor improvement; and (4)
the payments of New York City for the construction
of its various public works, buildings, and other public
improvements.

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

18

DIAGRAM 2 . — N E T GOVERNMENTAL COST PAYMENTS OP THE
UNITED STATES AND OP 14G CITIES: 1902-1911.
WUJ0M8 OP OOLLARS
I9fl

^^BBZ^^WS^^SSS^S^^^^S^^a^SMB^
y/////&s////AV//yy//Av/AV////^^^

toro
wy/&s/jy//Aw;v///////:w/^^^^
\*JJWJX&^&^^
7Af//A4y////AV/'//Af//Air////M^
^igflfaaaaJMM^^
1908 y//>//.
w////y//y///sy/AV///////s//^^^^

SSSSEs

1609

^M

ssssssa

1907

assets from the gross funded and floating debt as those
terms are used in this report, the outstanding current
debt being approximately balanced in all cases by cash
in the general treasury and by special assessments and
general property taxes levied but uncollected. So far
as thefiguresfail to bo comparable they slightly exag
gerate the city debt, owing to the fact that many cities
have uncollected taxes and cash on hand in excess of
their revenue loans and warrants outstanding; but this
excess affects the per. capita for the several years by
only a very few cents at most.

1906
1906

Tablo
BV

1904

TEAR.

1908

INDEBTEDNESS.
United States.
TotaL

Per
capita.

146 Cities.
Total.

j

Vet I
capita.

New York City.

TotaL

Per
capita.

i

1902

i

1909
190$
1906...
DIAGRAM 3 . — N E T PAYMENTS POR OUTLAYS OP THE UNITED
STATES AND OP N E W YORK CITY: 1902-1911.
MILLIONS OF OOLLARS

$1,015,784,338 $10.83 $1,803,129,085 $67.31 | $723,292,829 $145.92
1,046,449,185 11.35 | 1,657,661,296 64.00 1 656,194,384 137.66
131.39
1,537,099,399 61.22
608,214,820
1,023,861,531 11.31
123.16
1,434,991,649 60.78
550,779,903
938,132,409 10.55
55.75
1,2SS,318,890
i 494,799,541 117.09
10.06 1
878,596,755
105.84
435,324,772
11.25 | 1,175,970,979 52.11
961,435,687
9S.S9
1,118,087,784 50. SS 395,596,022
9S9,SC6,772 11.77
95.29
11.73) 1,062,746,750 49.58 \ 370,503,521
967,231,774
82.09
45.19
j
305,067,267
11.44
943,006,632
925,011,637
76.45
900,178,161 44.19 | 276,083,472
909,457,241 12.24

»

From 1902 to 1911 the net indebtedness of the Nation
varied slightly from year to year and increased during
1910
the 10 years by S46,327,097, which was 4.8 per cent of
r///7///zvszMV/:r//////;v//^^^
the indebtedness in 1902. This increase was wholly
1909
due to the expenditures for the acquisition and con
v/yzr//A7///////:7////M^
struction of the Panama Canal. The national popu
1908
y////////////////;v////////M^^^
lation increased, however, during those years by a
1907
greater percentage than the national debt, and hence
y//////Avy/miY///////s/^^^
the relative burden of national indebtedness as repre
1906
v//r////s////////&//////^^^
sented by the per capita indebtadness decreased from
S12.24 to 810.83, a decrease of 11.5 per cent. In 1902
1905
v/Ar////Ar/sw:v///zrw
the net indebtedness of the Nation exceeded the net
1904
indebtedness of the 146 cities by 869,279,0S0, or 7.7
#i%^02Z^0^^
per cent. The increase of the city debt in the 10 years
1903
7//&//AY//AY//s/sy/y////y/^^^^
was so much greater, actually and relatively, than
1902
that of the Nation that at the close of the fiscal year
1911 it exceeded the national debt by 8787,344,747, or
OUTLAYS, UNITE0 STATES.
OUTLAY*, NEW YORK CITY.
77.5 per cent. Another fact of importance to be noted
is that while the population of these cities increased in
Comparative indebtedness ofcities and of ihe Nation.—10 years from 20,369,308 to 26,788,107, a gain of 31.5
Table IV, which is a comparative statement of the per cent, their net indebtedness increased from
total and per capita net indebtedness at the close of 8900,178,161 to 81,803,129,085, an addition of
the fiscal years 1902 to 1911, inclusive, of the National S902,950,968, or 100.3 per cent, as compared with an
Government, of the 146 cities covered by the preceding increase of only 4.8 per cent in the national indebted
table and of the city of New York, calls attention to one ness. The greater burden of municipal indebtedness
class of financial problems which grow out of the vast than of national, as well as the greater relative increase
expenditures above noted. By net indebtedness is in that burden, is exhibited by the per capita debt of
meant the total debt obligations outstanding less the the cities, which increased in the 10 years from 844.19
resources available or provided for their immediate or in 1902 to S67.31 in 1911, an added burden of 52.3 per
ultimate redemption. In the case of the National cent. It is to be noted that the per capita indebted
Government the amount of indebtedness is computed ness of these cities, which in 1902 was three and sixby subtracting the cash in the treasury from the total tenths times the corresponding per capita indebted
debt obligations outstanding; and in the case of the ness of the nation, had so increased in 10 years that in
cities it is obtained by deducting the sinking fund 1911 it was six and two-tenths times such indebtedness.
19(1




vr////////////////7////^^^^

INTRODUCTION.
DIAGRAM 4.—NET INDEBTEDNESS OP 146 CITIES, THE UNITED
STATES AND NEW YOBK CITY: 1902-1911.
MILLIONS Or OOLLAR9

19

pared with twenty-two and two-tenths, the number
of times which the per capita outlay payments of the
city for 10 years were of the corresponding outlay
payments of the General Government, as summarized
in Table m .
DIACBAM 5.—PER CAPITA INDEBTEDNESS OP NEW YOBK CITY,
146 CITIES, AND THE UNITED STATES : 1902-1911.

1007

146 CITIES
UNITED STATES
NEW YORK CITY

Thefiguresfor the city of New York are, if anything,
more striking than those for the nation .or for the 146
cities taken as a whole. In the 10 years covered by
the table the population of that city increased from
3,623,160 to 4,956,865, a gain of 36.8 per cent, while
the net indebtedness of the city increased from
$276,983,472 to $723,292,829, a gain of 161.1 per cent.
As a result, the per capita indebtedness, which in 1902
was $76.45, so increased that at the close of 1911 it
was $145.92, or two and two-tenths times that of the
146 cities taken as a whole, and thirteen and five-tenths
times that of the United States Government, as com




■ H i NEW YORK CITY
B B 3 146 CITIES
UNITED STATEf

The accompanying diagrams present by the graphic
method the facts set forth by Table IV, that the bur
den of net municipal indebtedness at the present time
is much greater, relatively, than is that of the National
Government; and the further fact that the debts of
cities are rapidly increasing, while that of the nation
is remaining practically stationary.

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

20

Cities having a population of over 30,000 in 1911.—
The cities having an estimated population June 1,
1911, that exceeded 30,000 numbered 193. In the
general tables of this report, with one exception, they
are arranged in the order of their estimated popula
tion and each is given a number corresponding to its
CITY AND STATE.

Citv
number.]

KANSAS:

ALABAMA:

Birmingham
Mobile
Montgomery
AKKANSAS:

Little Kock

CALIFORNIA:

Berkeley
Loa Angeles
Oakland
Pasadena
Sacramento
San Diego
San Francisco
San Jose

COLORADO:

Denver
Pueblo

34
107
145
116
127
15
32
172
117
133
11
176
26
118
49
52
123
36
78
64

DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA:

Washington

17

FLORIDA:

Jacksonville
Tampa

90
132

GEORGIA:

Atlanta
Augusta
Macon
Savannah

31
139
140
89

ILLINOIS:

Aurora
Chicago
Decatur
East St. Louis
Joliet
Peoria
Quincy
Rockford
Springfield

Covington....
Lexington....
Louisville —
Newport
LOUISIANA:

New Orleans.
MAINE:

Porttand

185
2
177
91
160

86
156
113
105

Boston
Brockton
Cambridge....
Chelsea
Everett
Fall River...
Fitchburg.
Haverh
Thill..
Holyoke
Lawrence
Lowell
Lynn
Maiden
New Bedford..
Newton
Pittsfield
Quincy
Salem
Somerville
Springfield....
Taunton
Worcester
MICHIGAN:

Bay City
Detroit
Flint
Grand Rapids.
Jackson
Kalamazoo
Lansing

83
87
22
95
92

IOWA:

Cedar Rapids
Council Bluffs
Davenport
Des Moines
Dubuque
Sioux City—-




168
192
128
63
147
111

102
158
24
189
16
94

5
97
48
184
164
42
146
124
93
61
47
60
122
50
141
166
167
125
72
59
163
33
120
9
131
44
174
137
171
109
70
18
28

MISSOURI:

Joplin
Kansas City.
St. Joseph...
St. Louis....
Springfield..

179
21
73
4
154

MONTANA:

Butte

Lincoln
Omaha
NEW HAMPSHIRE:

Manchester
NEW JERSEY:

Atlantic City...
Bayonne
Camden
East Orange
Elizabeth
Hoboken
Jersey City
Newark
Orange
Passaic
Patcrson
Perth Amboy...
Trenton
West Hoboken..
NEW YORK:

Albany
Amsterdam
Auburn
Binghamton
Buffalo
Elmira
Jamestown
Mount Vernon..
New Kochelle..
New York
Niagara Falls...
Rochester
Schenectady...
Syracuse
Troy
TJtica
Yonkers

number.

142

Charlotte
OHIO:

Akron
Canton
Cincinnati
Cleveland
Columbus
Dayton
Hamilton
Lima
Lorain
Springfield
Toledo
Youngstown

81 I
112
99
58
155
76
82
19
14
190
9S
40
170
54
151
53
173

161
110
10

149
175
178
186
1
181
25
77
35
75
74
66
162
79
108
13

6
29
43
153
183
191
115
30
67
182
80

OREGON:

Portland

Allcntown
Altoona
Chester
Erie
Harrisburg
Johnstown.......
Lancaster
McKeesport
Newcastle
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Reading
Scranton
Wilkes-Barre....
Williamsport
York
RHODE ISLAND:

Pawtucket
Providence
Woonsockct
SOUTH CAROLINA:

Charleston
TENNESSEE:

Chattanooga
Knoxville
Memphis
Nashville
TEXAS:

Austin
Dallas
El Paso
Fort Worth
Galveston
Houston...
San Antonio....
UTAH:

Salt Lake City..
VIRGINIA:

OKLAHOMA:

Muskogee
Oklahoma City.

CITT ANl> STATE.

PENNSYLVANIA:

126
41

NORTH CAROLINA:

MINNESOTA:

Duluth.
Minneapolis.
St. Paul

CITT AND STATE.

NEBRASKA:

65
129
101

Baltimore

INDIANA:

Evansville
Fort Wayne
Indianapolis
South Bend
Terre Haute

City
number.

MARYLAND:
MASSACHUSETTS:

DELAWARE:

Wilmington

Kansas City..
Topeka
Wichita
KENTUCKY:

CONNECTICUT:

Bridgeport
Hartford
New Britain
New Haven
Waterbury

CRT AND STATE.

position in the tables. For convenience in finding
any particular city the following list has been pre
pared, the cities being arranged alphabetically by
states and the number assigned to each being indi
cated. The accompanying map of the United States
shows the location of these cities*

27

Lynchburg
Norfolk
Portsmouth
Richmond../...
Roanoke
WASHINGTON:

Seattle
Spokane
Tacoma
WEST VIRGINIA:

Huntington
Wheeling
WISCONSIN:

La Crosse
Milwaukee
Oshkosh
Racine
Superior

Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census.

MAP OF THE UNITED STATES
SHOWING LOCATION OF

CITIES HAVING A
POPULATION OP
OVER 30,000: 1911

6127*—13. (Face page 20.)




Financial Statistics of Cities Having a Population of Over 30,000 :1911.

INTRODUCTION.

21

chamberlain. These receipts and payments are (1) those
In the compilation of statistics such as have been of departments which are authorized to collect certain
described in the opening paragraph of this introduc fees and charges and make specified sales and expend
tion, and especially in the compilation of those of the money thus obtained for specified purposes without
municipal expenses, many difficulties are met with. covering it into the treasury or receiving warrants or
Detailed statements of those difficulties, of the factors orders for its expenditure, and (2) those of sinking,
and circumstances giving rise to them, and of the trust, and other funds under the management of special
methods employed and the success realized by the commissions or boards. In a large number of cities
Bureau of the Census in overcoming them are here with two or more governmental units some money is
presented to aid in the proper use of this report, similarly expended by those units. Further, in some
especially in comparing its figures with those of local cities referred to each of the persons acting as treasurer
or chamberlain may pay out money on the order of two
reports.
Difficulties arising from differences in governmentalor more different officers with the authority or power
organization are met with in all parts of the country. of a comptroller or auditor. The difficulties here de
In some cities all local municipal powers and activi scribed are overcome by securing reports from all
ties are administered by a single governmental organ officials receiving and paying out money from which
ization, while in others those powers are distrib the city corporation or other governmental body
uted among a number of independent governmental derives benefit, or for which it is responsible, and from
bodies. In each case the one or more bodies by every officer issuing warrants or orders, the same as is
which the local governmental activities are adminis done in the case of independent governmental units,
tered constitute the government of the city, which is and combining the data thus obtained with other
here spoken of as the city's government. The term city data into a single statement of the financial trans
corporation as used in this report is applied to the gov actions of the eity*s government.
Difficulties arising from differences in accounting for
ernmental organization or body in a city which has
administrative
funds are universal. The most imporonly one independent division, and also to the munici
ant
are
those
met
with in the case of so-called trust
pal organization exercising the principal authority in
the government of a city with two or more local govern funds. The character of the resulting difficulties may
mental bodies. For a city with local governmental be illustrated by concrete cases.
Some cities having trust funds whose incomes by the
powers exercised by two or more bodies, the data re
quired relate to all such bodies, and the Bureau of the terms of the trusts are expended for school, charity,
Census has collected them from all and has combined or other specified purposes, keep accounts with these
them into a single report for the city's government, funds, which show on the one side their annual earn
thereby making the resulting statistics comparable ings, and on the other the direct expenditures for the
with those of a city in which the governmental powers purposes of the trusts. Other cities having similar
are concentrated in a single governmental body or cor funds keep trust accounts which show on the one side
poration from which data are secured.
the earnings of the funds, as in the first instance, and
on
the other, the transfer of these earnings to other
A special difficulty arising from differences in local
funds,
as the general fund, or revenue fund, through
governmental organization is met with in those locali
which
those earnings are expended, and in the ac
ties where the territory governed by the city corpora
counts
of which the expenditures are recorded.
tion is materially less than that governed by another
Statistics
of payments compiled from the general fund
municipal body, as that of the school district. For
such a city the Census, instead of including for its accounts of the second class of cities will include with
combined statement all the receipts and payments, other expenses for the same purpose the amounts
or all the revenues and governmental costs, property, paid out for the purposes of the trusts from moneys
and debts of the civil division with the larger terri transferred from the trust funds to the general treasury
tory, includes only such a percentage of the same as and will be noncomparable with those based upon the
the valuation of the property within the territory of accounts of the same class of funds of the first class of
the city corporation assessed for the purposes of taxa cities. Further, there will be no comparability be
tion constitutes of the valuation of the property within tween the statistics based upon the records of the socalled trust funds of the two classes of cities, since the
the limits of the larger division.
Difficulties arising from differences relating to ihe trust accounts of the cities of the first class contain a
custody and expenditure of money are, if anything, more record of expenses not included in those of the second
common than those described in the last paragraph. class.
The difference above noted is one affecting statistics
Not infrequently a city with a single governmental unit
of
municipal expenses. Similar differences are to be
receives and expends some revenue or other money for
which the corporation is responsible without such met with on the side of municipal revenues, the most
money passing through the hands of the treasurer or common case of noncomparability of this class being
DIFFICULTIES IN COMPILING REPORT.




22

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

found in the accounts of cities with the receipts from which result from these conditions by having its
taxes on fire insurance companies that are appro agents reclassify from original vouchers, the revenues
priated by general statutes for the maintenance of and governmental costs, or receipts and payments, of
firemen's pension funds. Some cities in which such cities. Such a reclassification, even though made by
use is made of the given tax collect the tax by their skilled accountants with a large expenditure of clerical
general collecting agencies, and the amounts so col labor and money, can not be the basis of as com
lected are shown on the books of the city treasurers parable statistics as would result from the classification
and city comptrollers as city revenues, which are by intelligent public officials at the time of original
transferred to the trust funds for custody and invest audit. It overcomes some, but not all of the diffi
ment or expenditure. In other cities the amounts culties which now exist. These difficulties will dimin
are collected by officials connected with the adminis ish as fast as the cities here referred to can be
tration of the trust funds, and no account of their brought to see the wisdom of adopting a common and
receipt is shown on the books of the city treasurers scientific classification of all revenues and govern
and comptrollers, and there is no comparability be mental costs, or of receipts and payments, such as is
tween the tax statistics of the two classes of cities now in use by the Bureau of the Census.
In this connection mention should be made of tho
which are based solely upon the city treasurers1 or
fact that, unless cities have introduced classifications
comptrollers' books.
Many other cases can be cited, all showing how of expenditures based upon an intelligent application
statistics which are based upon the fund accounts of of the principles of cost accounting, the statistics com
cities are noncomparable as exhibits of governmental piled by the Bureau of the Census can not be made
costs or of revenue receipts. The two typical cases comparable by the methods outlined above except for
will suffice. The difficulties arising from the great the more important classes of expenses and outlays,
differences in the organization and accounting for and that comparable data for the several cities can be
city funds here noted are overcome by the Bureau of expressed only in per capita figures. Moreover, the
the Census by preparing, as has been described on possibilities of comparable municipal statistics will bo
page 21, a schedule for each independent fund in a fully attained only after the cities adopt more detailed
given city and consolidating the data so obtained into classifications of expenses and outlays than have
a single report for that city. The individual cities hitherto been employed by the Census, and combine
are with few exceptions keeping their fund accounts their financial statements with records of work done
as required by good accounting usage and as pre or services performed or public improvements con
scribed by the conditions under which they have structed so as to show the unit costs of services and
accepted trusts, or as called for by constitutional or improvements. Among such unit costs that should
statutory provisions, but the difference in these con be thus shown are those for the services of cleaning
ditions and provisions necessitate the Census treat streets per thousand square yards of each class of
ment to secure comparable statements of revenues paved highways cleaned; cost per ton of removing each
class of city refuse, eto.; and the cost per square yard
and governmental costs.
Difficulties arising from the use of antiquated and of constructing each of the various classes of pave
ments, and the cost per thousand yards of laying sew
diverse methods of classifying revenues and governmental
costs or receipts and payments are overcome by the ers of each size and class. It is hoped that with the
Bureau of the Census only in part. Many of the increasing public appreciation of the value of unit cost
smaller and some of the larger American cities have accounts and statistics as measures of governmental
accounts that were installed before the business world and private efficiency in business management, the
generally introduced revenue and expense accounts Bureau of the Census may be able at no distant date
to measure the results or outcome of financial trans to broaden the field of its truly comparable statistics,
actions. Their accounts are what are known in the and to present not only per capita statements of the
commercial world as cash accounts, or accounts with costs of certain public services, but also the unit costs
cash receipts and payments. They do not classify of such services as those mentioned and many others
receipts with reference to revenue; nor do they classify of equal administrative importance.
payments with reference to governmental costs, or
Difficulties arising from the collection of state and
to the costs of functional or departmental activities. county revenues hy differentgovernmental units areclosely
Further, no common classification has been adopted related to those referred to under the last heading.
by the majority of cities which have introduced In some states, the general property tax, taxes on
so-called revenue and expense accounts, or have the capital stock of banks and other corporations,
begun to classify receipts and payments with refer taxes on tho liquor traffic, and other revenues accru
ence to revenues and governmental costs. The Bureau ing for the benefit of the state and county, are col
of the Census endeavors to overcome difficulties lected by the city and transmitted to the civil division




ICTION.

23

for whose primary benefit the revenues are exacted* troller are for most cities records of cash received by
In other states the same revenues are collected by the treasurer and of warrants or orders drawn upon
county governments. In the cities of the states him in settlement of bills or claims, though in a limited
first referred to the receipts and payments by the but growing number of cities they also comprise records
city on account of these collections must be recorded of revenues, expenses, interest, outlays, assets, and
in the accounts and set forth in the published reports, liabilities. In a city of either class the totals for the
while the records and reports of the cities of the treasurer's and comptroller's accounts with cash will
states last referred to contain no statement of similar agree for a given fiscal period, as a month or a year,
receipts and payments. Most of the cities in the if the treasurer makes no payments except upon war
states first referred to treat their payments to the rants or orders of the comptroller, and if all warrants
state and county as payments for current expenses, or orders of the comptroller are paid within the fiscal
and the receipts from taxes and other revenues to period in which they are issued. The total of the
meet these expenses as receipts of city revenues. cash accounts of these officials for any given city will
A compilation of revenue receipts and payments for differ for a given fiscal period if the treasurer makes
expenses based upon the printed reports of cities, any payment without the comptroller's warrant or
some of which collected state and county taxes and order, or if any warrant or order of the comptroller
the others did not, give rise to noncomparable sta remains unpaid at the end of the fiscal period.
tistics, the revenues and expenses of the cities of the
In a city in which the comptroller keep accounts
first class being exaggerated as compared with those with revenues, expenses, interest, outlays, assets, and
of the second. To secure comparability under the liabilities, as well as with cash, no direct comparison
circumstances mentioned, the Bureau of the Census can be made between the comptroller's accounts with
treats receipts and payments of cities on account of revenues, expenses, interest, and outlays, and the
the revenue of states and counties as nonrevenue treasurer's accounts with receipts and payments.
receipts and nongovernmental cost payments, even Comparison can be made, however, between the total
though the local authorities have included them of the comptroller's accounts with claims accrued or
among the revenue receipts and payments for expenses. bills audited, or of his account with warrants or orders
Difficulties arising from the general use of cash acdrawn, and the totals of the treasurer's accounts with
counts by the comptrollers and treasurers are in large partwarrants or orders paid.
overcome by the Bureau of the Census. The accounts
Detailed comparisons between the cash accounts of
of those officers, or of those exercising their functions a comptroller and treasurer can be made in each of the
under other designations, necessarily constitute the cases mentioned in the preceding paragraphs only to
bases of the Census municipal financial statistics; they the extent that the two officials classify municipal
being the only accounts covering thefieldof the Census transactions in the same way. The methods adopted
statistics. But the use of these accounts gives rise to by the Bureau of the Census for overcoming the diffi
many difficulties which must be overcome before the culties arising in the compilation of detailed and com
data recorded therein can be embodied in comparable parable statistics of governmental costs from the exist
statistics of governmental costs. Those difficulties are ing and widely differing accounts of local comptrollers
patent to every one familiar with the elements of and treasurers are as follows:
For a city in which there is no comptroller, auditor,
accounting, and result from the use of accounts based
or
other official performing the function usually as
upon current payments, rather than upon current
signed
to a city comptroller, the Bureau of the Census
expenses. A description of the different accounting
bases
its
municipal financial statistics upon the ac
records in use at the present time in American cities
will assist to an understanding of the methods adopted counting records of the treasurer or treasurers ol the
by the Bureau of the Census for overcoming these one or more governmental units and of others having
the custody of the city money, and makes such re
difficulties.
classification
of receipts according to revenue and of
In one class of cities the only books of accounts
payments according to governmental cost as is prac
are those of the treasurer or other officer or officers
ticable. For a city in which there is a comptroller,
having the custody of municipal funds. In another auditor, or other official performing the duties of a
class, additional books are kept by the comptroller, comptroller, the Census statistics, for the reasons
auditor, or other official exercising the duties of comp which follow, aie based upon the accounting records
troller] or auditor. In a city of the latter class the of such officer, with such reclassification according to
books of the comptroller are in some respects similar revenue and governmental cost as may be necessary,
to those of the treasurer and serve as a check upon and the records of the treasurer or treasurers are used
his accounts and transactions, as well as upon those of as merely auxiliary thereto:
the departmental officials who immediately direct the
1. In most cities some of the warrants or audits
expenditure of moneys appropriated to public uses. issued or recorded in or for a given fiscal period are
The treasurer's accounts record the flow of cash into not paid until a subsequent period. For such a city
and out of the treasury. The accounts of the comp- the warrants, orders, or audits recorded in the comp-




24

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

troller's or auditor's books for a given fiscal period
represent for that period more nearly than do the
payments recorded in the books of the treasurer the
current costs of government, the presentation of which
constitutes the most important object of the Census
statistics of financial transactions; and hence are of
greater value for statistics showing the total costs of
operating individual departments and offices, or of
acquiring and constructing the several classes of prop
erties and public improvements, and the unit costs of
services rendered or improvements constructed or
acquired, such as those of education per pupil in the
public schools, or of the construction or care and
maintenance of particular classes of paved highways
per thousand square yards of surface;
2. The treasurer's books, in a city having a comp
troller as well as a treasurer, do not ordinarily show
payments classified by division and subdivision of
governmental service and by object, as the books of
the comptroller or auditor classify the governmental
costs or payments, and it is from exhibits of govern
mental costs or payments so classified that such sig
nificant and. comparable statistics of financial trans
actions as the Bureau of the Census endeavors to pre
sent can best be compiled:
3. In a city where neither the treasurer nor the
comptroller sufficiently classifies revenues or receipts,
and governmental costs or payments, and the census
agent classifying the same is compelled to depend
principally upon the original vouchers of expendi
tures, as has been described on page 22, he can find
such vouchers only in the office of the comptroller or
auditor.
Although the accounts and reports of the one or
more comptrollers or auditors of a city are used by the
Bureau of the Census as the basis of thefinancialstatis
tics of the city, truly comparable statistics of its govern
mental costs for a given fiscal period, as well as sta
tistics of its revenue receipts; of its receipts and pay
ments on debt and agency accounts, and of its assets
and liabilities at the beginning and close of the fiscal
year, are secured by a combination of (1) the comp
troller's statement of warrants or orders drawn or
bills audited and judgments registered during or for
thefiscalyear; (2) statements of the warrants or orders
drawn or claims audited and judgments registered
during or for the fiscal year but remaining unpaid at
its close, and of the warrants, orders, or audits and
judgments of previous years paid during the year,
such statements being compiled by comparing the
accounts of the comptroller and treasurer; and (3) the
treasurer's statement of cash receipts during the year
and of assets on hand at the beginning and close of
the year.
By obtaining a statement for each city, as above de
scribed, the Bureau of the Census secures as accurate
and comparable statistics of governmental costs as is
feasible based almost wholly on "cash" accounts. In




addition, the methods above described make possible
the compiling of other comparable statistics of which
mention was made in the opening paragraph.
Difficulties arising from lack of proper accounts with
materials and supplies can not be overcomo by tho Bu
reau of tho Census. Not infrequently in a city without
an organized bureau of supplies and supply accounts,
theseveral departments uso their unexpended appropri
ations toward tho close of tho year in purchasing sup
plies to bo used in the succeeding year. In such a city
tho materials and supplies thus purchased in ono year
are seldom the same in quantity or cost as thoso pur
chased in tho year preceding or succeeding, and hcnco
the costs of the various subdivisions of tho service are
made to appear to vary much more than thoy actually
do; and the statements of expenses or outlays, whether
recorded in cash accounts or expense and outlay
accounts, do not represent the actual current costs.
A few cities are beginning to appreciato this fact and
are establishing bureaus which make all purchases,
charging them to an asset supply account, and issuing
supplies to departments as required for immediate use.
The establishment of such bureaus of supplies and tho
employment of such methods of accounting for supplies
make the local accounts and statements of expenses
and outlays more accurate, and to that extent aid in
making the Census statistics more accurate and
comparable.
Even with accounts as described, a minor adjust
ment must be made by the Bureau of the Census in
compiling statistics of governmental cost payments,
if the cost of supplies purchased by tho bureau of
supplies for a given year is less than that of supplies
given out on requisition. Tho adjustment is made by
treating the excess as if it had been sold or disposed of
in meeting expenses and outlays and crediting the
supply account with receipts from supplies disposed
of which balance tho excess, the same as tho amount of
outstanding warrants and audits is balanced by a
receipt on account of such warrants and audits.
Difficulties arising from confounding expenses and
outlays vrith contingent liabilities incurred are met with
in the case of cities which have installed so-called
revenue and expense accounts independent of cash
accounts, but have not differentiated their accounts
with appropriations from their accounts with expenses
and outlays. These cities include in their summary
of expenses and outlays for a fiscal year tho contingent
liabilities properly recorded in appropriation accounts
that have been incurred by contract or upon market
orders during tho year, and which do not mature
until a subsequent year. They also omit tho actual
costs of the year that accrued during that year by
reason of contracts or orders of preceding years. Such
accounting gives rise to inaccurate statements tho
exact reverse in character of those which ariso when
payments are recorded as expenses and outlays with
out regard to the period in which were incurred the

UCTION.

25

liabilities that wero represented by the bills or claims I with this estimated value and charges the proper
paid. Such accounting magnifies the inaccuracies department or account with the same. This is done
to which attention has been called above when cities by preparing a schedule of the receipts and payments,
have no accounts with supplies, and make their or of credits and debits for this labor, the same as is
expense and outlay account or their payment account done in the case of the receipts and payments men
record the costs of materials purchased but not con tioned under a preceding heading, for which the treas
sumed or used until a later period. In the collection urer or comptroller of the city has no record.
of its data for cities with accounts such as are here I A city operating a municipal service enterprise,
referred to, the Bureau of the Census disregards the such as an electric light plant employed exclusively
local summary of current expenses and outlays, and J for lighting streets, parks, and buildings, if keeping
compiles a new summary of such governmental costs I- accounts for the enterprise by methods substantially
based upon the accrued or the audited claims of the the same as those utilized by private enterprises,
year.
makes its primary account with the enterprise a distri
Difficulties arising from different methods of accountbution account, and shows separately in its printed re
ing for interdepartmental services or services by one port the cost of lighting streets, parks, and buildings
department of the government for another are over as is done by cities obtaining their lighting from pri
come by the Bureau of the Census in only a limited vate parties. Without such an account the printed
number of cases. The noncomparability of the local report can only show the cost of operating the enter
records and the inaccurate statements of governmental prise as an independent department. For cities hav
costs in the case of many cities, which arise from these ing electric light plants the Bureau of the Census predifferent methods, are here illustrated by a number | pares special exhibits which show on the one side the
of concrete cases.
I expenses and outlays of the plants, and on the other
Many cities utilize the labor of the inmates of their j the value of the utilities and services furnished by
penal and charitable institutions in caring for and | them to the public and to the various departments,
maintaining their highways, or in making highway | the value of the latter being shown in Table 16 under
improvements, or in performing similar work of the title " Offsets to payments for expenses." For a
various kinds in parks or for other departments. A city having accounts of operating expenses and charg
few of these cities, recognizing the value of correct ing the value of the utilities, services, and materials
statements of highway and park as well as institu furnished to the proper accounts, departments, and
tional expenses and outlays, charge the proper highway enterprises, the exhibit is a condensed summary of the
or other account with the value of the labor of the local account. For a city whose accounts with one of
institutional inmates at amounts equal to what it these enterprises show no costs of the services rendered
would cost if their work had been done by city employ and utilities furnished the various branches of the
ees or by contract, and credit the institution with the governmental service, the Bureau of the Census secures
same amounts. The records of such cities, so far as estimates of the value of these services, utilities, and
their highway and park accounts are concerned, are materials, and employs these estimates in preparing
strictly comparable with those of cities whose work on the second side of the exhibit mentioned. To the ex
highways and in parks is done by city employees or by tent that the local statements of the expenses of oper
contractors; and their accounts with institutions, ating electric light systems include all costs for fur
showing on the one side the direct expenditures for the nishing light, the resulting statistics are true state
care, clothing, and guarding of the prisoners, and on ments of the cost of public light and are comparable
the other the value of the services secured from them, with those of other cities; and to the extent that they
exhibit accurately by their balance the burden which take account of only a part of the costs of furnishing
the institutions force the taxpayers to bear.
light or other utilities the statistics are inaccurate and
The records of such cities stand in marked contrast | the figures for the several cities are noncomparable.
with those of cities in which no account is taken of the (For a statement of the method of correcting inaccu
value of the labor of the institutional inmates for rate statistics resulting from the failure of cities to
other departments. Those records contain no accu include interest on the value of the electric light sys
rate statement of the cost of highway and park main tem as a part of their operating expenses, see page 26,
tenance or of the net burdens resting upon the cities under "Difficulties due to faulty accounting for inter
by reason of their institutions. To overcome the est chargeable as outlay or expense.")
difficulties in the way of comparable statistics and to
Incorrect statements of governmental costs are found
provide the basis in the case of such cities for accurate in the reports of all cities with public service enterprises
statements of the net costs of highway, park, and such as water-supply and gas-supply systems in
institutional maintenance and operation in these cities, which no account is taken of the value of the public
the Bureau of the Census secures estimates of the utility furnished other departments by such systems.
value of the labor of inmates of institutions upon the These incorrect accounts can not give rise to statistics
highways and in parks, and credits the institutions I that are comparable, any more than the accounts cf




26

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

institutions and parks in the case of cities such as penses, nor do they make other adequate provision
those referred to on a preceding page. The incorrect for it in their accounts. As a result, the reports of
accounts could be corrected by the Bureau of the all cities exaggerate outlays or expenditures for addi
Census and the basis laid for comparable statistics in tions to the value of permanent properties and public
the case of these public service enterprises, if the data improvements and understate their current expenses.
were available for correct estimates, as in the case of These exaggerations and understatements make it
labor of institutional inmates, or the interest on the difficult for the Bureau of the Census to compile accu
value of the plants of municipal lighting systems. But rate statistics of governmental costs. A beginning
such data are entirely wanting except in the case of a toward correcting this inaccuracy has, however, been
few cities in which the officials in charge of the water- made by the few cities which in the case of their
supply or other systems have prepared estimates of municipal service and public service enterprises pre
the value of the public utilities furnished, and such pare statements of depreciation as the basis of show
estimates are included in the printed reports, but not ing the costs of the service furnished and the extent
included in the comptrollers' or treasurers' accounts to which the enterprises are actually self-supporting.
and reports. These estimates, when available, are So far as these statements of depreciation have been
used by the Bureau of the Census the same as the prepared in any form by cities with reference to these
estimates described in the case of the work of the in enterprises, they are included by the Bureau of the
Census in its statistics of governmental costs. These
mates of penal and charitable institutions.
It should be stated in this connection that neither statements assist in making the Census statistics for
in the case of these estimates nor in that of the credits the cities concerned more accurate, but they can not
which are included in the accounts of a city comp materially increase their general comparability until
troller of actual payments by the city for water similar statements are available for a considerable
furnished by the water-supply system to other number of cities.
branches of the city government is there any great
The method employed by the Bureau of the Census
accuracy or strict comparability, owing to the lack of in reporting the local expenses for depreciation among
a well-accepted basis for assigning values to the water the operating expenses of municipal or public service
furnished by'privately owned and municipally owned enterprises is to deduct the amount so reported from
water-supply systems to the city departments and the outlay payments of the city during the year,
offices. The same lack of a basis affects the statistics making all deductions from the outlay payments for
of all other public utility enterprises operated by the enterprise affected, when possible; otherwise, from
cities, and this lack will continue to make difficult the the aggregate payments of the city for outlays.
preparation of accurate and comparable statements of
Difficulties arising frqm faulty accounting for interest
the cost of water and other utilities furnished by pub chargeable as outlay or expense are more common than
lic service enterprises to fire departments and other the average student of municipal finance appreciates.
departments until as a result of general discussion and Many of the public improvements of cities require
investigation of the subject, an approximately correct several years for their completion, and the cities
value can be assigned to the utilities furnished.
receive no benefit from their use until completed.
Other difficulties in the way of comparable statistics These improvements are constructed from the proceeds
of public service enterprises exist by reason of the fact of bond sales and the cities pay interest during the
that in the case of many of them the cost of making construction period. In commercial accounting
out bills and collecting revenue is included with the interest so paid is always charged to the account of
cost of collecting other revenue, and there is no basis outlay or capital expenditure, and interest is charged
in city accounts for comparing the expenses of con as a current cost only after the property constructed
ducting a municipally owned enterprise with those comes into service. Only a few cities in the United
of one that is privately owned, or for comparing the States recognize this principle of good commercial
expenses of a municipally owned enterprise whose accounting, and the Bureau of the Census is able to
employees make out and collect all their bills with present only for such cities true statements of the
those of a similar enterprise whose bills are made out costs of public improvements, and also to show the
and collected by some one of the general financial total interest for the use of credit capital.
officers of the city. The Bureau of the Census has
Cities lighting the streets, parks, and buildings with
formulated no method by which it is able to overcome municipally operated electric lighting plants do not
the difficulties here mentioned, and to the extent of show by their accounts or statements of lighting the
the inaccuracy of local accounts' here described true costs of services, unless they take into account
the resulting statistics fail to be strictly comparable the interest on the value of their plant as well as the
as between the several cities.
depreciation of that plant. Only a few cities prepare
Difficulties due to lack of accounting for depreciationstatements of the costs of their lighting service by
are everywhere met with. With a few exceptions these municipally operated enterprises which include
cities do not include depreciation among their ex interest on the value of the plant and hence, with




INTRODUCTION.
the exception of the cities referred to, local reports of
the costs of the lighting service are more or less
defective. Recognizing this fact, and also the desira
bility of correct statements of the costs of lighting
and similar services by municipal service enterprises,
the Bureau of the Census includes interest as an
expense of those enterprises, not only for the cities
preparing statements on that basis, but for all others.
The bureau hopes that the practice of the few cities
with reference to this item may become the practice
of all; so that the local statements of the cost of
municipal lighting may be made more accurate and
also more comparable as between cities. In introduc
ing thesefiguresfor interest as costs of operating these
enterprises or of making outlays for the public improve
ments mentioned in the preceding paragraph, the
Bureau of the Census employs substantially the same
methods as those used in the case of omitted state
ments of interdepartmental services already described.
The interest charged as an outlay or as an expense
of municipal service enterprises is credited as a
revenue in the interest receivable account, and the
amount so credited separately tabulated.

27

which it is to be hoped will ultimately be discarded
by all cities, as it has been by those best administered.
The difficulties arising from faulty systems of trans
acting business can not be overcome by the Bureau
of the Census, and the statistics of municipalities
with such business methods will be comparable one
year with another, and those of different cities with
such methods will be comparable with one another to
the extent to which the deferred costs of different
years or different cities are in like total amounts and
in like amounts for particular functions. The Bureau
of the Census notes with satisfaction, however, that
the last few years have witnessed great improvement
in the business methods of cities, and that the relative
amount of expenses now audited in a fiscal year
succeeding the one to which they relate is much less
than it formerly was, and it hopes that the introduc
tion of better business methods will in a few years
eliminate the factor of noncomparability to which
attention is here called.
State supervision of municipal accounts decreasing
the difficulties of compilation.—Many factors and agen
cies have contributed and are at present operating to
Difficulties arising from auditing claims after the dose lessen the difficulties mentioned above. The act of
of the year to which they relate readily fall into two Congress in 1899 authorizing the annual collection
distinct classes: (1) Those which arise from holding and publication of the financial statistics of cities
the accounts of the year open for a limited period of having a population of over 30,000 was a recognition
time, as ten days or a month, for receiving or auditing of the need and value of comparable statements of
claims, and (2) those which result from the faulty the financial transactions and financial condition of
system of transacting municipal business that permits cities. This act was the outcome of an agitation by
claims to be audited months or even years after the those interested in municipal affairs for securing
standard or uniform city reports and standard or uni
close of the fiscal year during which they mature.
The Bureau of the Census overcomes the difficulties form accounts as the basis for such reports. The
first mentioned and secures comparable statistics by same agitation led the legislature of Ohio to pass an
including with the warrant payments and audits for act in 1901 requiring the use of uniform methods of
a given year those which represent the bills audited in accounting and uniform reports by the municipalities
the succeeding year, and balancing these payments of that state, and to create a state office with power
by receipts from outstanding warrants or claims, as to enforce such uniformity and secure the use of good
is done in accounting for warrants issued during the business methods. Since 1901 New York, Massachu
year but unpaid at its close. Warrants drawn during setts, Indiana, Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, California,
the year on account of the governmental costs of the Washington, Oregon, and some other states have
preceding year and paid in cash are treated as pay enacted laws which provide for the compilation and
ments on account of the indebtedness of prior years, publication of uniform municipal reports, either with
and not as payments on account of current costs of or without the establishment of uniform accounts and
government.
the supervisory control established in Ohio.
The greatest difficulties of the second class men
The extent to which state supervision of municipal
tioned above are met with in cities where the final and county accounts and reports has been extended
approval of bills, or, in other words, their audit, is by legislation prior to 1913 is shown by the following
made by the city council. This method of audit statement taken from the June number of the Na
involves the exercise of a purely executive or adminis tional Municipal Review for 1913. The statement
trative function by a legislative body. It arises was compiled by the Hon. F. H. Irwin, director of
from a faulty commingling of administrative and
municipal statistics of the Indiana state board of
legislative functions, and is at once bad governmental
accounts.
practice, poor administration, and vicious accounting,




28

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

STATE SUPERVISION OP MUNICIPAL ACCOUNTS, UNDER EXISTING LEGISLATIVE ENACTMENTS PRIOR TO 1913.1

1

1

2

3

Official title of
1 Supervisory control. 1 examining
officer.

STATE.

Alabama.

1 Governor

5

4

6

7

Chief examiner of
public acts.

State board of con Superintendent of
trol.
accounts.
1 Public examiner....

(')

(')

Illinois

10

<f)

(*)

(,)

w

1 Noww In effect.
Including all disburs All offices and munici
ing officials.
palities.
State offices, Institu1 tions, and counties. «
Courts and commis Courts, state offices,
sions.
1 and commissions.
1 No law in effect.

w

<*)

<*)

0)

Remarks.

Including legislative No provision
1 appropriations for
any person, Institu
tion, or organization.
All precinct offices
State offices, institu Supervision of state
tions, and counties. 1 offices and institu
tions under direction
of department of ao1 counting and bank-

(1)

.1 State insurance com- 1 State examiner
I missioner.
.Auditor of public
accounts.
1 State board of ao1 counts.

9

State
State insti- I Coun RTown<1 Other municipalities. Installation of uniform
ties. [ships.
offices. tusystem of accounts.
1 tions.

Arizona... T-,.... r_ 1 Governor

California

8

State and
^offices.

(,)

Civil and school cities 1 All offices.
1 and towns.

No law in effect.

county
. ..

...
Examination of dties
and towns less than
5,000 population on
amplication or peti-

State accountant....
State inspector and
examiner.
Supervisor of public
accounts.

M*i™
Maryland....

x

Auditor of the com Director bureau of
monwealth.
statistics.

Michigan..... l x
Department of pub Public examiner....
lic examiner.
State revenue de State revenue agent..
partment.
State board hi ex
aminers.
Auditor of public ac
counts.

<*)

i 3 3 3 333 3 3 3
*
33; 3 3 3 333 3 3 3

Kansas?

<*>
<*>

New York

No provision . . .

<*)

(*)
(*)
<*)

(*)

(')

Bureau of inspection Chief inspector and
and supervision of
supervisor.
public offices.
Governor
State examiner and
inspector.

(l)

(»)

(1)

(,)

W

<*>

<*)

<»)
<*>

(*)

<»)

<*)

(*)

w

Cities (second and Counties, cities, and Cities of first class ex
third class), villages
towns.
cluded, also tho 4
(population of 3,000
counties comprising
or more).
tho city of Creator
New York.
No law in effect.
State institutions
All* taxing districts"....
All offices
Counties are examined State offices, institu
on request or peti
tions, and counties.
tion.

Rhode Island
mission.
Executive account
ant.

No provision....

(*)

Texas

7*) jCounty'
treas

Examiner of pubic
accounts.
1

urer.

State accountant....
3 ureau of Inspection (Jhief inspector and
1 ana supervision oi l supervisor.
public offices.

<*>
<*)

i

No law in effect.

State offices, institu Examination of coun
tions, and counties.
ties, cities, and towns
effected through local
examination boards.
No law in effect.
State offices and insti- j
ttitions.
State offices, institu
tions, and counties.

North Carolina
Ohio

City of Baltimore
Clues and towns (on State offices, institu
petition).
tions, dues, and
towns.
State offices and insti
tutions.
Cities (over 50,000 pop All offices.
ulation), towns, and
villages (on request).
All municipalities and
levy boards.

(*)

i

Examination of coun
ties on written order
1 of governor.

Municipal
corpora
tions, police, and
road district juries.

City fire department Sutoinstitutions.
relief associations.
County treasurer's of. flee.

County
treas
urer.

Governor.

Department of ac Auditor "o'f accounts.
counts.
Traveling auditor Traveling auditor
and bank exam
and bank exam
iner.
iner.
State comptroller
Chief accountant....

State institutions

J

(*)

No law in effect.
Supervision of state ox*
penditures only.
No law in effect.
Law amended 1013 ses
sion. Examinationof
counties on request.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i

County treasurer's of-j
fice.
I
State offices and insti
tutions.
(*) AUtaxingdistricts, In All offices
j
cluding civil and
school cities and
>
towns.
1

No law in effect.

No law in effect.

J OfflmlS^ot to s S S ^ o T * 0 ' m u n i d p ! ! statlsti<*> ***** State Board of Accounts, Indianapolis, Ind., for the National Municipal Review, July, 1913.




INTRODUCTION.

29

STATE SUPERVISION OF MUNICIPAL ACCOUNTS, UNDER EXISTING LEGISLATIVE ENACTMENTS PRIOR TO 1913—
Continued.
1

2

8

STATE.

Supervisory control.

Official title of
examining officer.

West Virginia

4

5

State
State insti
offices. tu
tions.

6

7

9

Coun Town Other municipalities. Installation of uniform
ties. ships.
system of accounts.

State tax commis Chief inspector and
sioner.
supervisor.

0)

0)

(0

State tax commis Accounting director..
sioner.

0)
0) | 0)

0)
0)

0)

WvomfPi?..... T . . . .

8

10

Remarks.

All taxing districts, in All offices
cluding c i v i l a n d
s c h o o l cities and
towns.
Cities, towns, and vil All offices (on request).
lages.
School districts, cities,
Supervision also of all
and towns (on re
financialinstitutions.
quest).

i office is subject to supervision.

Cooperation between the accounting offices or bu of the Census reports and of other similar reports
reaus of the states having bureaus or officers for has increased.
securing uniform accounts and the Bureau of the
The difficulties will not, however, be entirely removed
Census and popular discussion have given great im until the remaining cities have adopted similar systems
petus in all parts of the United States and Canada to of accounting. Realizing that with such a variety of
the movement for uniform municipal accounting. systems to choose from the average conscientious city
City officials, private accountants, and others have official, even though desirous of bringing his accounts
also been making earnest efforts to improve the into conformity with those of other cities, must be at
methods of municipal administration. Each year the a loss in determining by what system of accounts he
officials of the Bureau of the Census meet the account can secure the greatest assistance in his own duties and
ing and other officers of cities in conference, at which responsibilities, the Bureau of the Census recommends
improvement in accounting methods, in systems of that each city installing a new system of accounts
accounts and forms for reports, as well as a proper should include in its report a statement of the admin
accounting terminology, are discussed; and as a result, istrative gains obtained by the system adopted. The
the Bureau of the Census is able to improve its sched publication of such concise and concrete statements
ules, its classification of receipts and payments, its relating to accounts, set forth by those friendly to
methods of presenting statistical data, and many of each new system, and the later discussion of the same,
the cities are induced to bring their accounts and re will help to clarify the situation by disclosing the actual
ports more into harmony with the Census schedules helpfulness of the various schemes adopted and of the
and forms, and thus into approximation to a scheme various accounting forms introduced.
of uniform accounts and a standard form of reporting.
The value of uniform accounting terminology in les
To the extent that this has been done, the difficulties sening difficulties.—The establishment of state bureaus
in the way of comparable municipal statistics have or offices with power to enforce the use of uniform
been lessened.
accounting and correct business methods has been the
Introduction ofimproved accounts asfactors decreasingmost important single agency at work in recent years
the difficulties of compilation.—Since the Bureau of the for securing better municipal administration and in
Census began the collection of data for its municipal creasing the efficiency of local government. The Bu
financial statistics for the year 1902, many cities hav reau of the Census can never become such an agent
ing a population of over 30,000 have installed new for the improvement of governmental administration
systems of accounts which have been designed to afford as these state bureaus and offices are, but by cooper
greater assistance to the executive officers and to pro ating with them it can aid in the development of
vide the legislative branches of the government and accounting principles and terminology and in the
the general public with the data required for forming standardization of municipal accounts and reports.
an intelligent opinion concerning the economy and
Realizing the value of a standard and uniform
efficiency of the various departments and enterprises accounting and financial terminology as a basis for
of the city. The great majority of these cities in in standard or uniform municipal accounts and compara
stalling their new systems'of accounts have striven to ble statistics of finance, the Bureau of the Census some
bring their classification into harmony with that em years ago made a study of the more important account
ployed by other cities, so far, at least, as to enable ing terms used in governmental business. The results
them to compare revenues and governmental costs. of that study have been published in earlier volumes
In addition to the foregoing, many cities which still of reports on the financial statistics of cities having
retain their earlier systems of accounts have intro a population of over 30,000. The definitions which
duced classifications of revenues and expenses which were presented in those volumes have been discussed
approximate those of other cities. To the extent that by accountants and city officials and have been revised
such a uniform classification has been introduced, the from time to time. Some of those presented pre
difficulties in the way of compiling comparable finan viously, with a few additional ones, are here given
cial statistics of cities have decreased, and the utility under the heading "Accounting terminology."



FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.
ACCOUNTING TERMINOLOGY.
government "is a right which in its nature acknowl
edges no limit."l It includes the power to prescribe
Accounts.—Accounts are exhibits of the data of the conditions under which persons and corporations
financial transactions set forth by counter entries may engage in business and business activities, receive
called "debits" and "credits."
franchises, and enjoy common law rights and privi
Accounting.—Accounting is the art of analyzing, leges; and also the power to prescribe the conditions
recording, summarizing, and interpreting data relating under which they may take and hold title to real and
to business in such a way as to ascertain the results other property. Exercising that power, nations and
of its operation for any given period, to disclose its states take away from the owners of property the
state or condition at any given time, and to furnish legal title to lands and chattels and give it to others
all the information which accounts and summaries can if taxes on the same are not paid when due, and take
supply for its systematic and successful administration.
away from other .persons following given occupations
or
businesses, holding certain franchises, or enjoying
MUNICIPAL BEVENUES AND GOVEENMENTAL COSTS.
specified privileges the right to follow, hold, or enjoy
Municipal revenues.—Municipal revenues are the the same unless, or until, the tax is paid for that spe
moneys and other wealth received by cities and other cial occupation, business, franchise, or privilege.
municipalities for governmental purposes which add
The sovereign power of taxation is by the courts and
to their assets without creating debt liabilities. The many writers on public finance differentiated into the
aggregate of these moneys and other wealth received so-called "taxing power" and "police power," the
by a given municipality constitutes the revenue of the first including the power to raise revenue, and the
municipality; while the portion of such moneys de second the power of social, industrial, and economic
rived from a single source, as from taxes on real prop regulation and control. This differentiation has been
erty or polls, is properly spoken of as a municipal rev evolved by the courts in their efforts to reconcile or
enue. The revenue of a city or other municipality for a adjust the revenue-producing laws as enacted by the
specifiedfiscalyear is the aggregate of (1) the revenues legislatures of the several states to the different con
levied to meet the appropriations of that year; (2) those stitutional provisions* of those states. The great
accruing during the yeiir from the operation of public differences which exist in the constitutional and statu
service enterprises, the loaning of money, the manage tory provisions under which the 193 cities covered
ment of productive properties and investments, the by this report derive their revenues render it impos
performance of services, and the leasing of govern
sible, however, for the Bureau of the Census to use
mental buildings; and (3) those received from other
this differentiation as the basis of any classification of
sources during the year.
revenue; and hence it employs the phrases "the
The principal revenues of the 193 cities covered by
taxing power" and "the police power" only for pur
this report are (1) taxes, special assessments, fines,
poses of reference and for more exact description of
forfeitures, escheats, subventions, grants, donations,
certain revenues.
gifts, pension assessments, fees and charges other than
Subjects, objects, and methods of taxation.—Consid
those of public service enterprises, rents of municipal
ered
as exacted under the sovereign power of taxation,
buildings, minor sales of general departments, highway
taxes
may be levied upon every person, natural and
privilege dues, and (2) the revenues derived from the
corporate,
and with reference to every object to which
operation of productive enterprises, properties, and
the
legislative
power of the nation or state extends;
investments, including interest, rents, etc. The reve
but
the
subject
and object of taxation and the amount
nues mentioned after (1) are here called general reve
of
taxes
levied
upon
each at any given time are always
nues; while those mentioned after (2) are here called
determined
by
public
needs and by public policy with
commercial revenues. General and commercial reve
reference
to
the
conservation
of order in political
nues which are received for specified purposes or sub
society,
the
encouragement
of
industry,
and the dis
ject to specified conditions are spoken of as trust
couragement
of
pernicious
employments
and
injurious
revenues.
business
or
other
activities.
Further,
the
revenue
Taxes and the sovereign power of taxation.—In the
exacted
under
the
sovereign
power
of
taxation
may
broad signification of the word, taxes are amounts of
be
levied
and
collected
by
any
method
that
may
be
money, other wealth, or services, which by virtue of
adopted
by
the
legislative
authority
of
the
nation
or
the sovereign power of a nation or state are exacted
state
under
which
it
is
exacted.
Special
attention
is
for the support of governments, for meeting general
here
called
to
two
of
those
methods
involving
an
ex
public needs, and for all other purposes. The sovereign
power of taxation, by virtue of which taxes in this broad action of revenue (1) in connection with the grant of
sense of the word are exacted, is the power which Chief a privilege by the issue of a license or permit, and (2)
Justice Marshall declared "involves the right to de by the infliction of a penalty or mulct for violation of
1
stroy," and which when considered as a right of the
See Cooley's "Taxation;** footnote 2, pages 10 and 12.




ACCOUNTS AND ACCOUNTING.

ACCOUNTING TERMINOLOGY.
law. When taxes are exacted by the first method,
the license or permit is commonly granted by the
government on payment of a valuable consideration,
though this is not essential. According to court deci
sions with reference to this subject, to constitute a
privilege such as is involved in this method of collect
ing taxes, the grant must confer authority to do
something which without the grant would be illegal;
for if what is to be done under the license is open to
every one to do without it, the grant would be idle
and nugatory. But the thing to be done may be a
thing lawful in itself and restricted only for the pur
pose of securing revenue; that is to say, restricted in
order to compel the taking out of a license. This is
always the case where that which is licensed is not
unlawful at the common law.
The second method is that employed by the states
of Iowa and Ohio in exacting revenue from those
engaged in the business of selling intoxicating liquors.
The constitutions of those states expressly prohibiting
the licensing of such business, the legislature exacts an
annual mulct or penalty from those engaged therein
as an assumed punishment for violation of law.
Classification of taxes.—In exacting revenues under
the sovereign power of taxation as above set forth,
governments may levy and collect the same (1) with
out reference to any actual or assumed measurable
benefits conferred upon or services performed for the
taxpayer, or any actual or assumed burdens imposed
upon the general public by the subject or object of
taxation; (2) with reference to some actual or assumed
measurable benefit conferred upon or service per
formed for the taxpayer, including actual or assumed
measurable increase in the value of his property; and
(3) with reference to some actual or assumed expense
or burden imposed upon the general community by
reason of the subject or object of taxation.
Recognizing the three distinct sets of circumstances
or conditions under which compulsory revenues are lev
ied, many writers on publicfinanceuse the word "taxes"
as the exclusive designation of the revenues obtained as
stated in (1), and employ the terms "fees'* and "spe
cial assessments" as the designations of those obtained
as described in (2) and (3). In its classification for
this report of the municipal revenues exacted under
the so-called taxing and police power, the Bureau of
the Census has employed the theoretical classification
of the writers above referred to so far as the same was
practicable. Revenues levied and collected with ref
erence to property as described under (1) have been
readily separated from those levied and collected as
described under (2). When thus separated, revenues
such as those described under (1) are called property
taxes, and the others are called betterment taxes or
special assessments. (For a detailed statement of the
differences between betterment taxes or special as
sessments and other compulsory revenues, see under




31

the heading "Special assessments" in a succeeding
paragraph.) In the tabulation of compulsory reve
nues other than those exacted with reference to prop
erty, no such segregation has been practicable, it being
impossible to differentiate that portion of such other
revenues as was obtained under conditions stated in (1)
from that secured under conditions described in (2)
and (3); for example, the revenues secured by the re
ceipt of a so-called license fee from a dealer in intoxi
cating liquors is said by many writers to include (a)
a compensation for the service of making out the
license papers, which is identical in character with
that which is described more in detail in a later
paragraph under "Fees and charges"; (b) a payment
for the privilege of conducting the business; (o)
reimbursement for the special expenses of the gov
ernment in supervising a business that naturally
creates disorder; (d) a reimbursement for the special
expenses of the government by reason of crime, pau
perism, and disease that arise from the business; and
(e) a tax in the narrow significance of the term as
used by the writers on public finance above referred
to. Revenues such as those referred to under (a) and
(5) are identical in character with those previously
mentioned in (2), and those referred to in (c) and (d)
with those mentioned in (3); but how much of the
money collected by any liquor license represents reve
nue of the classes mentioned under (a), (6), (c), (d), or
(e)j is not susceptible of determination. In some states
the statutes have been enacted under circumstances
that demonstrate that the so-called license fees, even
though large in amount, are levied practically for the
purpose of obtaining revenue, and are therefore in
large part taxes in the most exclusive use of the word.
In contrast the statutes of other states are enacted on
the assumption that license fees are collected either as
stated in (&) or as in (c) or (d).
What has been said above with reference to the
practical separation of the revenues secured from the
licenses issued to dealers in the liquor traffic is, with
minor modifications, applicable to all revenues col
lected in connection with the issue of licenses or per
mits or the exactions of so-called mulcts. With
reference to them all it can be said that there is no
practical agreement among legislators, judges, and
writers on public finance as to what portion of these
revenues is received as compensation for services or
other benefits conferred, or for special expenses im
posed upon the government, and what portion is
otherwise received. The Bureau of the Census has
been unable, therefore, to employ a classification
which would show for revenues other than property
taxes and special assessments the relative amounts of
revenue which are collected with and those collected
without reference to benefits received or burdens im
posed. For this reason the Bureau of the Census uses
the word taxes in this report as the generic designa-

32

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

tion of all compulsory revenues other than fines and
special assessments, but shows separately that por
tion of the aggregate amount of these so-called taxes
which is obtained in connection with the issuance of a
license or permit. The impossibility of further segre
gation demonstrates the extent to which the legal
fiction of calling enforced contributions of wealth
"fees," "fines," and "mulcts," which was employed
by the early absolute rulers of Europe to reconcile
their subjects to the payment of taxes, is continued in
the modern terminology of revenues exacted under the
sovereign power of taxation. (For a statement of the
differences between the so-called "license fees" and
"permit fees" here tabulated as taxes as stated above,
and the amounts tabulated as fees and charges, see a
later paragraph under heading "Fees and charges.")
In this report the revenues tabulated as taxes, in
addition to being classified as above described with
reference to the issue of a license or permit in connec
tion with their collection, are classified with reference
to the objects taxed. Thus classified they are tabu
lated as belonging to one of four principal classes: (1)
property taxes, (2) poll or personal taxe3, (3) busi
ness taxes, and (4) nonbusiness license taxes.
Property taxes.—Property taxes are taxes upon the
property of persons, natural and corporate. Under the
existing laws in the United States, property taxes are
universally levied without reference to benefits con
ferred upon or enjoyed by the taxpaying property
owner. It should be noted, however, that under the
laws of Germany and Great Britain the property tax
upon the unearned increment of land values is levied
with reference to measurable benefit received or
enjoyed.
Most property taxes are apportioned according to
the value of the properties upon which or by reason of
which they are levied, and in so far as they are thus
apportioned they are properly spoken of as ad valorem
taxes. Others not thus apportioned are generally called
specific taxes. Property taxes are readily separable into
two groups, the general property tax and special prop
erty taxes.
The general property tax is the common designation
of the direct tax upon real property, and upon other
property which is apportioned and levied by substan
tially the methods employed in apportioning and levy
ing taxes upon privately owned real property. Re
ceipts from the general property tax form the largest
portion of the revenue receipts of most American
cities.
A general property tax, levied at the same rate
upon the greater portion of the property within the
territory of the taxing power, is here called a general
levy of the general property tax. A similar tax levied
upon a specified class of property within that territory
is called a special levy of the general property tax; and
if levied upon the property of a specified portion of
that territory, it is called a local levy of the general prop




erty tax. A general or a special levy which is applica
ble for a specified purpose is further designated as a
specific levy of the general property tax.
Special property taxes are those direct taxes levied
upon property which are assessed, levied, and collected
by methods that are not generally applied in the case of
privately owned real property. As such taxes the Bu
reau of the Census includes all taxes upon the prop
erty of corporations levied upon the basis of the
amount of corporate stock, corporate indebtedness, or
of both corporate stock and indebtedness, or by any
method other than upon the basis of the valuation of
all property of the corporation; taxes upon savings
banks and kindred corporations, which are levied in
proportion to deposits or in proportion to a certain
specified portion of deposits, as their excess above the
value of specified investments; and taxes upon life
insurance corporations assessed upon the basis of the
valuations of their policies. Special property taxes
also include all taxes levied upon mortgages at the
time of their execution or entry of public record, as
in New York, and taxes on investments, choses in
action, bonds and notes for specified periods of time,
as in Connecticut, and on corporation bonds held by
residents, as in Pennsylvania, and all specific taxes
upon property, as taxes upon land in specified amount
per acre, taxes upon horses, mules, and other animals
in specified amount per head, taxes upon grain in
specified amount per bushel, or taxes upon ships in
specified amount per ton of capacity.
PcU or personal taxes.—Under the term "poll or
personal taxes," the Bureau of the Census includes all
exactions by the government from private individu
als which are levied without regard to the property or
income of the taxpayer. These taxes comprise (1)
all so-called poll or capitation taxes, whether levied in
special amounts upon all males of specified ages, or
levied as quasi property taxes based upon an arbitrary
valuation of polls; (2) all so-called poll taxes graded
in amounts according to occupations; and (3) all ex
actions of personal service, as work upon the high
ways or elsewhere, whether classed in local statutes as
taxes or otherwise. Poll or personal taxes graded
according to occupation may, with propriety, be
called "occupation poll taxes." These are to bo dis
tinguished from business taxes, since they are prima
rily levied upon persons and not upon the business or
business activity by which the taxpayer secures an
income.
Business taxes.—Business taxes are taxes upon busi
ness and business activities exacted from persons,
natural and corporate, (1) in proportion to the volume
of their business; (2) by reason of tho business in
which they are engaged; or (3) by reason of some
business activity which constitutes a part of their
business, such as the selling of tobacco, the operation
of pool tables, or acting as insurance or transportation

ACCOUNTING TERMINOLOGY.

33

agent. Business taxes as here defined may be levied permits other than for keeping dogs, which are granted
with or without reference to measurable or assumed for a specified period of time, as a year, month, or
measurable benefits conferred upon or enjoyed by day. Among taxes of this land are those collected
the taxpayers, or special expenses imposed by them for vehicles, as automobiles, bicycles, etc., irrespective
upon the government. Business taxes may be classi of whether these vehicles are kept for business or
fied in many ways and given specific names, according pleasure.
to the basis of classification employed. Classified
In the third class, or that of permit taxes, are in
according to the business or business activity of the cluded all nonbusiness taxes that are collected in
taxpayer, they are grouped under the headings connection with the issue of so-called licenses or per
"Taxes upon traffic in intoxicating liquors," "Taxes mits which are granted for some specified act or
upon traffic in tobacco/' etc.; classified so as to transaction, as marriage licenses or permits, and de
separate the business taxes paid by corporations .from partmental permits, such as those authorizing the
those paid by private persons and firms, the resulting connecting of houses with sewers and water pipes.
classes would be designated as corporation and non- It should be noted in this connection, however, that
corporation business taxes; classified with reference to nonbusiness license taxes collected by public service
the issuance of a license or permit at the time of their enterprises in connection with the issuance of permits
collection, they fall into the two classes called license by them are included for accounting purposes with
and nonlicense business taxes.
revenue receipts from those enterprises; that inclusion
License business taxes are taxes exacted in connection does not, however, change the character of these
with the issue of a written instrument called a license receipts from compulsory revenue.
or permit, which authorizes the licensee to engage in
Special assessments.—Special assessments are gen
some specified business or business activity. Most of eral proportional contributions of wealth levied against
these taxes are exacted primarily for purposes of regu land and collected from its owners and occupants to
lation and only incidentally for revenue, and are thus defray the costs of specified public improvements made,
what the courts and some writers on publicfinancecall or of specified public services undertaken, in the in
revenues levied under the police power; but some of terest of the general public. Special assessments, like
them are exacted primarily for revenue, and are referred taxes, are levied and collected under the sovereign
to by the same writers as revenues levied under the powers of the state generally called the taxing and
taxing power. Nonlicense business faxes are business police powers, but under very different conditions and
taxes exacted without the issue of a license. License subject to the application of widely different princi
and nonlicense business taxes are in this report tabu ples, as may be noted from the following comparisons
lated under three headings—" Taxes on liquor traffic," based upon court decisions:
"Taxes other than on liquor traffic collected without
1. Taxes upon property are levied for the pur
the issue of a license," and "Taxes other than on pose of raising revenue for (1) meeting the general
liquor traffic collected with the issue of a license."
costs of government, (2) to provide for all general
Nonbusiness license taxes.—Nonbusiness license taxespublic needrf, and (3) for other purposes; and the
are taxes other than upon business that are exacted only benefit which taxpayers in the United States
primarily for purposes of regulation, and are collected at present receive is as members of organized so
in connection with the issue of so-called licenses or ciety. The individual taxpayer is therefore poorer, in
permits, and are always levied with reference to meas a sense, by reason of the payment. Special assess
urable or assumed measurable benefits conferred upon ments are levied only for the purpose of providing for
or enjoyed by the taxpayers. They may be sub some specified general public need, and, in theory at
divided and classified in many ways, although their least, do not leave the property owner who pays his
aggregate is small. The receipts from these taxes are assessments any the poorer, since he is fully compen
segregated for the purposes of this report into three sated by the benefits conferred upon him by the im
classes, and are tabulated in Table 6 as nonbusiness provements or by the services for which the assessment
license taxes paid by persons granted (1) dog licenses, is levied.
(2) general licenses, and (3) permits.
2. Taxes may be levied upon personal as well as real
In the first class, or that of license taxes on dogs are property, and upon person, business, occupation, fran
included all taxes which are collected from the owners chise, privilege, and right; but special assessments are
of dogs in connection with the issue of licenses or levied upon land alone.
permits to keep such animals for a specified period of
3. A tax is levied on the whole, or with reference
time, generally a year.
to the whole, of a known political subdivision, as a
In the second class, or that of general license taxes, state, county, city, town, or school district, or some
are tabulated all nonbusiness license taxes that are special subdivision thereof or some special class of
collected in connection with the issuance of licenses or property therein; while a special assessment is levied
6127°—13




3

34

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

on the properly situated in a district created for the
express purpose of a levy, and possessing no other
function or even existence, than to include the thing
upon which the levy is made.
4. Taxes constitute a personal liability of the tax
payer, but special assessments can not become such
liability.
5. Certain properties maybe specifically exempt from
property taxes on account of their public character or
from considerations of public policy, but no property
is thus exempt from special assessments.
6. Receipts from taxes may be expended for any
purpose or object for which the taxing authority may
make appropriations; but receipts from special assess
ments may be expended for only those public improve
ments and public services from which an exceptional
and plainly perceived benefit ensues to the property
or to the occupant of the property upon which it is
imposed.
7. Taxes are a continuing burden of recurrent
charges which must be collected at stated short
intervals, while special assessments are levied occa
sionally only, being exceptional both as to time and
locality.
Fines and forfeits.—Fines are amounts of wealth
exacted from individuals, firms, and corporations
under the sovereign power of inflicting punishment
as penalties for violation of law, while forfeits are
amounts accruing to governments in accordance with
the terms of contracts as penalties for nonobservance
of such contracts. Receipts from fines, like receipts
from taxes, are what writers on public finance call
"compulsory revenues," while thosd from penalties
belong to the class called "contractual." It should
be noted in this connection that the revenues from
the liquor traffic in Ohio and Iowa which are collected
under what are known as "mulct" laws, or laws for
imposing mulcts or penalties, are tabulated in this
report as business taxes and not asfines,such revenues
being levied under the legal fiction of a "fine" or
"mulct," just as the corresponding "license fees" are
levied under the legal fiction of a benefit or service.
Escheats.—Escheats are amounts of money received
from the disposal of property whose owners can not
be ascertained.
Subventions and grants.—Subventions and grants
are gratuitous contributions made by one government
to another. In the use of the terms the Bureau of the
Census applies the designation subventions to those
contributions for specified purposes made by the
Nation and by states and counties to their minor
civil divisions, which are granted subject to the formal
compliance by the recipient with certain prescribed
conditions, while the term grants is applied only to
those contributions of one government to another
which are made without the prior establishment of
conditions.




Donations and gifts.—Donations and gifts are gratu
itous contributions made by private individuals and
corporations to governments. The Bureau of the
Census uses the term donations in referring to those
contributions from private sources which are for the
establishment or maintenance of almshouses, hos
pitals, infirmaries, libraries, and kindred institutions,
and applies the designation gifts to all other contribu
tions by private individuals and corporations to
governments.
Pension assessments.—Pension assessments, as the
Bureau of the Census uses the term, are amounts of
money collected from policemen, firemen, teachers,
and other governmental employees toward the pay
ment of pensions and the maintenance of pension
funds in the interest of the classes of employees contrib
uting. Pension assessments are always received sub
ject to conditions, and thus always constitute trust
revenues.
Fees and charges.—Whenfirstused in private busi
ness, the word "fee" was the designation of the com
pensation exacted for a service performed or work
done, and the word "charge" was the designation of a
burden imposed. In private business the word "fee"
to-day retains its earlier significance, although it is
most frequently applied to the compensation for the
service of a physician, lawyer, or other professional
person. But the word " charge " has come to have the
same general meaning as "fee," although it is applied
most frequently to the compensation rendered for a
service performed, work done, or something sold.
When first used in governmental business, the word
"fee" was employed with the significance which it.
had in private life, but it soon began to be also used
as the designation of an amount exacted by absolute
rulers by virtue of what is now called the taxing
power, under the fiction that it was compensation for
a special service rendered or a special benefit con
ferred in the form of a privilege or right that the tax
payer was permitted to enjoy or exercise. In modern
statutes the word "fee" is used with both of these
meanings, inherited from the Middle Ages.
Municipal compulsory revenues called "fees" which
are levied and collected by virtue of the so-called
taxing or police power are in this report tabulated
as "taxes," for reasons already stated. Only those
revenues are tabulated as "fees," which are what
Seligman calls "contractual," and which represent the
actual compensation for services performed by the
employees of the government as one person performs
a service for another in private life. They are pay
ments for something done, as compared with the pay
ments for the privilege or right of doing something, as
are the so-called fees exacted under the taxing or
police power and tabulated as taxes.
The Bureau of the Census places in the generic group
of revenues to which fees are assigned the revenues

ACCOUNTING TERMINOLOGY.
called " charges." In so tabulating charges it uses the
word with its secondary or derivative meaning, which
is identical, as has been pointed out, with the primary
meaning of fees. The Bureau of the Census specifi
cally applies the term fees to amounts collected as
compensation for such services as are performed only
by governments; while it uses the word charges as
the designation of amounts collected as compensation
for governmental services that are similar in char
acter to those performed by one individual for another.
The amount of a governmental fee is usually established
by statute, and the fee is generally collected in advance.
On the other hand, a governmental charge can be defi
nitely determined only upon completion of the work
or service, and advance payment for such work or
service, if made at all, is made only to guarantee the
costs when determined.
Charges are differentiated from special assessments
by the following characteristics: A charge is the com
pensation for something done by governmental em
ployees for the benefit of a particular individual, and
in determining its amount no consideration is taken of
any service performed for another, or the cost of any
public improvement made or service rendered for the
general public, or in behalf of the people in a given
territory. In contrast, a special assessment paid by a
given individual always represents the cost of dome
public improvement or service which is levied on all
the land of a given territory. The difference can best
be illustrated by the following concrete cases:
If in one portion of its territory a city constructs a
sewer or sidewalk or lays a water pipe for one or more
squares and apportions the whole or a part of the cost
to the property benefited, the amount so apportioned
constitutes a special assessment; while if a given
individual with land outside the line of sewer or water
pipe authorized or in front of which no sidewalks have
been ordered petitions to have his land connected with
the sewer or water main or to have sidewalks laid in
front of the same, and the city complies with his peti
tion and makes the improvement requested and the
petitioner reimburses the city wholly or in part for the
improvement made, the payment is here called a charge
and not a special assessment.
If a city establishes a refuse-disposal service for
a portion of the city, and the cost of such service is
met either from special assessment or general revenue,
and a person outside of the territory covered by the
service requests a similar service at his expense and
the request is granted, the amount received for this
service is a charge and not a special assessment.
Further, if a city assume the task of removing the
snow from the sidewalks or the rubbish from the back
yards of any portion of the territory and reimburses
itself for the cost by a proportional levy upon those
benefited by the services, the amounts levied upon the
property benefited are special assessments. If, how




35

ever, the city makes it obligatory upon all owners or
occupiers of land to clear the snow from the walks or
remove rubbish from their back yards, but estab
lishes no general service for its removal or collection,
and in default of compliance by a particular owner or
occupier the city does the work and collects the cost
by a levy against the land, the amount collected is a
charge and not a special assessment or a tax.
Tolls is the designation given to charges made for
passing over bridges or traveling over roads.
Rates is the generic designation generally applied to
the revenues of water-supply, gas-supply, and electriclight systems and similar enterprises which they earn
by furnishing or supplying their respective utilities.
Rates and tolls are in reality but charges in specified
enterprises given special names. That distinction is
never modified by the method adopted for enforcing
the payment of rates for all such public utilities as
water, gas, electric current, etc. In some cities unless
these rates are promptly paid they are made a lien
upon the real property to the occupant of which water/
gas, or electric current is furnished, and the amount
is placed on the tax roll and collected with taxes.
This is a lien, as the courts have decided, for a debt,
the amount collected being the compensation for the
service furnished, and not a tax.
Highway privilege dues.—Highway privilege dues is
the generic designation applied by the Bureau of the
Census to amounts of money received by cities as com
pensation for special privileges in, upon, under, or
over the public highways granted to particular indi
viduals and corporations beyond the privileges of
other individuals and corporations. Some of the
privileges granted for which these dues are received
are privileges in, upon, under, or over the highways
that in the case of private realty are called licenses,
and others are rights which are most frequently
spoken of as easements, and others, granted to
public service corporations, are privileges called
franchises. They differ from the privileges granted
upon realty by lease in that they are exercised under
conditions that permit the use of highways by others
than the recipient of the privilege. They also differ
from the privileges for which license taxes are paid in
that they are privileges to make certain uses of land
owned by the grantor, while the privileges secured by
the payment of license taxes are merely privileges to
do something. Highway privilege dues differ from
fees in that fees are received as compensation for
services performed or rendered, while highway privilege
dues are received as compensation for specified rights
or privileges upon the public highways. Highway
privilege dues are divided by the Bureau of the Census
into two classes, called major and minor.
Major highway privilege dues are amounts of money
exacted as compensation for those privileges upon the
highways which are exclusively enjoyed by public

36

FINANCIAL STAI[ISTICS OF CITIES.

utility corporations and which such corporations I with the maintenance and operation of the govern
must possess in order to carry on their business. The ment, the conduct of municipal undertakings, and the
privileges for which these dues are received as com management of trusts; (2) their losses resulting from
pensation are those most generally called "fran defalcation, bank failures, and other causes; and (3)
chises," and are by some writers referred to as "op the depreciation of their permanent properties and
erating franchises" to distinguish them from public improvements. The municipal expenses of a
"corporate franchises," or authority to exist as a given city or other municipality for a specified year are
the expenses accruing during that year. Municipal
corporation.
Minor highway privilege dues are amounts of money expenses are here separated into two principal classes,
exacted for licenses or easements granted for utilizing, general and commercial.
The general expenses of municipalities are those in
for purposes specified, portions of the highway, or space
above or below it, including the privilege of erecting curred by them in connection with the exercise of
awnings and signs projecting over or extending across their general governmental functions, and include all
the sidewalk or street, or constructing vaults under of their expenses other than those specifically described
the sidewalks or streets in front of or adjoining the under the title "Commercial expenses."
The commercial expenses of municipalities include
property owned or occupied by the grantee. Minor
highway privilege dues may be collected from corpora (1) the expenses of their public service enterprises or
the costs of operating and maintaining those depart
tions as well as from private individuals.
Other revenues.—Governmental revenues other thanments and enterprises, such as municipal waterthose mentioned above include interest receivable, supply systems and gas-supply systems, which are
minor sales of materials and scrap when these are organized for the purpose of providing the inhabitants
offsets to governmental expenses, rents, and the sales of the city with some public utility or service, and
of products furnished by public service enterprises the losses and depreciation incident to such operation
and municipal institutions. The character of all these and maintenance; and (2) the expenses of general
governmental revenues is the same as that of similar investments or the costs of managing the properties
revenues of private persons and corporations to which other than assets of sinking funds held as investments.
are given the designations mentioned. None of them
General and commercial expenses which are incurred
call for any special definition or description in this in carrying forward and maintaining property loft to
connection.
cities in trust for specified municipal purposes or uses
Municipal governmental costs.—The term "municipal and for administering the trusts as directed by those
governmental costs" is employed in this report as a establishing them are here called trust expenses.
generic designation of (1) the costs of cities and other
Municipal interest.—Municipal interest on public
municipalities for maintaining their governments, debts, or municipal interest as it is frequently most
protecting person, property, and health, providing spoken of in this report, is the cost to cities and other
social necessities, caring for the dependent, punishing municipalities for the use of credit capital. Themunic*
the delinquent, bettering social conditions, and per ipal interest of a city or other municipality for a specified
forming other services and carrying on other activities fiscal year is the interest accruing during that year
for which the municipalities have authority, and from on its public debt.
which no permanent or subsequently convertible
Municipal outlays.—Municipal outlays are the costs
value is received or receivable; (2) the costs of con of land or other properties and public improvements
structing or acquiring the more permanent properties more or less permanent in character, which are con
and public improvements used for governmental pur structed or acquired by municipalities for use in the
poses; (3) their losses; and (4) the depreciation of exercise of their municipal functions or in connection
their more permanent properties and public improve with the business undertaken by them. The munici
ments due to waste, wear, and obsolescence. These pal outlays of a city or other municipality for a specified
governmental costs are readily separable into three fiscal year are the costs of permanent properties and
principal classes called expenses, interest, and outlays. public improvements that have been paid by war
The governmental costs of a city or other municipality forrants or orders or have otherwise become demand
a specified fiscal year are its expenses, interest, and liabilities of the municipality.
outlays for that year.
Municipal outlays are here separated into two
Municipal expenses.—Municipal expenses are (1) classes, general and commercial, corresponding sub
the costs, other than interest, of cities and other stantially to the two classes of municipal expenses
municipalities from which no permanent or subse bearing the same designation. General and com
quently convertible value is received, and which in mercial expenses and outlays are also classified accord
crease their liabilities without increasing their assets, ing to department, function, or enterprise. The
including the costs of services employed, property classes of general expenses and outlays thus made are
rented, and materials consumed in use in connection I shown in detail in Table 11 and 18; and the classes of




ACCOUNTING

ERMINOLOGY.

37

commercial expenses and outlays are shown in Tables quasi productive enterprises as water works and gas
15 and 18.
works; for, except in these enterprises, no trans
Revenue charges or revenue expenditures.—The termsactions of a government can be said to give rise to a
"revenue charges" and "revenue expenditures" are profit in the commercial sense of that word, owing to
frequently employed in commercial accounting as the fact that governments are organized to expend
generic designations of expenses and interest which and not to make money.
constitute the current costs of commercial under
The balance of such a summary will show for the
takings that must be met from revenue, and must be great majority of American cities an excess of govern
deducted therefrom to ascertain the current profit or mental revenues over expenses and interest. The
gain. In governmental accounting the charges against amount of such an excess is the amount of the cur
revenue or the expenditures that by the terms of the rent revenues of the city that is available for meeting
budget or appropriation ordinance must be met there the costs of constructing or acquiring permanent prop
from in any given year seldom exactly correspond erties and public improvements, purchasing invest
with the expenses and interest of that year. They most ments, or reducing indebtedness. The excess of ex
generally include, in addition to expenses and interest, penses and interest over revenues shows that the costs
certain payments for outlays and payments to sinking of all permanent properties and public improvements
and other reserve funds; although in some cities in of the current year and an amount of current expenses
in which a limited number of expenses are payable equal to the given excess are thrown upon the future.
from bond issues the revenue charges do not include The excess first mentioned—that of revenues over ex
all expenses. The amount of revenue charges or penses and interest—has been designated by various
revenue expenditures of a given municipality for a accountants and city officials as "surplus," "current
given year being always determined by the budget surplus," or "current revenue surplus;" but none of
for that year, they may with equal propriety be called these purely commercial terms is fully applicable or
budgetary charges or budgetary expenditures.
significant in governmental accounting. By reason of
Summary of municipal revenues and governmental this fact many good accountants and many govern
costs.—Of the many summaries of municipal financial mental officials decline to use them in municipal ac
transactions that may be prepared, none has greater counting, and are inclined to give to a summary of
administrative value than that of municipal revenues this character less consideration than it deserves by
and municipal governmental costs. The balance of reason of its actual economic and administrative value.
such a summary will show, for the great majority of The Bureau of the Census, while recognizing the value
American cities, an excess of governmental costs over of this summary, prefers to speak of the difference be
revenues. Such an excess measures the extent to tween the revenues and the expenses and interest of
which the cities, for purposes of convenience or for a city for a given year as "the excess of revenues over
reasons of public policy, have deferred making collec expenses and interest," or vice versa, and this practice
tions from or levies upon their taxpayers for meeting will be followed until some brief term can be suggested
the current costs of government. It also shows ap which describes this balance in municipal accounting
proximately the amount of increase which has been as accurately as the term "surplus," "revenue sur
made in the net public indebtedness, that is, the total plus," or "current revenue surplus," describes the
indebtedness, less the assets or possessions provided corresponding balance in commercial accounting.
and available for reducing or amortizing outstanding
MUNICIPAL RECEIPTS AND PAYMENTS.
debt. An excess of revenues over the costs of govern
ment, on the other hand, represents the extent to
Receipts and payments in Census statistics.—Atten
which the net indebtedness of the city has decreased tion has been called on preceding pages to the fact
during the year. The balance shown by the summary that the Census financial statistics of cities are neces
may thus be spoken of as a statement of the outcome sarily based upon, and in large part derived from, the
or result of current financial transactions expressed in accounts and reports of city comptrollers and treasur
terms of an increase or a decrease of net indebtedness. ers, and of other officials discharging some or all of
Summary of revenues and expenses and interest.—Of the duties of officers bearing those designations; and
lesser administrative importance, but possibly of to the further fact that those accounts, so far as they
equal economic significance, is a summary of revenues, are records of financial transactions, are with few ex
expenses, and interest, which may be prepared from ceptions primarily accounts with what are called in
the same accounts as the summary last described. the commercial world receipts and payments of "cash."
This summary corresponds in many respects to the The methods employed by the Bureau of the Census
profit and loss summary prepared by transportation in using the accounts of city comptrollers and treas
companies and certain other private enterprises to urers for the purpose of compiling comparable statis
measure the results or outcome of their business tics of governmental costs have already been de
operations for a given period; but it has a different scribed at length. By those methods certain receipts
significance, except in the special accounts of such and payments not recorded in cash accounts, but iden-




38

FINANCIAL STAT 3TICS OF CITIES.

tical in character with those thus recorded, are in of cities and other municipalities other than municipal
cluded in these statistics, and also certain receipts revenue receipts as previously defined. The municipal
other than cash. The character of the receipts and ntmrevenue receipts of a given fiscal year included in
payments thus included is definitely set forth in the the Census municipal financial statistics comprise (a)
all receipts recorded during the year in so-called cash
statements which follow.
Receipts.—In accounts, receipts are amounts of accounts of the municipalities from (1) sales of invest
money, bills receivable, land, materials other than ments, (2) sales of supplies which have been purchased
money, and services that in the conduct of business for sale, (3) sales of municipal securities, (4) transac
are received by or placed at the disposal or to the credit tions other than sales of municipal securities which
of the recipient* for his own use or benefit, or for the increase municipal indebtedness, and (5) counterbal
use or benefit of another. Receipts recorded in so- ancing receipts such as those mentioned in the pre
ceding paragraphs; together with (6) receipts during
called cash accounts are called cash receipts.
Payments.—In accounts, payments are amounts of the year of services whose costs have been included
money, bills payable, land, materials other than among the expenses and outlays of the year, as has
money, and services that in the conduct of business been described on pages 23 and 24, under "Difficul
are paid, delivered, or transferred in the settlement of ties arising from the general use of cash accounts by
claims against or for the final discharge of the debt comptrollers and auditors," and "Difficulties arising
obligations of the payer, or for his use, benefit, or from lack of accounts with materials and supplies."
Municipal governmental cost payments.—The term
credit. Payments recorded in so-called cash accounts
"municipal governmental cost payments" is here
are called cash payments.
Municipal receipts, and payments.—Municipal reapplied to the payments of cities and other munic
ceipts and municipal payments are the receipts and ipalities for their governmental costs, or for their
payments recorded in the accounts of cities and other expenses, interest, and outlays, less amounts which
municipalities. These receipts may be classified with have been returned or are to be returned by reason
reference to many different bases, and thus arranged of error or otherwise. The amounts so returned or
in a number of different classes, to each of which is to be returned are always recorded as receipts in the
given an appropriate designation. The primary class same accounts with governmental cost payments, and
ification made use of in this report is one which segre the payments and counterbalancing receipts are in
gates receipts with reference to revenues, and pay this report called counterbalancing payments and re
ments with reference to governmental costs. When ceipts. The municipal governmental cost payments of a
thus classified, municipal receipts are separable into given fiscal year included in the Census financial sta
revenue receipts and nonrevenue receipts, and munic tistics comprise (1) the amounts recorded in local
ipal payments into governmental cost payments and cash accounts of the comptroller or officer acting as
nongovernmental cost payments.
comptroller as paid during the year in settlement of
Municipal revenue receipts.—The term municipal the claims of the current year on account of expenses!
revenue receipts is here applied to the receipts of interest, and outlays, including payments for materials
cities and other municipalities on revenue account, and supplies used during the year; (2) the amounts re
less amounts which have been returned or are to be corded in the same accounts as paid during the suc
returned by reason of error or otherwise. The amounts ceeding year in settlement of the expenses! interest,
so returned or to be returned are always recorded as pay and outlays for the given year; (3) payments recorded
ments in the same accounts with the revenue receipts, in the local cash accounts of city comptrolling officers
and the receipts and the counterbalancing payments in preceding years, equal in amount to the excess of
are called in this report counterhalancing receipts and the value of materials and supplies charged during the
payments. The municipal revenue receipts of a given year as expenses and outlays over the payments of the
fiscal year included in the Census municipal statistics year for new materials and supplies; and (4) payments
comprise (1) amounts of receipts on revenue account re for interdepartmental services not recorded in local
corded in local cash accounts during the year, and (2) cash accounts. The payments mentioned after (1)
amounts of similar receipts which the Bureau of the and (2) are in most cases equal in amount to payments
Census combines with the recorded cash receipts for recorded in warrant registers, and differ from them
the purpose of compiling more comparable statistics only to the extent that some payments are made with
of revenue receipts and governmental cost payments. out the issue of a warrant or order, as has already been
• (For details of these added receipts, see pages 25 and explained. With that exception those payments may
26, under "Difficulties arising from different methods be called warrant payments as well as "cash payments."
of accounting for interdepartmental services," and The payments mentioned in (3) and (4) are combined
"Difficulties arising from faulty accounting for inter by the Bureau of the Census with those mentioned in
est chargeable as outlay or expense.")
(1) and (2) for the purpose of compiling more com
Municipal nonrevenue receipts.—The term "munic parable statistics of governmental cost payments, as
ipal nonrevenue receipts" is here applied to all receipts has been explained on pages 24, 25, and 26, under the




ACCOUNTING TERMINOLOGY.

39

captions "Difficulties arising from lack of proper ac of materials and supplies, and receipts during the
counts with materials and supplies," "Difficulties aris year of services the costs of which were included by
ing from different methods of accounting for interde the Bureau of the Census as expenses and outlays, but
partmental services," and "Difficulties arising from which were represented at the close of the year by
faulty accounting for interest chargeable as outlay unpaid warrants, orders, audits, claims, or judgments.
or expense."
Municipal payments to the public.—Municipal pay
Municipal nongovernmental cost payments.—The ments to the public comprise the payments by cities
term "municipal nongovernmental cost payments"is and other municipalities to private persons and cor
here applied to all payments of cities and other munici porations and to other civil divisions of cash or of
palities other than municipal governmental cost pay warrants, orders, bonds, notes, judgments, and other
ments as previously described. The municipal non bills payable in settlement or adjustment of claims
governmental cost payments of a given fiscal year in against, or in final satisfaction of the debt obligations
cluded in the Census financial statistics comprise all of the municipalities or of any of the divisions of their
cash or warrant payments recorded during the year governments, or for their use or benefit. The munici
in the accounts of municipalities for (1) the purchase pal payments to the publicfor a givenfiscalyear included
of investments, (2) the purchase of supplies in excess in the Census statistics comprise (1) cash paid during
of those used or sold, (3) the final cash payment of the year to private persons and corporations and to
municipal debt obligations in the form of bonds, notes, other civil divisions in settlement of claims against- the
warrants, and audited claims, and (4) counterbalanc municipality or one of the divisions of its government,
ing payments such as those described in preceding or for its use or benefit; (2) cash paid to such persons,
paragraphs which are recorded in revenue and govern corporations, and divisions during the year in final
mental cost payment accounts.
satisfaction of warrants, orders, and other bills pay
Significance of primary classification of municipal able of the given year or of any preceding year; (3)
receipts and payments.—The segregation of municipal warrants and other bills payable issued, delivered,
receipts into revenue and nonrevenue receipts and transferred, or entered of record during the year or
the segregation of municipal payments into govern during the succeeding year, in settlement of the claims
mental cost and nongovernmental cost payments is of private persons and corporations and other civil
of great significance, since it permits the preparation divisions against the municipality or one of the
of summaries of financial transactions that show divisions of its government, which arose or accrued
approximately at least the outcome or result of cur during the given year. It should be noted in this
rent financial transactions expressed in terms of an connection that the only payments such as those men
increase or decrease of the net indebtedness, and also tioned in (3) as being issued, delivered, etc., during
those which show the excess of revenue receipts over the succeeding year that are included in the Census
the expenses and interest for meeting which they are statistics ape those of warrants and orders in settle
provided, or the reverse.
ment of claims audited during the year that were
Secondary classification of municipal receipts and issued in the succeeding year, and the warrants, etc.,
payments.—Another classification of municipal re that were issued by cities that held their books open
ceipts and payments made use of in this report is one for a limited period after the close of the fiscal year to
which separates the receipts into those called "re make a complete statement of the governmental costs
ceipts from the public" and "transfer receipts," and of that year, as described on page 27, under "Difficul
the payments into "payments to the public"* and ties arising from auditing claims after the close of the
year to which they relate."
"transfer payments."
Municipal receipts from {he public.—Municipal re Municipal transfer receipts.—Municipal transfer
ceipts from the public is the designation applied in receipts is the designation applied in this report to
this report to receipts from private persons and cor amounts of cash which the divisions of the govern
porations, and from states, counties, and other civil ment of a city or other municipality (1) place at the
divisions by cities and other municipalities for (1) disposal or to the credit of their accounts with their
their governmental uses and purposes, and (2) for the various funds, including those for their departments
use, benefit, or credit of other civil divisions or of pri and enterprises; or (2) transfer to one of these accounts
vate persons or corporations. The municipal receipts from another; or (3) that one of these funds, depart
from the public for a given fiscal year included in the ments, or enterprises receives from or transfers to
Census municipal financial statistics comprise (1) all another. The municipal transfer receipts for a given
receipts by cities and other municipalities from other fiscal year included in the Census statistics comprise
civil divisions and from private individuals and cor all such receipts as those mentioned above after (2)
porations that during the given year are recorded in and (3), which are recorded in the local accounts dur
the so-called cash accounts of the officers of the various ing the year, and similar interdepartmental receipts
divisions of the government of the municipality; and combined therewith by the Bureau of the. Census for
(2) receipts during the year or during preceding years the purposes of compiling more comparable and accu-




40

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

rate statements of governmental costs, as has previ The text table on page 51 presents a summary of
municipal revenue receipts and governmental cost
ously been explained.
payments
classified as "net" and "transfer;" the
Municipal transfer payments.—Municipal transfer
net
revenue
receipts being the receipts on rovenue
payments are the amounts of cash which the divisions
of the government of the city or other municipality account, less the revenue transfer receipts and the
transfer or take from the credit of one of their funds, receipts returned or to bo returned by reason of error
departments, enterprises, or accounts in settlement or otherwise, and the net governmental cost payments
or adjustment of claims against it in favor of another being the payments for expenses, interest, and out
fund, department, enterprise, or account; or which lays, less transfer governmental cost payments and
one fund, department, or enterprise delivers or pays the payments returned or to be returned by reason of
to another in settlement of claims. The municipal error or otherwise.
In addition to the common subclassification of
transfer payments for a given fiscal year included in
the Census statistics comprise (1) all municipal inter receipts from and payments to the public and transfer
departmental payments recorded in the local accounts receipts and payments described in preceding para
during the year, and (2) similar payments combined graphs, attention is here called to two additional classi
therewith by the Bureau of the Census for the pur fications of transfer receipts and payments made use
pose of compiling inore comparable and accurate state of in this report: (1) A classification according to the
ments of governmental costs, as has previously been character of the transaction, separating the transfers
into those designated as general, service, interest, and
explained.
Significance of the secondary classification ofmunicirinvestment transfer receipts and payments; and (2) a
pal receipts and payments.—The segregation of munici classification by the degree of independence of the
pal receipts and payments into the two classes termed divisions, departments, offices, or accounts between
"receipts from and payments to the public" and which the transfers are made, separating the transfers
"transfer receipts and payments" is of great signifi into those designated as major and minor transfer
cance, since a receipt of cash or any specific equivalent receipts and payments.
General transfer receipts and payments are amounts
thereof from the public increases the amount of such
cash or specific equivalent in the possession or control of cash or its equivalent received and paid by transfer
of the government, and a payment or delivery to the between independently administered divisions, funds,
public decreases the amount of such cash or specific or enterprises, where the receipt is not associated with
equivalent; while corresponding receipts by one divi the performance of services, the purchase of securities,
sion, fund, or account of the city from another effect no the payment of interest on securities, or the renting
change in the amount of cash or such equivalent. In of real property.
recognition of this fact the receipts from and payments
Service transfer receipts and payments included in
to the public are sometimes spoken of in this report this report are the receipts by or for public service
as actual receipts and payments, and the transfer re enterprises as (1) compensation for the public utilities,
ceipts and payments as Twmincd receipts and payments.such as water, gas, and electric current, furnished by
The first class of receipts and payments may be called them for city uses; (2) the receipts by one govern
corporate receipts and payments, since they are the mental division, fund, department, or office, as com
receipts and payments of the various corporations pensation for the services performed, and the materials
that constitute the government of a municipality; and other equivalents of cash furnished by it for
while the second class of receipts and payments may another governmental division, fund, department, or
be called fund receipts and payments, since they are office, or for a municipal enterprise, and the payments
receipts of the funds of the city including those for the by or for a division, enterprise, department, fund, or
various enterprises, departments, and other objects account for which the services performed and the
of appropriation, or interdepartmental receipts and materials and other equivalents of cash are furnished;
and (3) the accounting transfer receipts and payments
payments, for reasons that are obvious.
'Subordinate classes of municipal receipts and pay described on pages 25 and 26 which represent similar
ments.—Municipal revenue receipts, whether receipts receipts and payments not recorded in city accounts.
Interest transfer receipts and payments are the re
from the public or transfer receipts, are classified and
tabulated in Tables 3, 6,7,8, 9, and 10, and in the text ceipts and payments included in the Census statistics
tables, page 54, so as to show those from general and of municipal financial transactions which represent
commercial revenues and from the various classes of (1) the receipts shown on the books of city funds with
those revenues. In like manner municipal govern investments and the counterpayments shown on those
mental cost payments, whether payments to the public of the city corporation or division of the city govern
or transfer payments, are classified and tabulated in ment on account of amounts paid by the corporation
Tables 11, 15, 17, and 18, and in the text table on or division to the funds as interest on municipal
page 56, so as to show those paid in settlement of securities or debt obligations held by those funds,
claims arising for expenses, interest, and outlays. and (2) the accounting interest transfer receipts and
payments described on page 26.



ACCOUNTING TERMINOLOGY.

41

Investment transfer receipts and payments are municiis one of the most valuable, from an administrative
pal receipts and payments recorded in the books of point of view, of the summaries of their financial
city funds with investments and in the books of the transactions that can be prepared by individual cities.
city corporation or other divisions of the government An exhibit of such summaries for the different, cities,
of the city, representing the value of securities or other while of little advantage for direct comparison, would
investments received by one fund from another, or show the various administrative operations pursued
the value of those securities received by the city by cities in financing the acquisition of their per
corporation or one of the otiher divisions of the city manent properties and the construction of their per
government.
manent improvements, and in providing for the
Major transfer receipts and payments are amounts of amortization of their debts. The Bureau of the
cash or its equivalent transferred by one independent Census hopes to present such a summary of municipal
division or fund of a government to another.
receipts and payments at no distant date.
Minor transfer receipts and payments are amounts
of cash or its equivalent received by one office or MUNICIPAL ASSETS, PROPERTIES, PUBLIC IMPROVE
account from another, or transferred from one account
MENTS, LIABILITIES, AND PROPRIETARY INTERESTS.
of a division of a government to another. The greater
portion of such transfers recorded in city accounts are
Assets in private accounts.—The word " assets,"
treated by the Bureau of the Census as accounting derived from the Latin ad satis, was first used as an
credits and debits and are not included in its pub accounting term in the statements prepared by heirs,
lished statistics.
administrators, and executors of the estates of de
Summary of aU receipts and payments.—Table 2 of ceased persons to include all the property, real and
this report presents for all cities a condensed sum personal, realizable and unrealizable, belonging to the
mary of the total receipts and payments recorded estate, when such property was sufficient in value
in the financial accounts of the several cities. The or amount to meet all debts of the estate or all claims
receipts and payments are divided into two principal upon it arising under the terms of the will of the
classes—revenue and nonrevenue receipts and govern deceased. In this use the.word retained the force of
mental cost and nongovernmental cost payments. its Latin derivation quite fully and could be defined as
Such a summary shows the net changes in the amount "property sufficient to meet debts and claims."
of cash in the treasury of the city as the result of all
The word " assets," which was first used as an
the financial transactions of the year.
accounting term with the meaning just stated, was
Summary of revenue receipts and governmental cost later employed in the balance sheet and other state
payments.—In Table 3 of this report is presented a ments of the financial condition of living persons,
classified summary of the revenue receipts and the and of firms, corporations, and governments, and is
governmental cost payments. The table shows as so used today. In this later use the word has lost the
fully as can be done by a statement of receipts and limitations of its Latin derivation and has come to
payments the results or outcome of governmental have its present significance in private accounts of
transactions, as already explained under the heading
"property liable for meeting the debts of or claims
"Summary of municipal revenues and governmental
against the owner."
costs" (p. 37).
For convenience of accounting, the assets of com
Summary of revenue receipts and payments for ex
mercial
undertakings and those of private persons
penses and interest.—Table 3 also presents a compara
or
corporations
are separated by accountants into two
tive exhibit of the revenue receipts and the payments
classes
designated
as current assets and fixed assets:
for expenses and interest. The significance of this
summary in municipal accounting has already been current assets being those which vary from day to day
discussed under the heading "Summary of revenues from sale, realization, exchange, etc., including such
and expenses and interest.1' Taken in connection property as stock in trade, cash, accounts and notes
with the other data given in the table, the excess of receivable in the case of all concerns, and land in the
revenue receipts over payments for expenses and in case of real estate companies; while fixed assets are
terest shows the extent to which the several cities those which are employed in the accomplishment of
are meeting their outlays or paying for their per the principal purposes of the enterprise or person
manent properties and public improvements out of owning them, and which are expected to have a life
revenues, and to what extent they are throwing the in service of more than one year, such as the real prop
erty, machinery, land and plant of a mine, or the road
burden of such expenditures upon the future.
Summary of budgetary receipts and payments.—A bed and rolling stock of a railroad.
Assets in governmental accounts.—Some modern
comparative summary of the receipts and the pay
ments of a given fiscal year in accordance with the accountants who have prepared what they call com
terms of the budget, or annual appropriation act, plete balance-sheet statements of the financial con-




42

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

dition of the governments of municipalities and of stitute governmental assets as here defined are some
other civil divisions have used the word "assets" times referred to as funds. This meaning of the word
with a significance which differs from both the original funds is to be distinguished from that of the word fund
and derived meanings of the term as above set forth. in the singular, and also in the plural, as the designation
As they use it the term loses the limitation which of an amount of money or other wealth available for
always attaches to it in commercial accounts and a specified purpose.
Classification of municipal assets.—In municipal ac
statements, of property liable for debts and holden
for meeting claims, and comes to be the generic counting records, as in those of private enterprises,
designation, not only of cash, investments, uncollected assets are always represented by debit entries and
revenues, and other resources provided and available balances in accounts generally referred to as asset acfor meeting debts and other liabilities, but also of all counts. Some of the debit entries and balances in these
public improvements, including street pavements and accounts represent wealth actually in the possession
sewers, as well as of all public property such as city of municipalities or in their control or at their disposal,
halls, parks, and fire and police stations; although and others represent the claims of one of their depart
none of the public improvements and only a limited ments or divisions upon another, or are in other ways
portion of the property is legally liable for govern offset by the credit balances of liability or other ac
mental debts or can be seized or held in satisfaction counts. The assets represented by the first class of
of claims.
entries are here called the actual assets of municipalities
The Bureau of the Census, however, prefers the usage to distinguish them from those represented by the sec
of another class of governmental accountants, and of a ond class, which are here called nominal assets of mu
number of students and writers on governmental finance nicipalities. Nominal assets which consist of wealth
who, fully appreciating the economic significance if not actually in the possession or at the disposal of a
not the administrative value of the so-called com municipality, but which under certain circumstances
plete balance-sheet statements of governmental finan may come into its possession or be placed at its disposal
cial condition, prefer to use the word " assets" in are generally called contingent assets of municipalities.
governmental accounts and statements with the
When classified according to the purpose for which
restricted meaning that it always has in private they are used, the assets of governments are specifi
accounts and statements. When*the term "assets" is cally designated as current and invested.
employed with this limited or restricted significance,
The current assets of a municipality are the resources
the terms "properties" and "public improvements" or forms of wealth which havfc been provided and are
are necessarily used in referring to other forms of available for meeting its current expenses, interest, and
wealth in the possession of the government. Such a outlays, for meeting the current claims of creditors,
terminology assists in keeping to the front the great and for investment. They include cash, materials, and
difference that exists between the objects and view supplies, authorized but uncollected revenues, prepay
points of private and governmental business. It ments, advances tofiscalagents, and bills and accounts
emphasizes the fact which the first terminology does receivable. The terms last mentioned have substan
not, that municipal debts are not ordinarily liens upon tially the same significance in governmental as in pri
city properties and public improvements, as all vate business accounting, and for that reason are not
private debts are upon the property of the debtor, specifically defined. The accounts of most govern
but upon the privately owned property of the citizens ments with their assets include considerable amounts
subject to taxation; and that only the property given of nominal assets in the form of uncollectable revenues
the designation "assets" with the narrower signifi not properly written off. The recorded assets whidh
cance is seizable for the payment of governmental represent cash or its equivalent in the possession or
debts in the way that private property is for the pay control of a government constitute its actual current
ment of private debts. This report uses the word assets.
"assets" in this restricted sense, as exclusive of
Invested assets, or investments, are those resources or
properties and public improvements of cities. The forms of wealth which have been acquired or are held
specific meanings given to the terms "municipal by governments for such purposes as securing an in
assets," "municipal properties," and "municipal come from their use, deriving gain from their rise in
public improvements" and to their subclasses are value, avoiding losses that otherwise might be suffered,
stated in the definitions which follow.
and securing other possible advantages through their
Municipal assets.—Municipal assets are the cash and.acquisition and possession.
other wealth in the possession of cities and other mu
Municipal properties.—Municipal properties is the
nicipalities, or at their disposal, which have been ac designation employed by the Bureau of tho Census in
quired or provided for meeting their governmental referring to land used by cities and other municipalities
costs, for investment and for paying debts, including for governmental purposes, to buildings and other more
those which have been incurred by accepting private or less permanent structures on such Tand (other than
or public trusts. The cash and other wealth that con those here called public improvements), and to fund


ACCOUNTING TERMINOLOGY.

43

ture, tools, apparatus, and other equipment having a life them, and few prepare any trustworthy estimates of
in service of more than one year, excepting hand tools the probable amount to be realized from their uncol
and other small portable tools which may be lost or lected revenues. Some improvement has been made,
stolen and of which no accounting record is kept. These however, in this branch of accounting during the last
properties are further classified as productive and non few years. Of the factors bringing about this im
productive. Municipal productive properties include provement, one of the most potent has been the re
the lands, buildings, structures, furniture, machinery, peated attempts made by the Bureau of the Census
tools, and other equipment that are used by cities and to secure correct information with reference to the
other municipalities in connection with the operation value of governmental properties and public improve
of their public service enterprises. All other proper ments. As a result of the progress made in this field
ties of municipalities are spoken of as municipal non of accounting, the Bureau has been able each year to
productive properties.
make its statistics of the value of governmental prop
Municipal public improvements.—Municipal public erties and public improvements more trustworthy than
improvements is the term employed by tbe Bureau of those of any previous year, although even now they
the Census as the designation of those permanent struc are confessedly far from perfect. Statistics of uncol
tures used by cities and other municipalities for com lected revenue have not, however, been included in
munity purposes, which have a value in use but not in the report for any year, since the data obtained with
exchange, and whose value in use is reflected in the reference to this class of municipal assets have not been
enhanced value of the property of private persons and deemed sufficiently trustworthy to warrant publica
corporations. They are readily separable into three tion, and this extension of Census statistics of assets,
classes here called municipal highway improvements, properties, and public improvements is therefore de
municipal sewers, and other municipal public improve ferred until approximately correct statements of these
ments. Municipal highway improvements is a designa values shall have been prepared by the cities.
tion used in speaking of the structures and other im
Liabilities in private and governmental accounts.—The
provements upon the land belonging to cities and other first financial statements in balance-sheet form in
municipalities which are employed for highway pur which the word "assets" was the heading for one side
poses; including pavements, sidewalks, curbs, bridges, had the word " liabilities " as the heading for the other.
tunnels, grades, and fills for highway purposes, but not These were statements for the estates of deceased per
structures for public service enterprises, such as rail sons, as has already been explained* In them the
roads, street railways, and revenue-earning canals. word " liabilities" had the meaning which the courts
Under the designation municipal sewers are included in that day assigned to it, and which they continue to
not only the structures bearing that name, but all struc give to it. The word acquired no new meaning
tures, such as manholes and catch basins, forming parts when it was later used in the balance sheets of living
of sewer systems. Under the designation other mu persons as well as in those for the estates of deceased
nicipal public improvements the Bureau of the Census persons; but with the adjustment of accounts and bal
includes such public structures as retaining walls, drain ance sheets to the needs of modern corporations, the
age canals, unproductive docks and wharves, and un word "liabilities" has become, in the practice of some
productive waterways.
accountants, a common designation of the debts of
Accounts with assetst properties; and public improve and claims against the corporation and also of its
ments.—When the accounts of governments with the capital stock and surplus.
In his work, "The Philosophy of Accounts," Mr.
value of their properties and public improvements are
properly kept, they will contain approximately correct Charles E. Sprague objects to this usage, since it con
statements of their value in use as determined either founds the rights or interests of creditors with those
by their original cost or the cost of their replacement, of the proprietors of an enterprise. The difference be
less depreciation. When, however, these accounts are tween these rights and interests are stated by Mr.
improperly kept, they do not contain correct state Sprague in the following words:
ments, and for that reason lose much of their account
1. The rights of the proprietor involve dominion over the assets
ing and administrative importance and can not be and power to use them as he pleases, even to alienating them; while
taken as a basis for a correct judgment concerning the the creditor can not interfere with him or them except in extraor
financial condition of governments or the results of dinary circumstances.
2. The right of the creditor is limited to a definite sum which
governmental methods of constructing and financing
does not shrink when the assets shrink, while that of the proprietor
improvements.
is of an elastic value.
3. Losses, expenses, and shrinkage fall upon the proprietor alone,
Few cities have any trustworthy records of the cost
or present valus of their properties; a still smaller num and profits, revenue, and increase of value benefit him alone; not
ber have any intelligible or trustworthy accounts of his creditors.
By reason of these differences, liabilities in accounts
the original cost of their public improvements or any
data for estimating the present cost of replacing I should be fully differentiated from proprietary rights,




44

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

as is done in the definitions of the two terms which
follow, and in the accompanying suggested form for a
municipal balance sheet.
The Oxford Dictionary defines liability as "the con
dition of being liable or answerable by law or equity,"
and as "that for which one is liable, especially pi, the
debts or pecuniary obligations of a person or com
pany." These definitions are condensed statements
of a large number of definitions embodied in American
and British court decisions, according to which ZiobiUties in accounts are the amounts of money and other
property and services, expressed in terms of money, for
which persons, corporations, and governments are
liable or answerable by law or equity.
Debts or debt liabilities.—In the accounts of private
individuals and corporations, and also in those of gov
ernments, the most important items listed in balance
sheets under the term liabilities are debts or debt lia
bilities. The Oxford Dictionary defines debt as "that
which is owed or due; anything (as money, goods, or
services) which one person is under obligation to pay
or render another; a sum of money or material thing."
The debts of private individuals, corporations, and
governments are separable into those called contract
and fiduciary, according as they are founded on or
arise from simple contract, or from some trust or con
fidence imposed upon the debtor. The greater portion
of debts arise from contract and call for no special
explanation or discussion in this connection. The
character of those created by assuming trusts can
best be stated by first defining trusts and their prin
cipal classes.
Trusts are the obligations to hold, use, or expend
money or wealth in the interest of specified persons,
or for specified purposes or objects, and may be
grouped into two general classes: (1) Obligations or
responsibilities which are strictly trusts in the legal
sense, of the word, and (2) obligations or responsibili
ties in the nature of trusts which involve the relation
of agent and principal, such as those arising in the
case of a city acting as agent for the state or other
civil division. The trusts belonging to the first class
are of two kinds, private and public.
Private trusts are those which concern individuals
and families and are limited in duration. They are
obligations and responsibilities to hold or use specified
amounts of money or other wealth in the interest of
specified individuals, or to expend such wealth in their
interest or at their behest, or in accordance with the
specified conditions of the trust.
Public or charitable trusts are those which are estab
lished for the benefit of the public at large or of
some designated portion of the public, such as the
young, the poor, or the insane. These trusts are ob
ligations to expend specified amounts of money or
other wealth for specified objects or purposes, or re
sponsibilities for holding the same in the interest of
such objects and purposes.




All public or charitable trusts assumed by private
individuals and corporations, and all quasi trusts as
sumed by them when acting as agent, create fiduciary
debts which are scheduled as such in balance sheets.
It is otherwise with municipal and other governments.
The only municipal trusts that give rise to fiduciary
debts are private trusts, the quasi trusts arising from
agency transactions, and a class of public trusts to
which the Bureau of the Census gives the designation
public trusts for nonmunicipal uses, or public trusts
for objects and purposes for wliich the municipality
has no authority to make appropriations. Other
public trusts assumed by municipalities, as those for
objects and purposes for wliich the municipality has
authority to make appropriations, are hero called
public trusts for municipal uses. The obligations
created by accepting these trusts are shown on bal
ance sheets after the title "Reserves"; the definition
of which is given later under "Municipal proprietary
interests."
Municipal debts or debt liabilities.—Municipal debts
or debt liabilities, or the debts or debt liabilities re
corded in the accounts of cities and other municipali
ties and summarized in their balance sheets, are the
amounts of money or of property and services ex
pressed in terms of money, whioh the municipalities
owe, or are under obligations to pay, deliver, or render.
They include, in addition to the debts arising from
contracts, the fiduciary debts above described.
Municipal debts may be evidenced by written instru
ments such as those called bonds, certificates of in
debtedness, mortgages, notes payable, warrants paya
ble, audits payable, or by decrees of courts called judg
ments. Further, some municipal debts, like private
debts, are represented by accounts without tho issue
of any formal instrument acknowledging tho indebt
edness. The terms bonds and certificates of indebted
ness are generally applied to all written instruments
evidencing municipal liabilities given under the seal
of the city or other municipality issuing tho same.
These instruments are generally given specific names
when the money for redeeming them is to be obtained
from certain specified sources. Thus bonds and cer
tificates of indebtedness to be redeemed from tho pro
ceeds of special assessments are called special assess
ment bonds or special assessment certificates; and in
struments given as evidence of debts to be paid from
the current tax levy are called revenue bonds, anticipa
tion tax bonds, anticipation tax warrants, warrants, and
kindred designations. Instruments evidencing munic
ipal indebtedness less formal than those mentioned
above are called notes payable, warrants payable, and
audits payable. Liabilities recorded only in books of
accounts are called accounts payable, and those evi
denced by the decision of courts are called judgments.
The debts or debt liabilities of municipalities may
be classified in many ways, and thus given many spe
cific designations. Classified with reference to cred-

ACCOUNTING TI5RMINOLOGY.

45

itors, they are here called actual and nominal debts or
The fixed or funded debts of municipalities are those
debt liabilities; classified according to the provisions debts or debt liabilities of cities that are evidenced by
made for meeting them, they are called current, fixed, bonds or certificates of indebtedness which have a num
and floating liabilities; and classified according to the ber of years to run, or upon which interest is to be
time when due and payable, they are called due and paid in perpetuity, but for the amortization of which
demand debt liabilities, debt liabilities not due, and no assets other than those of sinking funds have been
unadjusted debt liabilities or claims.
specifically provided or appropriated. Governments
The actual debts or debt liabilities of municipalities at one time applied the term "funded debts" to only
are the amounts of money or of property, or services those of their debts for whose amortization sinking
expressed in terms of money, which cities and other fund provisions had been made; but at the present
municipalities are under obligation to pay or render the term is used more or less interchangeably with
to private persons and corporations and to other civil "fixed debts " in speaking of the debts evidenced by the
divisions; while the nominal debts or debt liabilities of long-term bonds and certificates of indebtedness spe
municipalities are the amounts which (1) cities and cifically mentioned above.
other municipalities owe to their funds, departments,
The floating debts or floating debt liabilities of munici
or enterprises, or which one of their funds, departments, palities are those debts or debt obligations of cities
or enterprises owes or is under obligation to pay to and other municipalities for the payment of which
another; (2) debts and debt liabilities which under there is no cash in the treasury, or other assets spe
specified circumstances or subject to specified condi cifically provided and available for meeting them when
tions municipalities may be called upon to pay, deliver, due. Under this heading the Bureau of the Census has
or render in the future, but for the payment, delivery, tabulated for this report (1) all debts evidenced by
or rendering of which there are no present obligations; special assessment certificates, revenue bonds, war
and (3) other debts or debt liabilities of municipalities rants, and accounts payable that have been incurred in
represented by credit entries in liability accounts that excess of the amounts received or receivable on account
are balanced by identical debit entries in asset and of the levies or special assessments and general prop*
other accounts. The nominal liabilities of munici erty taxes provided for redeeming them; (2) all judg
palities which do not represent amounts which are ments outstanding; (3) all indebtedness to public trust
present obligations to pay or render, but which under funds not evidenced by formal bonds or certificates of
certain circumstances may become such obligations, indebtedness; (4) all mortgages; (5) all liabilities grow
are generally called contingent debts or contingent debt ing out of the relation of agent and principal or the
liabilities.
acceptance of private trusts where no assets to meet
The current debts or current debt liabilities of munici them are in the treasury; and (6) all debts or debt
palities are the debts or debt liabilities of cities and liabilities which have a number of years to run and
other municipalities for the payment or redemption of which are not evidenced by bonds or certificates of
which provision is fully made by cash on hand, by indebtedness.
Gross and net debts.—The term gross debt or gross
revenues (including special assessments) levied but
uncollected, or by other current assets provided and indebtedness is employed in this report as the designa
appropriated for the specific purpose of their payment tion of the aggregate of all outstanding debt obliga
or redemption. The current liabilities of cities and tions, including current, funded, and floating in
other municipalities are readily separable into those debtedness; and the term net debt or net indebtedness
evidenced by special assessment certificates, revenue is used as the designation of the gross debt less the
bonds, warrants, and similar instruments, and the assets specifically appropriated for meeting them.
fiduciary debts arising from the acceptance of private The amount of that indebtedness shown for the indi
trusts for nonmunicipal uses and from acting as agent vidual cities included in this report is computed in
each case by subtracting the sinking-fund assets from
for other civil divisions.
The current debts evidenced by special assessment the total funded and floating debt, it being assumed
certificates are those which will be redeemed from the that the current debt is balanced by the current assets.
proceeds of special assessments that have been levied This method of computing net debt or net indebtedness
and collected or are to be collected. The current secures only approximately correct statements, owing
debts evidenced by revenue bonds and by warrants and to the fact that the current assets axe not always
accounts payable are those which will be redeemed identical with current debts; but until cities generally
from the proceeds of the general property taxes provide more accurate statements of the value of such
already levied, or from cash or other assets in the city current assets as uncollected taxes and uncollected
treasuries; and the current fiduciary debts are those special assessments, no more accurate or comparable
arising from the acceptance of private trusts and pub figures of net indebtedness are practicable for all
lic trusts for nonmunicipal uses, and those arising from cities.
acting as agent, for meeting which the city has cash in
Proprietary interests in private accounts.—The term
the treasury.
"proprietary interests" is the designation here used




46

FINANCIAL STAT][STICS OF CITIES.

in referring to the amount of money or other wealth I or nominal proprietary interests, but to give them a
which the proprietor or proprietors of a private busi name descriptive of their actual character. Desig
ness have invested in that business. Its amount in nated in this manner they are here most frequently
any case is always the difference between the assets referred to as offsets to assets.
Balance sheets in private business.—The term "bal
and the liabilities of the business. In accounts these
proprietary interests or property rights of the proprie ance sheet" is quite generally used by accountants in
tors are represented by credit balances, the same as private business as the designation of a statement
are the liabilities, and in the case of corporations are compiled from the books of a solvent concern which
readily separable into two classes—those which are have been kept by double entry, showing on the one
recorded in the accounts with capital stock, repre side the assets and on the other the liabilities and pro
senting the original investments of the stockholders, prietary interests of the concern at a particular moment
and those which are recorded in the accounts with the of time. As stated by* lisle in his "Accounting in
so-called surplus, which represents the undivided Theory and Practice," "It is prepared for the purpose
profits or earnings of the business. The difference of showing the financial condition of the concern at a
between the interests orrightsof the proprietors repre particular moment of time and should be so classified
sented by credit balances in one group of accounts, and arranged as to give the clearest and fullest idea of
and the claims of creditors or liabilities that are repre thefinancialcondition of the concern." In arranging
sented by credit entries in another set of accounts the balance sheet all nominal assets and liabilities
have been set forth on page 43 in the quotation from should either be separately shown in a supplementary
statement or, if given in the balance sheet proper,
Sprague's "The Philosophy of Accounts."
Municipal proprietary interests.—The term "munici should be so designated that their character will bo
pal proprietary interests" is the designation here readily perceived. Offsets to assets shown by credit
applied to the excess of the value of municipal assets, balances in proprietary interest accounts should be
properties, and public improvements over the amount shown on the balance sheet on the side of assets as
of municipal liabilities. These interests are the net I deductions from the value of the assets to which they
contributions of the citizens, or the general public, relate and not given on the side of proprietary inter
toward acquiring or constructing such assets, proper ests and liabilities.
ties, and public improvements, and may with equal
In arranging balance sheets American and Scotch
propriety be spoken of as municipal revenue accumu accountants place the assets on the left-hand side and
lations. They are of four distinct classes: (1) Those the liabilities and proprietary interests on the right,
that are held subject to the conditions of public trusts while the English accountants place the assets on the
for municipal uses; (2) those which are held subject to right-hand side of the sheet.
the terms of appropriation acts for expenditure for
A special form of balance sheet known as " the double
specific purposes; (3) those which are held subject to account form" is used by many corporations, such as
future contingencies, including those for depreciation j railways, in presenting a statement of their financial
and fire losses; and (4) all others. The classes num condition. This form is prescribed in Great Britain for
bered (1), (2), and (3) are called reserves to distinguish companies, such as railways, formed to undertake pub
them from liabilities or claims of creditors on the one lic works under sanction of acts of Parliament. Its dis
side and from the free or unreserved proprietary intereststinct characteristic is that since the money authorized
represented by class (4). The reserves should be to be spent is provided for a specific purpose, such as
given specific names descriptive of the object or pur the construction of a railway, the fixed assets and the
pose of the reservation; those referred to under (1) fixed liabilities and proprietary interests are separated
being given the general designation reserves for public from the current assets and current liabilities and cur
trusts, and those referred to under (2) appropriation rent proprietary interests of the concern, the fixed
reserves, and those referred to under (3) reserves for assets, liabilities, and capital stock being kept in an
contingencies.
account and shown in a statement called "receipts
It should be noted in this connection that some of and expenditures on capital account," and the other
the ledger accounts of municipalities, like those of assets, liabilities, and proprietary interests forming a
private individuals and corporations, carry credit bal "general balance sheet" of the concern. The excess
ances that do not represent any actual proprietary of the so-called capital receipts over the amount ex
interests, but are offsets to the other balances in asset pended for the fixed assets shows the amount of those
accounts. Considered as proprietary interests, the receipts which have been applied to the specific pur
credit balances of these accounts are here spoken of as pose for which they were secured and are still available;
nominal municipal proprietary interests to distinguish while any excess of expenditures for fixed assets over
them from the actual municipal proprietary interests, capital receipts measures the floating debt of the soor the excess of actual assets over actual liabilities. called capital account. The balance of the capital
It is better, however, to consider these not as actual | account is carried to the general balance sheet and




ACCOUNTING TERMINOLOGY,

47

represents either the indebtedness of capital to rev- I should be shown on the right-hand side a detailed
enue or that of revenue to capital. Several modifica statement of the city's current debts, including those
tions of the double account form of balance sheet are which arise from contracts and private trusts, and
employed by municipalities, of which mention is made public trusts for nonmunicipal uses, so arranged as to
in later paragraphs.
exhibit (1) the outstanding warrants, judgments, and
Municipal balance sheets.—Owing to the fact that other due and demand debt liabilities to be met from
hitherto the Bureau of the Census has been unable, general revenues; (2) fiduciary debts that constitute
as previously noted, to secure any trustworthy statis due and demand liabilities to be met from the assets
tics of the value of all municipal assets, properties, received when the liabilities were created or assumed;
and public improvements, it' makes no attempt to (3) claims awaiting audit that will probably become
present complete balance-sheet summaries for the due and demand liabilities within the next few days;
cities covered by this report. The fullest possible and (4) other current and floating debts arranged in
statements of the value of actual assets other than the order in which they become due, and with refer
uncollected taxes and special assessments, and of the | ence to the assets from which they are to be paid.
properties, public improvements, and investments of i
On the same side should be shown after the liabili
the cities, and of their actual liabilities are presented, ties a detailed exhibit of the proprietary interests, or
however, and no comparative statement of assets, the excess of current assets over the current liabilities.
properties, public improvements, liabilities, and pro This should be so arranged as to show (1) the reserves
prietary interests for all cities will be prepared by the for meeting current appropriations (a) from general
Bureau of the Census until such time as reliable data revenues, (6) those to be met from income of public
can be obtained for at least a majority of the cities trust funds, and (c) those to be met from cash in the
concerned.
treasury derived from issue of debt obligations; and
At the present time a number of cities annually (2) the current surplus, or the excess of assets over lia
prepare what they call balance sheets, some of which bilities and appropriations that is available for future
are complete statements of assets, liabilities, and pro appropriations, if such excess exists.
prietary interests, while others are only partial state
The assets should be given in detail on the left-hand
ments in a balance-sheet form of assets, liabilities, side of the summary, and arranged in an order that
and proprietary interests. Some are arranged in a corresponds in a general way with the order of the
single division, and others in two or more divisions. liabilities, and one which will most readily show the
Of the latter class of balance sheets some embody a relation of the various classes of liabilities and reserves
few of the characteristics of the double-form balance and the assets available or provided for meeting the
sheet of corporations, and still others present separate same. For a city in which the assets are less than
exhibits of tho condition of the various administrative the liabilities and reserves, there will be a balancing
funds or accounts of tho city. Tho designation munici account on the left-hand side of the balance sheet
pal balance sheet is used in this report only in referring showing the excess of the liabilities and reserves over
to a complete statement of the financial condition of the assets, which is here referred to as current deficit
a municipality which is embodied in a single division. The current surplus of such a sheet shows, if correct
Other statements of municipal financial condition are in its statement of assets and liabilities, the amount
given specified descriptive names, some of which are of unappropriated resources, or resources that are
set forth in the paragraphs which follow.
available for future appropriations; and the current
Current municipal balance sheets.—Of the various deficit, if one exists, shows the actual floating debt of
statements of financial condition in balance-sheet the municipality, or the current liabilities for the
form that are being used by American cities, none are amortization of which no assets are in the treasury or
of greater administrative value or popular interest have been provided.
General municipal balance sheets.—The term "gen
than a statement of current assets and current and
floating liabilities, appropriation reserves, and surplus, eral municipal balance sheet" is here applied to a sec
constituting what is here called a current municipal ond section of the double-account form of the munici
balance sheet, corresponding in some respects to that pal balance sheet which shows on the left-hand side
division of the commercial double-form balance sheet (1) the surplus assets, if such there be, recorded on
to which most accountants give the designation "gen the current balance sheet; (2) the assets of sinking
eral balance sheet.'1 It differs from that sheet, how funds accumulated for the amortization of fixed debt;
ever, since the current revenue accumulations or pro (3) the assets of public trust funds for municipal and
prietary interests of the city are derived from its cur nonmunicipal uses; (4) the assets of other funds with
rent operation, and the current section of the municipal permanent investments; and (5) real and other prop
balance sheet must be closed into other divisions in erty held for investment purposes but not constitut
stead of the reverse, as in the case of the double-form ing assets of funds. On the same side of the balance
private balance sheet. In a properly prepared sheet should be shown the value of the property and
municipal summary, such as is here described, there public improvements of the municipality.




48

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

On the right-hand side of the same sheet or state
ment, there should be included under the general title
"Liabilities" (1) the deficit, if such there be, shown
on the current balance sheet; (2) the fixed debts of
the municipality; and (3) the liabilities of the munici
pality by reason of public trust funds for nonmunicipal uses.
On the same side of the sheet should be given under
the heading "Proprietary interests" or "Revenue ac
cumulations" (1) the reserves of the municipality by
reason of public trust funds for municipal uses; (2)
the reserves by reason of sinking fund provisions; (3)
contingent reserves of the municipality for fire insur
ance, depreciation, and kindred purposes; and (4) the
free or unreserved proprietary interests of the munici
pality, or the excess of the value of the assets over the
liabilities or reserves of the municipality. In stating
the reserves on account of public trusts, they should
not only be segregated so as to show the reserves for
each class of trusts, but also so as to show the reserva
tions by reason of the assets for public trust funds,
and those which are represented by the value of the
properties which have been received by donation for
specified purposes. In presenting a statement of con*
tingent reserves, care should be taken to eliminate all
such nominal reserves as those represented by offsets
to assets by reason of depreciation already experi
enced and losses already suffered but not adjusted.
These offsets expressed by estimates should be shown,
as previously stated, on the side of assets and property
as deductions from the reported book value of such
assets and properties.
Some cities in making a general balance sheet such
as is here described, or a single-form balance sheet,
have given to the free or unreserved proprietary in
terests as above described the designation "surplus."
Those interests which represent the excess of assets
and properties and public improvements over liabili
ties and reserves are not a surplus in any such sense
as the term is used in corporation accounting, or in
the accounts of a private individual or firm. It is
not an undivided profit or excess of proprietary in
terests over original investments as is the surplus of
a commercial enterprise. It represents the total free
proprietary interests of the citizens and general pub
lic in the property assets and public improvements of
the city, and should be given some such designation
as that used above that indicates its character or the
sources from which it has been derived. Taking ac
count of the character of the excess, it can best be
spoken of by the term above used, "municipal propri
etary interests;" while if it is desirable to take ac
count of the fact that an excess of assets represents
an accumulation of revenues not used for expenses or
interest, that excess has been here designated "reve
nue accumulations." But whichever point of view is




adopted, no balance sheet should fail to present this
excess so designated that its true relation to the busi
ness of the municipality may be evident.
Consolidated lalance sheets.—A number of cities have
introduced modifications of the double-form municipal
balance sheet described above, under the titles " Current
municipalbalancosheets" and "General municipal bal
ance sheets." They are sheets that are arranged in a
number of sections, one of which contains the totals
of the various items in the other sections. Each sec
tion other than the total contains a statement of the
assets, properties, public improvements, liabilities, re
serves, and free proprietary interests of one of the
administrative funds or accounts of the city. The city
of Philadelphia makes use of a very commendable
balance sheet of this type arranged under the four sub
heads: (1) General account; (2) permanent funds,
properties, and improvements; (3) sinking fund; and
(4) special and trust accounts.
The same general rules should be observed in making
use of balance sheet statements of tliis class that have
been set forth at length in the paragraphs immediately
preceding this.
Comparative value of different summaries.—The value
of the various summaries of the condition or results of
thefinancialbusiness of a city depends upon the accu
racy with which the values of the current assets, prop
erties, and public improvements are set forth and the
fidelity with which the debts and reserves are classified
and exhibited. At the present time the greater num
ber of the statements presented by cities in their re
ports are more or less misleading and defective, be
cause they overstate the amount to be realized from
taxes levied but uncollected, and because the stated
value of permanent properties and public improve
ments is more or less incorrect due to lack of data
pertaining to their original cost and failure to take
account of depreciation. Such defects bring large
factors of error into the summaries of revenues,
expenses, and interest, and the summaries of reve
nues and costs of government. At the present time
these factors of error are greater than the differ
ence between the revenue collections and the true
revenue accruals of the average city for the average
year, or that between the average warrant expenditures
and the accrued expenditures of the same city. Hence,
though governmental summaries of accrued revenues
and expenditures form theoretically a better index of
conditions and results than summaries of cash receipts
and warrant expenditures, their general adoption and
use will depend much more upon the development of
plans and methods for giving correct estimates of the
amounts to be realized from uncollected taxes and
making proper estimates for depreciation, so as to
eliminate the present factors of error than upon their
theoretical superiority.

DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
NUMBER AND CHARACTER OF GENERAL TABLES.
The statistics of this report relate to 192 incorporated
cities and the incorporated town of West Hoboken,
N. J., each of which had, on July 1,1911, an estimated
population of over 30,000. These statistics pertain to
the fiscal year of each municipality, and of each divi
sion and fund thereof, closing between February 1,1911,
and January 31, 1912, as shown in detail in Table 23.
The statistics of this report are presented in 42 gen
eral and supplementary tables, and statements con
tained in the accompanying text. General Table 1
gives certain statistics relating to the population and
area of the cities covered by the report. Tables 2 to
25 summarize and give in detail the receipts and pay
ments. Table 2 is a summary of all receipts classified
as revenue and nonrevenue, and of all payments classi
fied as governmental cost and nongovernmental cost
payments; it also contains a statement of cash bal
ances at the beginning and close of the year. Table 3
summarizes the revenue receipts and governmental
cost payments, and makes certain comparisons between
those receipts and payments. Table 4 presents per
capita averages, and Table 5 the per cent distribution
of the receipts and payments shown in Table 3. Tables
6 to 10 give detailed statistics of the revenue receipts
summarized in Table 3. Tables 11, 12, 15, 16, 17,
and 18 give similar detailed statistics of governmental
cost payments. Table 13 summarizes certain groups
of these payments and presents per capita averages
therefor, and Table 14 gives the per cent distribution
of these tables. Table 19 summarizes the nonrevenue
receipts and nongovernmental cost payments, and
Tables 20 to 22 present details of such receipts and
payments. Table 23 gives the date of the close of the
fiscal year of every division and fund of the govern
ment of the cities covered by the report, and also the
receipts and payments of those divisions and funds
classified as receipts from the public and transfer
receipts, and as payments to the public and transfer
payments. Tables 24 and 25 contain supplemental
statistics of receipts and payments of sinking and pub
lic trust funds. Tables 26, 27, and 28 relate to munic
ipal assets and the value of municipal properties and
public improvements, and Tables 29 to 33 relate to
municipal indebtedness. Table 34 presents statistics
of the assessed valuation of property subject to taxa
tion, and of amounts and rates of tax levies. Tables
35 to 42 contain detailed statistics relating to receipts,
properties, and payments for public schools.
6127°—13

4




TABLE 1.

Date of incorporation as a city.—In the first column,
under the general heading "Date of incorporation as
a city," are given for 192 of the municipalities covered
by this report the dates on which they were organized
as cities. In the same column is given for West
Hoboken, N. J., the date when it was organized as a
town. In the second column under the same general
heading are given the dates of the latest complete reor
ganization of the same municipalities. The date of
the first organization as reported is doubtless correct
in all instances, but the date of the latest reorganiza
tion is correct only in most instances, owing to the
difficulty in distinguishing between the complete reor
ganization of the city government which results from
the enactment of a city charter or a new municipal
code, and the minor governmental changes which result
from the enactment of amendments to the charter or
to the municipal code.
Population.—In Table 1 are shown for each of the
municipalities covered by the report its estimated
population as of July 1, 1911, its population as re
turned by the decennial census of April 15, 1910, and
that of June 1, 1900. THe estimates of population
shown in Table 1 for 1911 are, in the case of cities
which have the same territorial area as in 1900, based
upon the assumption that the increase in the popula
tion of a municipality during the period April 15,
1910, to July 1, 1911, was the same as the average
increase during a similar period between the census
enumeration of June 1, 1900, and that of April 15,
1910, or 29/237 of the increase between those dates,
or a proportional part of the total increase shown by
the Federal census of 1910 as compared with the enu
meration of a state census in 1904 or 1905. In com
puting these estimates for cities whose territorial area
has been enlarged or diminished dining the decade
or the five-year or six-year period since the state cen
sus, the enumerated or estimated population of the
annexed or detached territory shown in the columns
of the table has been taken into consideration.
Area.—In Table 1 are shown for each of the munici
palities covered by the report the area of the city July
1, 1911, and the area annexed or detached between
June 1, 1900, and July 1, 1911. The area given un
der each of these two headings is subdivided whenever
possible into land area and water area. The area of
(49)

50

FINANCIAL STAT?ISTICS OF CITIES.

The increase in four years of over $120,000,000 in the
cash balances represents in large part the accumula
tion of money obtained by the issue of long-term debt
obligations for the acquisition and construction of
public improvements. This increase in cash on hand
added at least 82,400,000 to the current governmental
costs of the cities covered by the Census report, this
TABLE 2.
amount being approximately the excess payments of
Summary ofaU receipts and payments.—Table 2 pre interest on account of the idle money thus brought
sents for the municipalities covered by this report a into the treasury. This municipal expenditure must
summary of their receipts classified as revenue and be spoken of as useless. It results in most cities not so
nonrevenue, and of theii: payments classified as gov much from error or mismanagement on the part of
ernmental cost and nongovernmental cost. In the city officials as from the operation of unwise laws re
column of receipts headed "Revenue" are summar lating to the borrowing of money to finance public
ized all amounts that are recorded in the books of the improvements. These laws burden the cities with
several municipalities as having been received on rev needless interest payments without accomplishing any
enue account other than receipts in error and accrued good that may not bo secured in other ways. New
interest received on the original issue of city debt York City has in recent years led in securing legislation
obligations. In the second column for receipts are relating to methods of financing public improvements
summarized all other receipts under the heading that permit such improvements to be economically and
"Nonrevenue." In the column of payments headed safely financed with a minimum of cash on hand de
"Governmental costs" are summarized all amounts rived from bond issues. The economical administra
recorded in the books of the several cities as having tion of city business calls for the general enactment of
been paid on account of expenses, interest, and outlays similar laws in all states.
other than payments in error, payments of accrued
interest on investments purchased, and payments for
TABUS 3.
outlays balanced by amounts credited in outlay
Summary of revenue receipts and governmental cost
accounts. In the second column for payments are payments,—Table 3 is designed to present for each
summarized all other payments under the heading municipality covered by this report a summary of the
"Nongovernmental cost." The receipts and payments results or outcome of itsfinancialtransactions, such as
summarized as here stated are further summarized in is described on page 37, under the title "Summary
Table 23 by division and fund of the government of municipal revenues and governmental costs," so
receiving and paying. They are given with consider far as such summaries can be presented in the form
able detail in Tables 3 and 19, and with other details of an exhibit of receipts and payments. The receipts
in text Tables V and VI, on pages 51 and 52.
and payments included in the table are those defined
Summary of cash lalances.—The cash in the posses in the introduction as revenue receipts and govern
sion of the 193 municipalities increased during the fis mental cost payments and described in the text for
cal year 1911 from $235,498,265 to $264,614,006, an Table 2; the revenue receipts being classified in the
increase of $29,115,741, or nearly 12.4 per cent. All of table as obtained from the various kinds of taxes and
the five groups of cities show an increase of cash on other revenues, and the governmental cost payments
hand, although the cities containing over 500,000 in as paid for expenses, interest, and outlays.
habitants reported nearly one-half of the total. Of
Summary of net and transfer revenue receipts and gov
the 193 cities, 114, or about 59.1 per cent of all the cities,
ernmental
cost payments.—The totals of Table 3 include
reported an increase of cash on hand during the year,
both
actual
or net receipts and payments, or receipts
and 79, or about 40.9 per cent, reported a decrease.
from and payments to the public, and nominal or tianaIncreases in cash on hand were shown by the cities
fer receipts and payments, or amounts received by one
having a population of over 30,000, for which the
enterpiise, department, fund, or account from another.
Bureau of the Census secured statistics for the fiscal
In Table V the total revenue receipts of Table 3 are
years 1908,1909, and 1910. The increase in 1910 was
separated into net and transfer revenue receipts, and
$20,571,175; in 1909, $17,784,932; and in 1908,
the payments of Table 3 are in like manner separated
$52,742,336.
into net and transfer governmental cost payments.
Pittsburgh as given in 1911 includes the area of the
former city of Allegheny, which was consolidated with
Pittsburgh in 1908. At the time of the consolidation
Allegheny had an area of 5,126 acres, of which 4,726
acres were land and 400 acres water.




DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
Table V
City
num
ber.

REVENUE RECEIPTS.

GOVERNMENTAL COST
PAYMENTS.

CITY.
Net.

[1787,230,885 [$18,489,238

Grand total
Group
Group
Group
Group
Group

Transfer.

393,376,223
113.026,849
137,449,083
80,987,313
62,391,427

I
II
III
IV
V

13,033,933
1,530,040
1,965,970
1,140,429
818,866

Net.

448,966,924
126,965,960
165,982,651
98,366,978
69,567,387

Transfer.

13,029,630
1,530,040
1,965,770
1.140,279
819,879

GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OP 500,000 AND OVER IN 1911.
N e w York, N . Y . .
Philadelphia; P a l !
St. Louis, M o . . . . .

»190,099,160
1
65,826,724
38,6S1,475
20,150,061
32,661,359
14,760,630
13,138,291
18,058,523

Boston, Mass.
Cleveland, Ohio..
Baltimore, M d . . .
Pittsburgh, P a . . .

$8,864,733 $242,764,576
350,590 1 62,028,091
696,651
43,381,302
87,150
22,607,973
1,691,111
173,191
704,767
465,740

28,211,100
16,339,315
14,253,774
19,210,793

$8,864,733
346,287
696,651
87,150
1,691,111
173,191
704,767
465,740

GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OP 300,000 TO 600,000 IN 1911.
Detroit, Mich
Buffalo, N Y
!
San Francisco, Cai..
Milwaukee, W i s . . . .
Cincinnati, O h i o . . . .

$11,914,000
11,652,229
12,518,400
9,212,910
12,962,091

1165,688
230,532
2,200
111,380
381,674

$12,178,136
12,853,6SS
17,442,002
9,348,297
15,460,924

$165,688
230,532
2,200
111,360
381,674

Newark, N . J
Los Angeles, G a l . . .
N e w Orleans, L a . . .
Washington, D . C
Minneapolis, M i n n .

11,777,704
13,027,534
8,068,523
13,379,552
8,513,906

334,836
40,098
38,465
61,842
163,325

12,750,986
16,670,670
8,251,704
12,229,665
9,779,888

334,836
40,098
38,465
61,842
163,325

GROUP m.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OP 100,000 TO 300,000 IN 1911.
Jersey City, N . J . .
Seattle, Wash
Kansas City, M o . .
Indianapolis.Ind.
Providence, I t . I . .

$6,728,578
13, OSS, 439
7,406,362
4,675,806
5,475,302

$217,088
287,610
38,640
1,320
285,830

$13,181,720
16,754,509
7,571,923
4,954,832
4,872,376

$217,088
287,610 „
38,6401
1,320 "
285,830

Louisville, K y . . . .
Rochester, N \ Y . . .
Denver, Colo
Portland, O r e g . . . .
S t . Paul, M i n n . . . .

6,051,009
5,6S5,275
6,520,376
8,950,755
4,4S9,U0

11,304
11,213
47,683
68,485
22,803

6,068,686
7,325,434
6,613,490
14,803,868
4,601,007

11,304
11,213
47,6S3
68,485
22,803

Columbus, Ohio...
Toledo, Ohio
Atlanta. Ga
Oakland, Cat
Worcester, Mass...

4,215,891
3,650,0S0
3,195,707
4,311,513
3,591,294

180,050
88,007
76,620
6,225
176,925

4,783,337
3,914,208
4,251,933
5,240,041
4,046,809

180,050
87,807
76,820
6,225
176,925

Birmingham, A l a . .
Svracuse,N.Y
N e w H a v e n , Conn.
Memphis, Tenn
Scranton, P a

1,962,045
3,413,255
2,536,793
2,957,209
1,712,9G3

41,287
2,295
575
2,584

3,098,527
3,589,684
2,481,164
4,322,300
1,843,041

41,287
2,295
575
2,584

Richmond, V a
Patcrson.N.J
Omaha, Ncbr
Fall River. M a s s . . .
Dayton, Ohio

3,230,306
1,982,213
2,978,937
2,300,895
2,415,9S9

124,161
11,753
17,552
14,515
12,957

3,610,976
1,948,118
3,864,162
2,300,829
2,453, HO

124,161
11,753
17,552
14,515
12,957

Grand Rapids. Mich.
Spokane, Wash
Nashville, Tenn
Lowell, Mass
Cambridge, Mass

2.419,284
3,850,314
1 935,277
2,038,263
3,158,257

35,434
10,465
17,423
9,949
50,019

2,970,042
5,907,143
2,289,066
2,153,740
2,635,294

35,434
10,465
17,423
9,949
50,019

Bridgeport, C o n n . . .
N e w Bedford, Mass.
San Antonio, T e x . .
Hartford, Conn..
Albany, N . Y . . .

1,696,114
2,431,400
1,405,919
2,688,244
2,236,909

19,672
26,420
90
23,707
25,109

1,665,664
3,248,403
1,419,366
2,946,078
2,251,011

19,672
26,420
90
23,707
25,109

GROUP IV,

HAVING A POPULATION OF 50,000 TO 100,000 IN 1911.
$1,723,455
1,294,746
2,073,633
2,782,940
1,406,566

$48,277
5,740
15,241
6,387
24,769

$1,977,897
1 221,706
2,470,155
3,134,598
1,522,732

Springfield, Mass..
L y n n , Mass
Lawrence, Mass
Tacoma,Wash
D e s Moines, I o w a . . .

2,763,253
2,038,047
1,551,260
3,954,616
2,122,811

88,105
29,032
13,446
246,230

3,285,109
2,039,300
1,663,204
6,355,846
2,566,220

Wilmington, D e l . . . .
Kansas City, K a n s . .
Yonkers,N.Y
Youngstown, O h i o . .
Houston, T e x

1,152,829
1,781,968
2,308,447
1,663,204
1,551,799

Trenton, N . J .
Reading, P a . .
Dallas, T e x .
Salt Lake City, U t a h . . . .
Camden, N . J




1,325,620
2,634,584
3,171,328
2, aW, 406
2,307,065

EEVENUE BECEIPTS.

City
num
ber.

$909,849,800 $18,4*5,698

148,277
5,740
15,241
6,387
24,769

51

Net.

Transfer.

GOVERNMENTAL COST
PAYMENTS.
Net.

Transfer.

GROUP iv.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 50,000 T O 100,000 I N m i — c o n t i n u e d .

70
71
72
73

Norfolk, V a
Duluth,Minn
Fort Worth, T e x . . ,
Somerville,Mass..
St. Joseph, Mo

74
75
76
77
78

$1,482,923
2,467,079
2,054,188
1,759,469
1,525,935

$40,768
45,196
25,547
895
4,087

$2,295,728
2,583,210
2,961,109
1721,691
1,472,346

9340,768
45,196
25,547
895
4,087

Utica,N.Y
Troy, N . Y
Elizabeth, N . J..
Schenectady, N . Y . ,
Waterbury, C —

1,265,768
1,623,165
1,174,194
1,709,750
1,359,537

1,196
4,744
8,577

1,196
4,744
8,577

3,657

1,516,955
1,697,091
1,154,234
1,759,895
1,756,112

79
80
81
82
83

Akron, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Manchester, N . H
Hoboken, N . J
Evansvilie, Ind

1,163,467
1,413,006
1,086,602
1,503,673
1,238,262

5,065
6,500
46,713
1,812
2,820

1,613,087
4,031,533
1,069,162
1,497,706
1,214,110

84
85
86
87

WUkes-Barre, P a .
Erie, Pa
Peoria, 111
Fort Wayne, Ind
Harrisburg, P a

'876,689
1,158,805
1,286,100
1,226,675
1,124,475

11,463
3,171
57,421
6,880

1,049,028
1,236,910
1,458,152
1,235,330
1,303,028

90
91
92
93

Savannah, Ga.
Jacksonville, F l a . . .
East S t . Louis, III..
Terre Haute, Ind..,
Holyoke, Mass

1,297,418
1,516,441
951,854
830,613
1,591,767

94
95
96
97

Portland, Me
South Bend, I n d . . .
Charleston, S. C . . .
Brockton, M a s s . . . .

1,726,534
898,176
938,948
1,398,652

98
99
100
101

Passaic, N . J . . . .
Bayonne,N.J.,
Johnstown, P a . .
Wichita, K a n s .

573,885
1,251,298
573,492
1,497,637

102
103
104
105

Covington,
Allen town,
Pawtucket,
Springfield,

797,157
673,714
1,134,835
1,145,186

3,932
55,156
2,400

789,425
674,649
1,260,464
840,283

3,932
55,156'
2,400

106
107
108
109

Altoona,Pa....
Mobile, Ala
Canton, O h i o . . .
Saginaw, Mich.

781,808
831,955
836,101
1,065,606

7,814
10,713
3,478
8,090

785,309
959,834
994,751
925,480

7,814
10,713
3,478
8,090

Ky...
Pa...
R. I .
111...

73,474
48,913
35,449
30,137
24,420
1,545
11,452
7,760

3,657
5,065
6,500
46,713
1,812

11,463
3,171
57,271
6,880

1,236,652
1,525,527
1,742,639
774,911
1,638,332

73,474
48,913
35,449

2,525,793
997,731
1,174,561
1,452,788

30,137
24,420

906,082
1,691,582
669,577
2,443,421

1,545
11,452
7,760

GROUP V.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 30,000 TO 50,000 IN 1911.
110
HI
112
113
114

Binghamton, N . Y
Sioux City, Iowa
Atlantic City, N . J
Rockford, 111
Lancaster, P a

115
116
117
118
119

Springfield, O h i o . . . .
Little Rock, A r k . . . ,
Sacramento, C a l . . . .
Pueblo, Colo
Chattanooga, T e n n .

960,SS0
730,890
1,526,352
990,453
701,070

120
121
122
123
124

B a y City, Mich
York, P a .
Maiden, Mass
N e w Britain, Conn..
Haverhill, Mass

125
126
127
128
129

..

$788,794
859,688
1,831,979
767,966
572,515

$1,662
106,824
111
2,486
2,526
9,194

$749,223
892,948
2,407,089
1,014,054
592,239

$1,662
106,824

HI

2,486
2,526
9,194

35,035
3,125

915,153
739,413
1,418,527
904,743
953,114

35,035
3,125

759,139
700,953
1,008,748
813,894

28,780
4349
5,629
1,665
7,712

597,746
601,269
948,248
1,015,366
996,655

28,780
4,349
5,629
1,665
7,712

Salem, Mass
Lincoln, Nebr
Berkeley, Cal
,
Davenport, I o w a . . . ,
Topeka, E a n s

778,100
901,664
946,599
973,570
1,010,934

2,000
7,022

2,000
7,022

23,493

802,592
794,858
968,444
912,659
934,775

130
131
132
133
134

McKeesport, P a . .
Flint, Mich
Tampa, Fla
San Diego, C a l . . . .
E l Paso, T e x

727,467
585,129
622,909
1,838,512
746,216

2,740
11,649
14 255
13 201
16,720

593,009
2,142,837
2,094,410

2,740
11,649
14,255
13,201
17,110

135
136
137
138
139

Wheeling, W . V a .
Racine, w i s
,
Kalamazoo, Mich.,
Superior, Wis
Augusta, Oa

739.260
6S6,921
650,259
775,426
874,270

6,370
881
2,600
360
10,897

901,702
721,807
594,801
896,455
953,084

6,370
881
2,600
360
10,897

140
141
142
143
144

Macon, Ga
Newton, M a s s . . . . .
Butte, Mont
Woonsocket, R . I .
Chester, P a

686,271
1,661,418

19,218
62,062
304
47,161
4,704

1,404,608
1,405,897
824,125
508,058
366,741

19,218
62,062
304
47,161
4,704

145
146
147
148
149

Montgomery, A l a . .
Fitchburg,Mass...
Dubuque, I o w a . . .
Galveston, T e x . . . ,
Elmira,N,Y

7,103
16j 874

1,004,037
893,319
570,218
2,106,103
593,256

7,103
16,874

564,052
410,135
744,830
847,197
643,066
836,566
551 231

3,750
831

3,750
831

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

52
T a b l e V—Contd.
City
num
ber.

REVENUE RECEIPTS.

GOVERNMENTAL COST
PAYMENTS.

C1TT.

Net.

Transfer.

Net.

New Castle. Pa
West Hoboken, N. J.,
Knoxville, Tenn
,
Hamilton, Ohio
Springfield, Mo. . . . . . .

1458,741
495,918
805,286
731,462
561,367

165
156
157
158
159

range, J
Quincy, HI....
Roanoke, Va
,
Lexington, Ky
Himtmgton,W.Va..

1,005,403
566,416
578,799
656,940
302,380

160
161
162
163

Joliet,HL.:
Auburn, N . Y
Charlotte, N . C
Taunton, Mass

164
165
166
167
168
169
170,
171

Everett, M a s s —
Portsmouth, Va.,
Pittsfteld, Mass..
Quincy, Mass....

766,469
349,240
684,783
909,813

Cedar Rap __,, Iowa..
Oshkosh, wis
Perth Amboy, N . J .
Lansing, Mich

934,319
609,110
561,994
730,812

.
,

566,139
620,072
373,144
763,154

3,278

18,470
10,870
"3,"S69

"i^ioi
*ii,"996
14,505
300
1,817
1,584
20
3,320
4,520

$474,487
527,044
715,791
965,412
518,323
1,208,944
462,409
973,919
612,352
472,301

$283
3,278
18,470
#

i6,*870

"3,"869

CLASS OP RECEIPTS.

Total
Service transfer receipts..
Receipts from services by general departments
Receipts from rents
Receipts for services by public service enterprises.
Imterest transfer receipts.

Transfer.

GOVERNMENTAL COST
PAYMENTS.

Net.

Transfer.

GROUP V.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OP 30,000 TO 50,000 IK 1911—continued.
$1,054,220
384,001
536,391
652,937
71S,£30

$44,117

4,608
4,932
5,850
1,546
16,0G0

759,262
1,053, H3
449,5S5
322, G54
1,316,594

4,608
4,932
5,850
1,546
16.0C0

6,412
55,502
4,242

902,951
441,760
914,797
695,927

6,412
55,502
4,242

172
173
174
175
176

Pasadena, Cal
Amsterdam, N . Y . . . .
Jackson, Mich
Jamestown, N . Y . . . .
San Jose, Cal

$1,148,360
405,933
526,449
561,314
755,756

$44,117

177
178
179
ISO
181

Decatur, 111
.
Mount Vernon, N. Y„
Joplin, Mo
Wnliamsport, Pa
Niagara Falls, N . Y . . ,

546,681
869,349
421,508
412,979
956,786

182
183
184
185

Muskogee. Okla
Lima, Ohio
Chelsea, Mass
Aurora, 111

,

5S2,590
536,G35
826,029
515,422

37,285

37,285

577,731
661,818
339,0S9
720,590

"li,"996

716,592
504 991
1,107,325
l f 045,348

14,505
300
1,817
1,584

186
187

NewRochelle,N.Y..
Austin, Tex
,
LaCrosse, Wis
Newport, Ky
,

934,653
603,492
521,450
361,890

1,219
25,255
9,800

1,440,968
613,722
510,943
337,687

1,219
25,255
9,800

1,009,830
496,881
714,928
733,826

20
3,320
4,520

190
191
192
193

Orange, N . J
,
Lorain. Ohio
,
Council DluflS, Iowa..
Lynchburg, Va

617,196
500,379
471,527
718,712

11,708
4,940

667,574
640,455
458,0G6
873,296

11,708
4,940

16,024

The amounts shown in the foregoing table as trans
fer revenue receipts and transfer governmental cost
payments are what on page 40 have been given the
designations "service and interest transfers." These
Table VI

Net.

Transfer.

GROUP T.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION o r 30,000 TO 50,000 IN 1911—continued.
150
151
152
153
154

R E V E N U E RECEIPTS.

City
num
ber.

Table in
which
ineluded.

11,864

receipts and payments are included with other revenue
receipts and governmental cost payments in Tables 8,
9,10,11,15,17, and 18. The amount of each of these
classes of transfers is shown in Table VI which follows.

Amount
included.

$18,489,238

11,864

CLASS OP PATMENT3,

Total

Table In |
which
Amount
inIncluded.
eluded.
31$,4S5(59$

2,827,186 H Service transfer payments..

2,823,546,

713,266
53,374
2,060,546

2,400,388
195,807.

15,662,052

Payments for expenses of general departments
Payment* for expenses of public service enterprises.
Payments for outlays
Interest transfer payments.,
Payments of expenses of municipal service enterprises.
Payments to sinking, trust, and investment f u n d s . . . .
Payments on outlay account

227,35iJ

15,662,052
141,752
14,717,224
803,076

The aggregate service transfer receipts are not iden city's government." When the city corporation is
tical in amount with the total service transfer pay the only governmental unit having such power, only
ments. The differences to be noted arise principally one line is devoted to the city, the revenue receipts
from the different fiscal years of the departments, en and governmental cost paymonts of all funds and
terprises, and funds between which the transfers take accounts of that city, whether under the accounting
place, which cause some of the transfer receipts given control of the auditor or comptroller or not, being
in the tables to be balanced by transfer payments shown on that line. For 84 of the 193 cities covered
reported in 1910 or by those to be reported in 1912. by this report, the city corporation was the only local
The differences of this kind relating to service trans governmental unit. When there were additional
fers are reported by Chicago, HI., Toledo, Ohio, Fort governmental units, the revenue receipts and the gov
ernmental cost payments of each unit, including all
Wayne, Ind., El Paso, Tex., and Auburn, N. Y.
Divisions of governments of cities.—As stated in the revenue receipts and governmental cost payments of
introduction to this report,1 American cities are very the funds and accounts belonging to such units, are
differently organized for purposes of local self-govern shown after descriptive titles. The governmental
ment. The governmental units of each city which have units shown in the table, with the possible exception
power to levy taxes and incur indebtedness are shown of some of the counties referred to in the following
in Table 3 under the heading "City, and division of paragraph, all exercise municipal functions.
For 10 of the 18 cities of over 300,000 inhabitants a
1
See "Difficulties arising from differences in governmental or
percentage
of the receipts and payments of the coun
ganizations," page 21.
ties in which the respective cities are located, based




I

DESCRIPTION OF (GENERAL TABLES.

53

on the ratio between the assessed valuation of the city II as collected for the divisions which may eventually
and that of the county, has been included with the use the money in meeting their governmental costs.
figures for the city corporation and other units of
Of the independent local governmental units re
local government. This treatment seems desirable ported, the school districts are the most important and
because of the fact that in the remaining 8 cities of numerous, being reported in 99 cities; park districts
Groups I and II the original county organization has are found in 6 cities; sanitary districts and boroughs
been merged with that of the city. The addition of or towns, each in 2 cities; a poor district, a naviga
the county figures places the cities of Groups I and II tion district, a water district, a bridge district, a
on a more nearly comparable basis than would other district for township expenses, and a district for bor
wise be the case. The cities of Groups I and II for ough expenses each in 1 city. In addition, for 3 cities,
which a percentage of the county receipts and pay namely, Rochester, Syracuse, and Troy, N. Y., some
ments has thus been added to the city figures are expenses were paid through a special fund of the county
Chicago, 111., Cleveland, Ohio, Pittsburgh, Pa., De government. In each of these cities the county levied
troit, Mich., Buffalo, N. Y., Milwaukee, Wis., Cincin and collected taxes to reimburse itself for payments
nati, Ohio, Newark, N. J., Los Angeles, CaL, and Min for the poor and^the delinquent and for election and
neapolis, Minn. Special attention is here called to the other expenses of the city. In certain other cities of
figures for Denver, Colo., a city of Group III. These New York, namely, Yonkers, Schenectady, Binghamfigures are for a municipality like that of New York, ton, Elmira, Auburn, Jamestown, Amsterdam, and
N. Y., and seven others of Groups I and II, in which Niagara Falls, in which the county performs similar
the county organization is merged with that of the services for the city, the cities reimbursed the counties
city, which makes the figures for this city compara for these expenses by warrant payments.
ble with those of the cities of Groups I and II, but
Where there were several independent school districts
not with those of the other cities of Groups III, IV, or other districts within the limits of a given city, a re
andV.
port was secured for each district, but thefiguresfor the
In 3 of the 10 cities with county payments merged several classes of districts in each city are consolidated
with those of the city as mentioned in the last para into a single total in Table 3. In some cities the school
graph, the city corporation and other divisions of the district maintains only a part of the public schools, the
government of the city collected all taxes, licenses, city corporation maintaining the rest. The city cor
and similar revenues accruing to the benefit of those poration sometimes expends money for sanitation,
divisions. These cities were Pittsburgh, Pa., Mil parks, poor relief, port improvements, bridge construc
waukee, Wis., and Newark, N. J. In the other 7 tion, or water supply, in addition to the payments
cities the county government collected revenues for made for the same purposes by the independent dis
the city corporation and other divisions of the govern tricts having these objects particularly in charge. The
ment of the city, as follows: General property taxes transactions of all the independent governmental units
and part of the special assessments in Chicago, LI., shown in Table 3 are analyzed and their receipts and
Denver, Colo., Cleveland and Cincinnati, Ohio, and payments added to the corresponding receipts and pay
Los Angeles, CaL; liquor licenses in Detroit, Mich., ments of the city corporation in making up the other
and Cleveland and Cincinnati, Ohio; cigarette licenses financial tables of this report. Thus payments of an
in Cleveland and Cincinnati, Ohio; and mortgage and independent school district and of the city corporation
bank taxes in Buffalo, N. Y.
for school expenses are consolidated in Division VII
For three cities for which county receipts and pay of Table 11, and all payments for school outlays are
ments are included, namely, Pittsburgh, Pa., Milwau combined and appear under the appropriate heading
kee, Wis., and Newark, N. J., and for most other in Table 18.
Summary of revenue receipts, by divisions of (he gov
cities, Table 3 presents a correct statement, not only
of the city revenue receipts collected by the various ernments of cities.—In the case of cities having govern
divisions of the government of the city, but also ments which consist of two or more separate and inde
of all those that were collected for the use of such pendent divisions, such as have been considered under
divisions. For seven cities, namely, Chicago, 111., the last heading, the revenues of the divisions are
Cleveland, Ohio, Detroit, Mich., Buffalo, N. Y., seldom derived in like proportion from the same source
Cincinnati, Ohio, Los Angeles, CaL, and Minneapolis, and those of no one division are drawn in like propor
Minn., the table shows the revenues collected for the tion from the sources from which the cities having a
several divisions of the government of the city, but single division of government derive their income. To
does not show the revenues collected for those divisions assist in showing the differences in the sources of the.
by the county. For a number of cities where the city revenues used for meeting governmental costs of the
corporation collects taxes and other revenues for the various divisions of the governments of the 193 cities
other divisions of the government of the city as well covered by this report, the revenue receipts of Table 3
as for its own use and benefit, the table shows the are summarized in Table VII, by divisions of the city
amounts as collected by the city corporation, and not |I government.




FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

64

REVENUE RECEIPTS: 1911.

Table VII
DIVISION OF CITY'S
GOVERNMENT.

Cities
re
port
ing.

Total.

From
poll
taxes.

From
property
taxes.

From busi
ness taxes
and non
business
license
taxes.

From do From
From
From
nations,
From
fines,
gifts, and ofearnings
subven
general highway
forfeits, tions and pension
privi
depart
and
leges.
assess
ments.
escheats. grants.
ments.

From
special
assess
ments.

From
From
earnings
rents and of public
interest. service en
terprises.

9805,720,133 $496,446,214|$1,552,S45 $54,799,511 $63,509,773 $i,U0,891 $32,844,46t $4,540,820 117,270,578 $11,029,567 $20,195,894 $85,410,575
44,548,084
84 408,682,289 271,135,583 987,992 21,895,785 22,889,713 1,646,852 15,511,006 3,138,172 6,654,848 4,106,6-14 16,207,010 39,673,483
109 1303,174,502, 150,442,449 441,457 31,960,624 45,303,867 2,307,834 6,599,024 1,062,242 7,485,457 6,839,111 11,053,354
1,199,645
80,4S5
407,263
320,305
10,048,912
30,266
372,370
99 63,650,0971 51,067,455 123,396
579,936
19,751 2,555,691
654,923
22,203
3,029
570,732
204,053 125,169
10 19,379,093 14,613,606
Tlridpa district .

Boroughs and t o w n s . . . .

<J1

5,815,086
90,800
24,383
1i
1
372,099

5,424,613
82,462
22,688

3,694,986
587,532
233,044
16,222

2,965,332
450,297
232,859
8,870

2
1
3
2

107,140

350

687

212,339
7,925
202

234
1,375

66,153
4,935
102

6,213
33,288
83

» Corporation of cities having a single division of government.

69,723
413
US
17,505

354,594
657,288
99,012

7,352

s Corporation of cities having two or more divisions of government.

Summary of revenue receipts, by states.—The revenuesseveral revenues shown separately in Table 3 as do the
of the 193 cities covered by this report are obtained cities of other states. To assist in showing the differ
under the constitutional and statutory provisions of ences in the revenue systems under which the several
39 different states and those of the District of Columbia. cities of the nation are operated, Table VIII has been
Under those provisions the cities of one state seldom prepared. It is a summary by states of the revenue
derive their receipts in the same proportion from the receipts reported in Table 3 for the cities of this report.
REVENUE RECEIPTS! 191L

Table VIII
GEOGRAPHIC DIVISION
AND STATE.

Total.

Grand total
New England:
Maine
New Hampshire..
Massachusetts
Rhode Island.....
Connecticut
Middle Atlantic:
New York.
New Jersey
Pennsylvania
East North Central:
Ohio
Indiana.....
Illinois
Michigan
Wisconsin
West North Central:
Minnesota
Iowa
Missouri
Nebraska
South Atlantic:
Delaware
Maryland
District of Columbia.
Virginia
West Virginia
North Carolina
South Carolina......
Georgia
Florida
East South Central:
Kentucky..
.,
Alabama
,
West South Central:
Arkansas
Louisiana........
Oklahoma
mr Texas
Mountain:
Montana
Colorado
Utah
Pacific:
Washington
Qnm~




From
property
taxes.

From
poll
taxes.

From
business
.taxes and
non
business
license
taxes.

From
special
ments.

From
fines,
profits,
and
escheats.

From do
From
nations,
From
subven gifts, and ofearnings
general
tions and pension
depart
assess
grants.
ments.
ments.

From
highway
privileges.

From
rents and
interest.

From
earnings
of public
service
enter
prises.

$805,720,133 $496,446,214 $1,552,845 554.799,511 $63,509,773 $4,110,891 $32,844,465 »I,540,S20 $17,270,578 $11,029,850 $29,19*. 605 $35,416,575
1,761,983
1,133,315
68,822,404
7,562,336
9,143,858

974,750
695,489
48,231,323
4,786,601
6,837,606

28,545
32,790
754,958
28,463
69,416

53,777
156,710
2,157,962
417,913
540,819

46,246
1,133
1,121,535
107,865
283,527

2,675
1,112
220,825
12,978
64,314

234,908,634
33,440,687
69,442,165

165,159,017
17,501,991
41,594,338

123,406
266,171

9,640,710
2,556,918
4,098,627

15,437,675
2,028,260
2,532,723

674,968
80,965
280,963

45,266,649
8,931,093
72,537,610
18,902,919
11,931,558

26,650; 833
5,026,244
40,980,765
11,140,581
7,684,916

3,994,473
810,246
10,192,393
1,033,001
1,141,332

3,810,891
1,383,087
6,489,487
1,774,516
1,103,856

15,701,419
6,005,001
30,263,960
3,905,175
4,356,708

9,387,497
4,024,690
16,785,325
2,363,987
2,448,520

2,654
3,984
8,020

1,157,977
386,850
3,045,077
347,147
118,658

1,153,636
13,843,058
13,441,394
6,547,943
1,051,879
373,144
969,085
6,160,601
2,227,079

735,222
8,772,148
4,770,174
3,837,422
626,190
193,174
634,648
2,955,628
862,804

23,202
7,988
5,002

9,018
1,263,767
1,39S,311
824,815
103,496
37,796
122,520
758,087
230,544

7,878,300
6,422,257
3,597,933

4,732,167
3,510,492
1,168,519

739,994
8,106,988
2,002,096
9,358,416

361,912
5,459,024
831,350
5,788,208

807,292
7,599,547
2,789,327

425,735
4,930,073
1,402,633

21,434,574
9,019,240
36,178,876

7,373,229
3,631,566
21,269,423

57,667

18,054

1,124
12,121
51,995
*23,78i'
21,256
*i2*248'

7,449
150,510
5,150
3,946
130,511 1,8*7,930
53,776
*27,009
33,157
245,916

45,335
9,141
2,312,094
194,610
188,940

2,653,750
4,812,784
4,070,849

834,872
51,241
99,383

2.252,251
552,967
2,277,3<)0

1,888.331 10.400,021 26,017,039
991,471 4.096,035
6H.OI9
654,036 5.311,311 6,056,399

124,243
23,293
601,383
66,803
76,723

863,626
777,068
432,7£0
1,573,102
409,784

239,C02
47,807
231,013
6S.719
209.903

1,510.31?
81,137
2,014,213
916.650
300,562

413.605
122,160
3,296,919
147.431
58,273

3,000.318
74,159
1,386,001
347,383
106,435

4,598,025
528,225
6,912,653
1,833,831
839,774

1,978,559
993,291
4,213,351
623,842
1,213,675

95,233
39,157
181,279
25,445
27,505

445,191
125,914
619,479
102,978
35,383

289,984
10,641
136,036
15,871
5,510

429,189
63,584
608,366
€0,464
47,211

174,534
38,017
668,240
186,292
25,950

280,282
31,985
WI.886
60,2Sf
36,605

1,462,973
288,218
3,3fi0,937
110.845
397,682

61,500
64,093
444,849
116,764
371
3,155

33,825
542,925
5,689,401
177,225
27,616
35,835
163,198
470,038
242,657

1,876
16,837
29,628
20,532

682,083
71,251

8,302
14,262
91,422
52,619
25,330
8,100
48,146
153,607
60,409

18,600
213,328
340,831
51,948
15,346
10,253
16,658
204,457
52,119

33,314
539,258
91,288
170,177
6,592
10,000
14,086
89,924
21,299

6,688
936,8*1
2,908
203,981
13,578
2,701
35,477
31,164
24,691

245.291
1,479.546
582,582
1,061,258
225,372
67,125
20,970
759,588
661,395

757,445
276,408
677,168

653,215
490,372
740,009

30,825
66,235
100,810

443,796
832,066
359,355

19,638
4,810
1,353

87,456
142,831
141,575

19,173
78,452
49,006

111,850
92,793
26,187

1,022,735
926,669
321,830

114,328
916,874
38,594
230,888

125,966
700,303
1,016,436

40,102
47,503
86,786
132,687

62,092
191,204
49,010
613,623

2,292
56,757

15,934
292,106

10,563

71,101
231,330

7,575
202,376
4,478
23,259

4,854
99,982
8,857
152,266

4,939
789,077
211,612
1,130,375

91,279
552,422
355,954

111,118
1,152,041
386,156

21,945
30,655
4,689

124,498
133,039
265,670

68,352
5,530

10,744
182,148
23,165

411
134.227
2,600

306
158,658
7,860

257,932
322,822

826,618
715.050
2,746,609

7,746,729
3,179.059
5,570,779

109,337
48,156
329,010

1,671,048
367,726
2,841,401

19,933
5,511
64,560

280,168
48,222
955,791

147,007
38,568
230,297

181,735
112,618
424,192

3,078,770
872,864
1,746,814

3
13,382
37,971
10

1,375

12.549
289,3ft
250,557
39,093

65,746
30.491
3,119,855
445.661
163,564

3*5,525
184. S01
8,636,067
1,236,903
677,471

DESCRIPTION OF xENERAL TABLES.

55

Comparison between revenue receipts and aU govern$136,369,508, an average of $981,076. This excess
mental cost payments.—Comparisons between revenue varied from $52,665,416 for New York, 1ST. Y., to $935
receipts and governmental cost payments are of the for AUentown, Pa., and the excess of governmental
greatest significance in municipal finance. If a city cost payments of the 193 cities over the revenue re
is realizing more money from revenues than it is pay ceipts was $122,615,265.
ing for expenses, interest, and outlays, it has a bal
Comparison between revenue receipts and payments
ance which may be applied to reducing indebtedness; for expenses and interest—The final column of Table
while if its payments for expenses, interest, and out 3 shows the excess of revenue receipts over payments
lays are greater than its revenue receipts, the city is for expenses and interest.. These payments for ex
increasing its indebtedness. If it is realizing from penses and interest correspond approximately to the
revenues enough money to pay-for expenses and in charges of a business corporation for maintenance,
terest, but only a portion of its outlays, it is shifting operating expenses, and interest, except that no al
a part of the burden of paying for its permanent lowances have been made for depreciation. The 193
properties and public improvements upon the future. cities together collected $193,464,064 more from reve
In the last three columns of Table 3 are shown the nues than they .paid out for expenses and interest,
results of comparisons between revenue receipts and and each city, excepting Passaic, N. J., and Hunt
governmental cost payments. In the first of these ington, W. Va, received enough from revenues to
columns is shown the excess of governmental cost meet its expenses and interest and to pay a portion
payments over revenue receipts for the cities in which of its outlays. The excess of payments for expenses,
such payments were in excess of revenue receipts, and interest, and outlays over revenue receipts varied
in the second column is shown the excess of revenue greatly among the different cities, and thefigureshave
receipts over governmental cost payments for cities in little significance except as the amounts of the out
which revenue receipts were greater. Of the 193 cities lays are also taken into consideration. The excess of
comprehended by this report, 54 realized enough from revenue receipts for all cities was equal to 61.2 per
revenues to meet all their payments for expenses, in cent of the total net payments for outlays. The cor
terest, and outlays, and to have a balance available for responding percentages for 1910,1909, and 1908 were
paying off debt. The excess of revenue receipts of these 65.7, 61.5, and 49.2, respectively.
54 cities over their governmental cost payments
In Table IX there is presented a summary of the
amounted to $13,754,243, an average of $254,708. revenue receipts and the payments for expenses, inter
Boston, Mass., and Chicago, HI., reported the greatest est, and outlays for groups of cities classified by the
excess—S4,450,259 and S3,S02,93G, respectively. The percentage of their revenue receipts for 1911 that
excess of governmental cost payments over revenue were in excess of their payments for expenses and
receipts by the 139 cities reporting such excess was interest.
Tabic I X
REVENUE RECEIPTS.

PAYMENTS
POB EXPENSES AND
INTEREST.

GROUP OP CITIES WITH SPECI
FIED EXCESS OP REVENUE Num
RECEIPTS OVER PAYMENTS ber of
FOR EXPENSES AND INTEREST. cities.

TotaL

Per
capita.

TotaL

Per
capita.

PER CENT OP REV
ENUE RECEIPTS.

Re
Avail
quired able
for
for
outlays
meeting and for
ex
other
penses
pur
and in poses.
terest.

EXCESS OP REVENUE
RECEIPTS OVERPAY
MENTS POR EX
PENSES AND INTER
EST.

Total.

Per
capita.

Percent
of pay
ments
for out
lays rep
resented
by excess
lofrevenue
receipts
over pay
ments
Per
capita. for ex*

PAYMENTS TOR
OUTLAYS.

TotaL

and
interest.

Grand total

193

1805,720,133

128.21

1612,256,069

$21.44

76.0

24.0

$193,464,064

$6.77

$316,079,329

$11.07

61.2

More than 40 per cent.
From 30 to 40 per cent
From 20 to 30 per cent
From 10 to 20 per cent
Less than 10 per c e n t .

15

55,397,158
161,670,072
238,296,333
334,123,830
16,232,740

35.17
26.95
25.35
31.41
17.13

29,495,675
109,507,657
180,007,814
278,284,967
14,959,956

18.73
18.26
19.15
26,16
15.79

53.2
67.7
75.5
83.3
92.2

46.8
32.3
24.5
16.7
7.8

25,901,483
52,162,415
58,288,519
55,838,863
1,272,784

16.45
8.70
6.20
5.25
1.34

44,276,302
56,536,723
81,624,247
124,229,020
9,413,037

28.11
9.42

58.5
92.3
71.4
44.9
13.5

72
49
13

Of the 193 cities covered by this report, 15, namely,
Los Angeles, CaL, Seattle, Wash., Portland, Oreg.,
Oakland, CaL, Tacoma, Wash., Fort Worth, Tex.,
Erie, Pa., Wichita, Kans., Springfield, 111., Little
Rock, Ark., York, Pa., San Diego, Cal., Springfield,
Mo., Cedar Rapids, Iowa, and Lansing, Mich., reported
an excess of revenue receipts over their payments for
expenses and interest equal to or greater than 40 per
cent of their revenue receipts. The greater number
of these are rapidly growing cities and all of them had




11.68
9.93

a comparatively large percentage of their revenue
receipts from special assessments, as may be seen by
reference to Table 5. . Of the $55,397,158 total
revenue receipts of these cities, $15,380,350, or 27.8
per cent, were obtained from special assessments, as
compared with a percentage of only 8.5 for the 193
cities, or 7.1 for the cities other than those of the
special group here tinder consideration. All of the 15
cities of this group had payments for expenses and
interest which constituted less than 60 per cent of

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

56

their revenue receipts, and the total payments for
the group for expenses and interest constituted but
53.2 per cent of all their revenue receipts. It is
quite noteworthy that if the other revenues of these
cities had been as they were in 1911 and the cities had
collected no special assessments, their revenue receipts
would have exceeded their payments for expenses and
interest by only 26.3 per cent of their revenue receipts,
which is about the same .as that of the group of 72
cities to which thefiguresof the third line of the table
relate. The per capita revenue receipts of these 15
cities were greater than that of any other group, and
the per capita payments for outlays were more than
two and a half times the corresponding average of the
193 cities, and were approximately three times those
for the second, third, and fifth groups of cities shown
in the table. This group of 15 cities includes none of
the larger and but few of the smaller cities, the average
population of the group being 104,997, as compared
with the average of 147,974 for the 193 cities. The
significance of the facts to which attention is called
above, as well as those shown in Table 3, can not
readily be grasped unless they are considered in con
nection with thefiguresof Table 21, which shows the
receipts of several cities which increased their debt
obligations and the payments which decreased such
obligations.
The per capita revenue receipts of the second and
third groups shown in Table IX do not materially
differ, although those of the third group are slightly
greater. In like manner their per capita payments
for expenses and interest differ but slightly. In both
of these groups the per capita revenue receipts and the
per capita payments for expenses, interest, and outlays
are less than the average for the 193 cities. The
revenue receipts of the second group from special
assessments constituted 11.4 per cent of all revenue
receipts, and the corresponding percentage for the
third group was only 6.7, showing that the second
group utilized this revenue to a slightly greater extent
and the third group to a slightly less extent than the
Table X

NET BEVENUE RECEIPTS.

MET GOYEBXVEXTAL COST f ATMENTS.

Total.
YEJJU

Amount.

Ten years.
1911
1910
1909
1908
1907
1906
1905
190*
1903
1902

,

Per
cent of
increase
over
1902.

15,683,221,382
750,335,552
717,882,232
663,379,686
624,833,065
508,756,856
626,934,945
500,960,415
469,131,231
441,116,189
419,891,211

Amount.

For expenses.
Per
cent of
increase
over
1902.

$6,614,032,651
78.7
71.0
58.0
48.8
35.5
25.5
19.5
11.7
5.1

862,229,808
807,224,695
761,502,037
761,527,311
691,049,439
600,383,766
583,646,656
566,509,115
518,225,379
462,574,445

Amount.

4857307,642
464,148,789
434,008,861
423,754,758
393,000,355
352,817.373
346,162,500
335,383,907
302,078,202
292,447,718

H5R CENT Of—

For outlays.

Tor interest.

Per
cent of
increase
over
1902.

Amount

Per
cent of
increase
over
1902.

8599,302,394

13,829,110,105
86.4
74.5
64.6
64.6
49.4
29.8
26.2
22.5
12.0

As shown by the foregoing table, the net revenue
receipts increased in the period from 1902 to 1911
from 8419,891,211 to $750,335,552, or 78,7 per cent.



193 cities as a whole, but both markedly less than the
cities of thefirstgroup.
The per capita revenue receipts and the per capita
payments for expenses, interest, and outlays of the
fourth group are greater than those for tho 193 cities
taken together, and tho per capita payments for
expenses and interest are greater than those of any
other group. The percentage of tho revenue receipts
of this group from special assessments was 5.1, which
was less than that of the 193 cities as a whole, and less
than the corresponding percentage of the first, second,
and third groups.
The last group includes 13 cities, as follows: Bir
mingham, Ala., Lowell, Mass., Camden, N. J., Law
rence, Mass., Yonkers, N. Y., Norfolk, Va., Oklahoma
City, Okla., Passaic, N. J., Eockford, 111., Chattanooga,
Tenn., El Paso, Tex., Butte, Mont., and Huntington,
W. Va. These cities had an average population of
72,887, which was slightly less than one-half of the aver
age of the 193 cities, and as a group had tho small
est per capita revenue receipts of any group, as well
as very small per capita payments for outlays. The
percentage of revenue receipts represented by tho
receipts from special assessments was 9.9. This fact
taken in connection with the other facts mentioned
indicates that the chief characteristic of these cities is
a governmental administration which, while taxing
them relatively much less than is done by tho other
cities, is accomplishing much less for their citizens in
the way of public improvements or expenditure for tho
public welfare. Diagram 6 on the following page
represents graphically for the 193 cities for tho five
groups shown in Table IX tho per capita revenue
receipts and per capita payments for expenses and
interest, and for outlays.
Comparative summary of the revenue receipts and
governmental cost payments of 146 cities: 1902 to
1911.—Table X shows for the 146 cities for which
statistics throughout the entire period 1902 to 1911
are available the aggregate net revenue receipts and
the aggregate net payments for expenses, interest, and
outlays.

65.9
58.7
48.4
44.9
34.4
20.6
18.4
14.7
3.3

82,643,372
76,832,300
71,857,259
68,739,679
59,199,783
65,131,582
51,902,051
47,760,974
43,054,769
42,175,625

Amount.

Per
cent of
increase
over
1902.

$2,186,520,152
96.0
82.2
70.4
63.0
40.4
30.7
23.1
13.2
2.1

294, 273.704
266, 243,606
255, 605,917
269, 032,874
238, 819,301
192, 434,811
185,582,105
183, 364,234
173,092,408
127, 951,102

130.0
108.1
99.8
110.3
86.7
60.4
45.0
43.3
35.2

Govern
mental
cost pay
ments
repre
sented
by
revenue
receipts.

Revenue
receipts
repre
sented
by pay
ments for
expenses
and
interest.

85.9

77.9

87.0
88.9
87.1
82.1
82.3
87.8

75.7
75.4
76.3
78.8
79.5
77.4
79.5
81.7
78.2
79.7

as. 8
82.8
85.1
90.8

During the corresponding period the percentage of
increase was for expenses, 65.9; for interest, 96; for
outlays, 130; and for all governmental costs, 86.4.

DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
The revenue receipts and the payments for expenses
and interest for the nine years make an unbroken series
of increases, the receipts and payments of each y$ar
being greater than the corresponding ones of the pre
ceding year. The payments for outlays make a like
unbroken series of increases, with the exception of the
years 1908 and 1909. The total governmental cost
payments increased from §462,574,445 in 1902 to
$862,229,808 in 1911, or 86.4 per cent. This is a
slightly greater percentage of increase than that of
revenues, showing with the markedly greater increase
of payments for outlays a small tendency to increase
the proportion of outlay payments to be met from the
issue of debt obligations. Diagram 7, which follows,
presents graphically the relative increase in 10 years
of the net revenues, governmental costs* expenses,
interest, and outlays of 146 cities, as shown by the
figures of Table X .
DIAGRAM 6*—PER CAPITA REVENUE RECEIPTS AND PER CAPITA
PAYMENTS FOR EXPENSES AND INTEREST, AND OUTLAYS, IN
GROUPS OF CITIES WITH SPECIFIED EXCESSES OF REVENUE RE
CEIPTS OVER PAYMENTS FOR EXPENSES AND INTEREST: 1911.
GROUPS OF CITIES

•

MORE THAN 4 0 PER CENT

SESS^:
30 TO 40 PER CENT

30 TO 30 PER CENT

F R TI

10 TO 20 PER CENT

The following statement shows for the 146 cities for
each year from 1902 to 1911 the percentage of the total
payments for outlays which is represented by the
excess of revenue receipts over payments for expenses
and interest.
YEAR.

1911
1910
1909
1908
1907

i...
II.

in

1910

W^SBSZaBZBBSa

v..
'&y8&TSSSS///SSS//

^^zzzsszzzsza
frm&*jJJ>j]fJJjJfJA

V///////////////A7jr^^^^

*JfMJfMJA

1907 Y///////s<Y/////ssy^^^

.
1906 Y///////AY/////^^^^
1906
1904
1903
1902

.

61.8
55.4
46.9
55.5
66.6

Gov
Rev ern
enue mental]
cost
reIceipts. pay-

Lowest city.

GovBev- ernenue
re- , cost
ceiptsJ pay
ments.

Baltimore, Md
Boston, Mass
|*24.52 826.97
[849.86
New York, N . Y . . .
[$50.76
New Orleans, La... 23.4?
Washington, D. C . 39*83
Los Angeles, C a t . . .
23.90
48*08 Milwaukee, Wis....
Scranton, Pa
Seattle, Wash.
12.86 13.84
51.51
66.86
Portland, Oreg
Tacoma, Wash
73.86 Passaic, N . J
9.76
Johnstown, Pa
11.73
Huntington, W. Va. Tee'
43.82
San Diego, Cal
"*9.'50
52.03 Chester, Pa
Atlantic City, N . J .

Y////////V///////S/^^^^

1909 W/////AV///////,V//^^^^
1908

IV,

Y///////AY//////ZY/S//^^^^

1906
1905
1904
1903
1902

Percent.

Per capita revenue receipts and governmental cost
payments.—The per capita receipts and payments
presented in Table 4 are. based upon the absolute
amounts shown in Table 3, which include certain
transfers between enterprises, departments, and funds,
but exclude receipts and payments in error and all
other counterbalancing receipts and payments.
Of special significance are the amounts in the col
umns showing the per capita of all revenue receipts
and all governmental cost payments, which are largest
for Group I and decrease successively from group to
group; showing that in general the revenue receipts
and governmental cost payments increase with the
size of the cities. To the general rule set forth above
there are many individual exceptions, as may be seen
by the following statement of the cities of the several
groups with the highest and lowest per capita revenue
receipts and governmental cost payments.

tKPCWMt « * • I N T t M f f

191!

YEAE.

TABLE 4.

Highest city.

MILLIONS OF DOLLARS

Per cent.
62.0
66.4
61.6
49.2
48.8

LESS THAN 10 PER CENT

DIAGRAM 7.—NET REVENUE RECEIPTS AND NET GOVERNMENTAL
COST PAYMENTS OF 14C CITIES: 1902-1911.

57

>xx////s////

r///////jY///////??///^^^^

..

-:

Y///////AW////y;#//Y^^^^
?./:.-.

m>'/////sss*
^ y / / / / / / >

'vwmwjmzymwMimwj.
.

v:

K I T REVENUE




^m///s//.

ftECEIPTS

NET GOVERNMENTAL COET M T M t N T j

■ l—llll

III

cxpcNtn iNTcnctr O U T U W

I

On the receipt side of Table 4 the per capitafiguresfor
all columns exhibit the general tendency noted abovefor
all revenue receipts to decrease from Group I to Group
V, and yet no one of the nine columns presents an
unbroken series from the highest to the lowest, the
nearest approach being in the column for property
taxes, in which the series is broken only because the
receipts were slightly less for Group IV than for Group
V. The per capita receipts from special assessments
were larger for Group III than for any other group,
being notably large, for the following cities of that
group: Seattle and Spokane, Wash., and Portland,
Oreg.
On the payment side, the per capita figures for three
of the five columns other than that headed "All gov
ernmental cost payments" were largest for Group I ,
and decreased successively from group to group. The

58

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

The receipts and payments in this table aro on a
different basis from those included in Table 4, inasmuch
as the absolute amounts upon which the averages of
Table 4 are computed are included in Table 3, while
the figures of Table XI aro computed after excluding
the service and interest transfers to make thorn fully
comparable with thefiguresof prior years.
Pay
Pay
Lowest city.
The summary gives the per capita figures for all
Highest city.
GOVERNMENTAL COSTS.
ments.
ments.
revenue receipts and also for those (1) from revenues
15.67
Expenses of general de Boston, Mass..., $26.94 Charlotte, N. C .
of general departments and (2) from rovenues of pub
partments.
Seven
cities
*....
Holyoke,
Mass.
5.61
0.01
Expenses of public service
lic
service enterprises. It also gives the per capita
enterprises*
8.41 Springfield, Mo.
0.06
Interest
, Boston, Mass....
figures
for all governmental costs and (1) for expenses
1.08
Portland, Oreg.. 48.74 Chester, Pa
Outlays
of general departments, (2) for expenses of public
i New Haven, Conn., Paterson and Elizabeth, N. J., Omaha, Nebr., East St.
service enterprises, (3) for interest, and (4) for out
Louis, 111., and Johnstown and Chester, Pa.
lays. The number of cities for which the census re
Comparative summary of per capita net revenue re port presents statistics has materially increased since
ceipts and per capita net governmental cost payments: 1902, and the make-up of the different groups has
1902-1911.—-In Table XI, which follows, is presented changed slightly from year to year, but these changes
a summary of the per capita net revenue receipts and have been too slight to affect seriously the compara
the per capita net governmental cost payments for bility of the per capita figures.
the aggregate for all cities covered by the several
Changes in per capita net revenue receipts: 1902census reports from 1902 to 1911, and for each group 1911.—The per capita net revenue receipts for all the
of cities.
0
cities combined increased from S20.12 in 1902 to S27.57
in 1911, again of 37 per cent. The per capita net
PES CAPITA NET REVE FEB CAPITA NET GOVERNMENTAL COST
Table X I
PAYMENTS.
NUE RECEIPTS.
revenue receipts of general departments increased from
$17.76 in 1902 to $24.65 in 1911, a gain of 38.8 per
For
ex
For ex penses
GBOUP AND
Of
cent, while those of public service enterprises increased
1 Of gen-> public
penses
TEAR.
of
For
For
de
of gen
inter 1 out
TotaL oral
during the same period from $2.36 to S2.92, a gain of
part service Total. eral de public
est. lays.
ments. enter
part* service
enter
prises.
only 23.7 per cent. The net revenue receipts of public
ments. prises.
service enterprises have therefore increased somewhat
less rapidly than other revenue receipts, and as a result
All cities:
$27.57 124.65 12.92 $31.86 $16.53 '$1.26 $3.04 $11.03
1911
30.74
24.26 2.97
16.37 1.25 1 2.91 10.21
the percentage which the revenue receipts of public
1910... . 27.24
23.34 2.87
30.12
26.21
15.92 1.22 2.84 10.14
1909
23.47 2.81
26.28
32.02
service
enterprises constituted of all revenue receipts
16.53 1.28 2.89 11.32
1908
21.74 2.76
24.50
29.73
15.72 1.18 2.55 10.28
1907
23.18 1 20.41 2.77 11 26.29 14.37 1.14
decreased
from 11.8 in 1902 to 10.6 in 1911. An ex
2.43
8.35
1906
20.03 2.58
22.61
25.59
13.85 1.09 2.36
8.29
1905
19.39 2.53
21.92
25.72 1! 13.76 1.21 2.22
amination
of the per capita figures for the 10 years
8.53
18.43 2.46 ! 24.79
20.89
13.49 1.12 2.05
1903
8.13
20.12 | 17.76 2.36
discloses the general characteristics of the figures to
22.50
13.38 0.96 2.03
6.13
which attention has been called in the analysis for
Groups I and II:
1911
32.27 i 28.91 3.36 j 36.70 1 19.98 1.36 3.76 11.60
1911, as shown in Table 4. The receipts aro largest
28.93 3.47 1 36.32
1910
32.40
20.04 1.38 3.61 11.28
1909
30.72 1 27.42 3.31 I 35.57 ! 19.44 1.34 3.56 11 22
in
every case for Group I, and, with a few exceptions,
190S
37.90
30.19! 27.07 3.12
19.78 1.40 3.55 13.17
35.25
24.60 3.07
1907
27.67
18.92 1.29 3.04
12 00
decrease successively from group to group.
31.26
23.08] 3.17
1906
26.25
17.09 1.25 2.81 10.11
30.43
22.96 2.93
1905
25.89
16.18 1.20 2.67 10.38
30.42
1901
19.98 2.89
22.87
15.83J 1.48, 2.48 10.63
Changes in per capita net governmental cost pay*
1903
29.78
21.00 2.87
23.87
15.72 1.31 2.20 10.55
1902
26.96
'23.43
20.61 2.82
15.86 1.14 2.20
7.76
ments:
1902-1911.—Tho per capita net governmental
Group III:
24.55
22.12 2.43
29.64
13.58 1.06 2.31 12.69
1911
cost
payments
increased from $22.50 in 1902 to $31.86
23.33
1910
20.89 2.43
26.91
12.89 1.07 2.16 10.79
23.45
1909
21.01 2.44
26.76
12.63 1.06 2.05 11.02
in
1911,
again
of
41.6 percent. The corresponding per
23.92
27.34
I 21.35 2.57
1903...
13.35 1.15 2.15 10.69
23.21
25.47
1907
20.66 2.55
12.67 0.98 2.03
9.79
centages
for
the
various
classes of per capita net gov
21.72
21.99
19.28 2.44
1906
11.98 0.98 2.08
6.95
20.14
20.89
17.89 2.25
1905
11.79 0.88 2.06
6.16
ernmental
cost
payments
for the same period were as
21.07
18.97 2.10 [ 22.20
1904...
12.41 0.83 1.93
6.98
21.32
1903
20.00 1 18.09 1.91
12.40 0.91 1.98 i 6.03
follows:
Expenses
of
general
departments, 23.5; ex
20.04] 12.36 0.74 2.05
1902
17.14 1.85
18.99
4.89
Group IV:
penses
of
public
service
enterprises,
31.2; interest, 49.8;
19.99 ! 17.41 2.58
24.28
11.37 1.31 2.13
9.47
22.81
19.24
16.71 2.53
10.98 1.21 1.98
8.64
and
outlays,
79.9.
The
per
capita
net payments for
20.68
1909
IS. 48 16.08 2.40
10.66! 1.15 1.88
6.99
22.92
19.69
1908
17.34 2.35
11.83 1.16 1.94
7.99
both
classes
of
expenses
shown
in
the
table
increased less
22.01
19.41
1907
17.06 2.35
11.62! 1.13
1.95
7.31
19.28
18.43
1906
16.14 2.29
10.79 1.08
1.89
6.52
rapidly
than
did
the
per
capita
net
revenue
receipts, but
19.32
18.37
1905
16.17 2.20
10.83 0.99 1.99
5.51
19.46
17.S0
1904
15.75 2.15
9.86 0.93 1.97
5.70
the
per
capita
payments
for
outlays
show
a
much
greater
18.54
17.09
1903
14.86 2.23
10.67 0.88 1.95
6.04
1902
17.92
16.64
14.53 2.11
10.73 I 0.83 1.96
4.40
relative
increase
than
the
per
capita
revenue
receipts.
Group V:
17.34 2.06
19.40
21.63
11.31 1.06 1.94
7.32
1911...-.
This condition comports with the great increase in pub1910
16.45 1.96
18.41
19.45
10.84 0.97 1.86
5.77
1909
15.92 1.87
17.79
20.18
10.49 0.91 1.81
6.97
lic
#indebtedness recorded in other tables of this report,
1908
16.01 j 2.14
13.15
20.70
10.79 1.07 1.95
6.89
1907
17.30 i 15.19 2.11
19.26
10.15 1.04
1.82
6.25
and
is reflected in the increase of per capita payments
1906.
14.93 2.00
16.93
18.35
9.81 0.92 1 1.84
5.78
1905
14.36 1.93
16.29
17.74
9.80 0.95 1.76
5.23
for
interest
on municipal debt shown in Table XI.
14.12 2.01
16.13
17.13
9.60 0.91 1.75
4.S7
1903
13.06 1.91
14.97
17.20
9.65 0.92 1.67
4.96
The
increasing
relative magnitude of outlay payments
1902
11.43 1.58
13.01
13.91
8.31 0.69 1.45
3.46
1
is also shown by a comparison of the payments for
—
exceptions to be noted are in the columns "Expenses
of public service enterprises" and "Outlays/7 in which
the averages for Group III are larger than those for
Group II. The cities with the highest and the lowest
per capita payments for the principal classes of
governmental costs were as follows:




DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
1902 with those for 1911, whereby it is found that in
1902 58.9 per cent of the payments for governmental
costs were for expenses of general departments, 4.3 for
expenses of public service enterprises, 9 for interest,
and 27.7 for outlays. The corresponding percentages
for 1911 were 51.9, 3.9, 9.5, and 34.6.
The gradual but marked increase in 10 years of the
per capita revenue receipts and payments for govern
mental costs, which include expenses, interest, and
outlays, shown by the figures of Table XI are illus
trated for the aggregate of all cities covered by the
census report by diagram 8, which follows.

from the general property tax and special property and
business taxes show an increase from 1902 to 1911, but
the per capita receipts from poll taxes have remained
practically stationary. The per capita receipts from
liquor licenses and taxes have shown great fluctuations*,
those for all cities reported being greatest in 1908; for
Groups I and II, in 1908; for Groups III and IT, in
1907, and for Group V, in 1905. The relations brought
out in Table XII are shown graphically in Diagram 9.
Table X I I

DIAGRAM 8.—PER CAPITA NET PAYMENTS FOR PRINCIPAL GOV
ERNMENTAL COSTS FOR 146 CITIES: 1002-1911.

10111
10101

-~ --. fA\mtm\mmmmam!mzm
v v/j^^vmmmm&w/imL'A
. -, //si&wmmm&mmmmb
, v/;mtfmMm&m/mw/m,v//M
- vj^^zmmmwm'/4mt'A
, //z^ftmmmmsz&m',
r/.msMtmmivmez'm.

1008
10071

B |
EXPENSES 0 * GENERAL DEPARTMENTS
tS//ZA EXPENSES OF PUOUC SERVICE ENTERPRISES
W%$M INTEREST
WJ&PM OUTLAYS

DIAGRAM 9 . - -PER CAPITA NET RECEIPTS FROM PRINCIPAL REV
ENUES OF 14G CITIES: 1902-1911.
OOLLARS

I GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES
B B i

SPECIAL PROPERTY AND BUSINESS TAXES

E Z Z 2 2 UQUOR LICENSES AND TAXES
gSftfra ALL OTHER LICENSE TAXES AND PERMITS
I ALL OTHER

Comparative summary of per capita net revenue re
ceipts other than of public service enterprises: 19021911.—In Table XII, which follows, aro shown the pfcr
capita averages of all net revenue receipts other than
of public service enterprises and those of a number of
principal classes of such receipts. The summary is for
all cities covered by the census reports from 1902 to
1911 and for each group of cities. The revenue re
ceipts that aro included in the column headed "All
other" are those from special assessments, departmen
tal fees, charges, sales, interest, rents, privileges, sub
ventions, grants, gifts, donations, pension assessments,
fines, penalties, and escheats. The per capita receipts




59

TAXES.

Total.

GROUP.

All cities:
1911
1910
1909
190S
1907
1906
1905
1904
1903....
1902
Groups I and II:
1911
1910
1909
190$
1907
190G
1905
1904
1903
1902
Group III:
1911
1910
1909
190S
1907
1906
1905
1901
1903
1902
Group IV:
1911
1910
1909
1908
1907
1906
1905
1904
1903
1902
Group V:
1911
1910
1909
1908
1907
1906.
1905
1904
1903
1902

The
general
prop- 1
erty
tax.

$16.98
$24.65
16.77
24.26
15.99
23.34
15.27
23.47
14.54
21.74
20.41 1 13.92
20.03 1 13.94
19.39
13.38
18.43
12.69
17.76
12.65

LICENSES AND
PEEWITS.

Special
All
All
prop
Liquor other other.
erty
Poll licenses licenses
and taxes*
and
and
busi
taxes. per
ness
mits.
taxes.

$0.43
0.55
0.54
0.51
0.55
0.52
0.44
0.43
0.41
0.34

$1.41
$0.05
1.43
0.05
0.05
1.46
0.05
1.64
0.05
1.61
0.06 | 1.62
0.05 | 1.33
0.05
1.34
0.05
1.31
0.05 J 1.27

$0.42
0.41
0.39
0.39
0.38
0.37
0.33
0.30
0.27
0.28

! $5.29
i 5.05
4.91
5.61
j 4.61
3.92
j 3.94
3.89
3.70
3.17

28.91
28.93
27.42
27.07
24.60
23.03
22.96
19.98
21.00
20.61

20.77
20.83
19.49
18.42
16.98
16.14
16.45
15.66
15.03
15.44

22.12
20.89
21.01
21.35
20.66
19.28
17.89
18.97
18.09
17.14

0.44
13.64
1.21
0.03
0.36
1.20 1 0.44
12.56
0.06|
0.30
0.33
1.18
0.06
0.31
13.04
0.42
1.37
0.06
0.22
12.50
0.42
0.23 1 0.06 1 1.45
12.65
0.38
0.24
1.44
0.06
12.24
0.34
0.06 i 1.24
11.60 I 0.21
0.33
0.32 ' 0.05
1.31
11.61
0.28
0.32
1.23
0.06
11.30
0.23
0.21
1.23
0.06
10.69

6.39
6.32
6.09
6.78
5.85
4.92
4.44
5.35
4.90
4.67

0.30 i 0.13
0.13 !
'0.49
0.11
0.43
0.12
0.41
0.54
0.14
0.51
0.13
0.45
0.11
0.42
0.12
0.36
a
nj
0.31
0.10
11.52
0.26 1 0.09
11.13 j 0.31
0.09 i
0.30 i 0.10
10.58
0.32 1 0.09
10.12
0.25
9.73
0.09
0.28
9.64
0.10
0.26
9.49
0.10
0.26
9.39
0.10
0.24
8.72
0.11
0.18
7.74
0.08

0.99
0.39
0.93
0.36
0.93 i 0.39
1.08
0.37
1.11
0.30
1.04
0.35
1.04
0.31
1.04
0.32
1.00
0.34
0.98
0.35

4.33
3.85
3.79
4.83
3.66
2.48
3.38
3.41
3.14
2.95

0.86
0.50
0.79
0.47
0.90
0.43
0.93
0.42
1.07 1 0.53
1.04
0.47
1.03
0.44
1.00
0.39
0.93
0.32
0.87
0.28

4.11
3.61
3.61
4.13
3.52
3.40
2.99
2.93
2.74
2.28

17.41
16.71
16. OS
17.34
17.06
1 16.14
| 16.17
15.75
1
14.86
14.63
|

17.34
16.45
15.92
16.01
! 15.19
14.93
14.36
14.12
13.06
11.43

0.02
0.62
1.71
0.02
1.77
0.69
1.80
0.02
0.69
2.00
0.02
0.67
1.91
0.02
0.73
1.95
0.02
0.66
1.50
0.01
0.55
1.50
0.02
0.51
0.49 1 0.01 1 1.52
0.02 1 1.47
0.43

11.27
10.95
10.43
10.53
11.31
11.00
10.88
10.44
9.91
9.84

0.40
0.40
0.38
0.38
0.35 1
0.35
0.31
0.27
0.23
0.26

5.39
5.22
5.04
5.58
4.61
3.96
4.14
2.02
3.72
2.99

TABLE 5.

Character of table.—Table 5 shows for the several
cities (and for the five groups of cities) the per cent
which the receipts from each principal class of revenues
constitute of the total revenue receipts, and the per
cent which the payments for each of the principal
classes of governmental costs constitute of the total of
such payments. The percentages are in all cases com
puted upon the basis of the receipts and payments
shown in Table 3.

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

60

Per cent distribution of revenue receipts, by cities.— Of the 193 cities covered by this report, 185 had
Of the total receipts from revenues in 1911, 68.6 receipts from special assessments and the following
per cent was from property, business, and poll cities derived more than a third of their revenue from
taxes. The percentages from this source of revenue this source: Seattle, Wash., 41.3 per cent; Portland,
for the different groups of cities were fairly uniform, Oreg., 35.2 per cent; Oklahoma City, Okla., 34.8
though that for Group II was less than that for any per cent; Wichita, Kans., 49.1 per cent; Springfield,
other group. The only cities of over 100,000 inhab Mo., 35.5 per cent; and Muskogee, Okla., 35.4 per
itants that realized less than 50 per cent of their cent.
revenues from property, business, and poll taxes were
Washington, D. C, derived almost as large a per
Washington, D. C., 45.9 per cent; Seattle, Wash., centage of its revenues from subventions, grants, gifts,
37.5 per cent; Portland, Oreg, 48.2 per cent; and and donations as from taxes. Most of this revenue
Spokane, Wash., 43.4 per cent; Washington having a was from a grant by the United States Government to
very high percentage of subventions and the other defray a part of the costs of maintaining the city gov
cities mentioned having very high percentages of ernment. The entire subvention for West Hoboken,
special assessments.
N. J., constituting 31.7 per cent of all revenues, was
Of the municipalities having between 30,000 and received from the state and county for educational
100,000 inhabitants, nine realized less than,50 per cent purposes.
of their net revenue receipts from these taxes, the one
The following cities derived more than a fourth of
showing the smallest percentage, 35.6, being Tacoma, their revenue from public service enterprises: Holyoke,
Wash., with very large relative receipts from special Mass., 34.5 per cent; Jacksonville, Fla., 41.5 per cent;
assessments.
Lancaster, Pa., 25.7 per cent; Wheeling, W. Va., 29.7
All cities had receipts from business and license
per cent; Jamestown, N. Y., 26.7 per cent; and Austin,
taxes, including liquor and other business licenses.
Tex.,
39.6 per cent.
The percentage of receipts from this class of revenue
Per
cent distribution of revenue receipts, by divisions
varied from 25.6 for Joliet, 111., to 0.1 for Maiden,
of
the
governments
of cities.—The percentages of Table
Newton, and Cambridge, Mass. In addition to Joliet,
XIII,
which
follows,
are based upon the absolute
HI., the following cities received more than 20 per
amounts
presented
in
Table VII, and summarize the
cent of their net revenue from business and license
revenue
receipts
of
the
193 cities by the independent
taxes: East St. Louis, 111., 22.6 per cent; Norfolk, Va.,
divisions of the city governments receiving.
21.4 per cent; and Lynchburg, Va., 20.3 per cent.
PEE CENT OF REVENUE RECEIVED lHOlf—

Table X I I I
DIVISION OF CITY'S GOVERNMENT.

Property
taxes.

PoU
taxes.

Business
taxes
and non
business
license
taxes.

Special
assess*
ments.

Donations J Earnings
Earnings
gifts, and of general Highway Rents and of
Fines, for Subven
tions
public
pension
feits, and
and
depart
(service
en
privileges.
Interest.
assess
escheats. grants.
ments.
terprises.
ments.

Grand total..,

61.6

0.2

6.8

8.5

0.5

4.1

0.6

2.1

1.4

3.6

10.6

City corporation!..
City corporation*..
School district
County

66.3
49.6
80.2
75.4

0.2
1

5.4
10.5
0.6
2.9

5.6
14.9

0.4
0.8.

3.8
2.2
15.8
3.5

0.8
0.4
0.5
0.1

1.6
2.5
0.6
13.2

1.0
2.3

4.0
3.6
1.0
3.0

10.9
13.1
0.1

Park district...
Poor district....
Bridge district..
Water district..

03.3
90.8
93.0

Sanitary district
,
Navigation district...
Special fund
Boroughs and towns..

80.2
76.6
99.9
54.6

96.2

1.1
1.8

O.

0.6

(»)

(«)

(»)

3.6
8.7
0.8

0.1

(*)
6.6

0.2
5.7
45.3

(»)

1.2
0.5
0.5
4.7

95.3

1.8
0.8

17.8
16.9

(«)

1
Corporation of cities having a single division of government.
* Corporation of cities having two or more divisions of government.
* Less than one-tenth of 1 per cent.

Per cent distribution of revenue receipts, by states.— which summarizes the revenue receipts reported in
The percentages of Table XIV, which foUows, are Table 3 by the states in which the several cities are
based upon the amounts reported in Table VIII, located.




DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
Table XIV

PEB CENT OF BEYENT7E BECEIVED FBOlfr—

GEOGRAPHIC DIVISION AND STATE.

Property
taxes.

New England:

Middle Atlantic:
New York.

East South Central:

0.5 J

4.1 |

0.6

2.1 1

1.4 1

3.6

10.6

55.3
61.4
70.1
63.3
74.8

1.6
2.9
1.1
0.4
0.8

3.1
13.8
3.1
5.5
5.9

2.6
0.1
1.6
1.4

0.2
0.1
0.3
0.2

8.5
0.3
0.2
0.7
2.7

0.4
0.5
2.7
0.4
0.4

2.6
0.8
3.4
2.6
2.1

0.1
1.1
0.4
3.3
0.4

3.7
2.7
4.5
5.9
1.8

21.9
16.3
12.5
16.4
7.4

0.4
0.4

4.1
7.6
5.9

6.6
6.1
3.6

0.3
0.2
0.4

1.1
14.4
5.9

0.4
0.2

1.0
1.7
3.3

0.8
1.9

1.2 1

4.4
3.0 1
7.6

11.1
12.2
11.6

8.8
9.1
14.1
5.5
9.6

8.4
15.5
8.9
9.4
9.3

0.3
0.3
0.8
0.4
0.6

1.9
8.7
0.6
8.3
3.4

0.5
0.5
0.3
0.4
1.8

3.3
0.9
2.8
4.8
2.5

0.9 \
1.4
4.5
0.8
0.5

6.8
0.8
1.9
1.8
0.9

10 1
59
9.5
9.7
7.0

7.4
6.4
10.1
8.9
2.7

12.6
16.5
13.9
16.0
27.9

0.6
0.7
0.6
0.7
0.6

2.8
2.1
2.0
2.6
0.8 1

1.8
0.2
0.4
0.4
0.1

2.7
1.1
2.0
1.5
1.1

1.1
0.6
2.2
4.8
0.6

1.8
0.5
2.1
1.5
0.8

9.3
4.8
11.1
2.8
9.1

0.8
9.1

5.3
0.5
3.3
1.8

2.9
3.9
42.3
2.7
2.6
9.6
16.8
7.6
10.9

0.2 i
0.1
0.2
0.3

1.6
1.5
2.5
0.8
1.5
2.7 !
1.7
3.3
2.3

2.9
3.9

0.6
6.8

21.3
10.7
4.3
16.3
21.4
18.0
2.2
12.3
29.7

5.6
13.0
10.0

59.8
67.0
55.5
60.5
56.2
63.7
63.4
35.5
5S.6
59.5
51.8
55.2
48.0
38.7
60.1
54.7
32.5

West South Central:
Louisiana

.

Mountain:
Montana.....
Utah
Pacific:
Washington

48.9
67.3
41.5
61.9
52.7
64.9
50.2

0.6

0.2

a4

0.8
1.3
0.3

0.3
0.6
0.3
2.6

6.4

34.4
40.3
58.8

3.1 1

12! 6
9.8
10.1
12.6
12.3 ,
10.4

11.1
3.2

9.6
4.3
18.8

8.3
7.6
20.6

0.4 1
1.0
2.8

15.4
11.3
1.9
2.5

17.0

35.6 1

8.4
2.4
2.-4

10.9

5.4
0.6
4.3
1.4

11.3
7.3
12.8

13.8
15.2
13.8

2.7
0.4
0.2

15.4
1.8
9.5

3.9

36.1
35.2
15.4

as

7.8
4.1
7.8

77.9
a

1 -

0.8

;;;

;

\\




::....
""!....
....

61.6
61.6
61.0
60.0
59.2
59.8
61.4
61.3
61.5
63.6

1.8
2.0
2.1
2.0
2.3
2.2
2.0
2.0
1.9
1.7

0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2

0.5
0.9

ai

a7

3.2
1.3
0.7
3.7
0.5
1.1

0.3 i
0.1

!•- 1
2.2
3.9

2.6
0.6
2.7
1.5
1.5
1.0
0.2
1.2
1.4

0.3
0.7

2.2
3.6
3.6
2.5

1.0
2.5
0.2
0.3

1.3
2.4
0.8

0.1
1.8

2.i

0.3

3.4
11.6

1.3
0.5
2.7

0.7
0.4
0.6

0.8
1.2
1.2

14.3
9.7
4.8

1.4
0.6

ai
6.9
0.2

ai

0.1
0.2

ai

1.4
1.4

a7
a7
cu
1.6

13.0
14.4
8.9
0.7
9.7
10.6
12.1

1

comparable, since those for the years 1902 to 1908 are
computed upon the basis of reports which in some
columns include amounts received in error that were
later refunded; while those for later years are com
puted upon the basis of reports which excluded re
ceipts in error that were later refunded. A careful
investigation shows that this noncomparability exag
gerates for the years 19C2 to 1908 the percentages for
general property taxes to the extent of a fraction of
one per cent. This exaggeration reduces the per
centages of most of the other columns; the total
exaggeration and reduction being for any given year
not far from half of 1 per cent.

Special
Tho gen- property
and
non- Poll taxes. License
cral prop license
taxes.
erty tax. business
taxes.

YEAB.

a7

0.7
0.1
0.7
0.8
2.4
2.2
6.0
2.4
2.7

Comparative summary of per cent distribution of net
revenue receipts: 1902-1911.—Table XV, which fol
lows, presents a per cent distribution of the net revenue
receipts of the cities covered by the Census reports
for the years 1902 to 1911, inclusive. The headings
of tho columns differ somewhat from those of Tables
5, XIII, and XIV, owing to slight differences in the
tables for net revenues in the earlier and later reports.
Tho percentages are based upon the absolute amounts
of net revenue receipts tabulated in the reports for the
several years, and that basis differs somewhat from
the basis for the percentage of Tables 5, XIII, and XTV,
by being exclusive of service and interest transfers. The
figures for the several years are not in all cases strictly
T a b l e 3CV

Earnings
of public
service en
terprises.

8.5

56.5
58.9
64.4

District of Columbia
Virginia
West Virginia

Donations, Earnings I
Special Fines, for Subven gifts, and of
Rents
general Highway 1 and
assess* feits, and tions and pension 1 depart
privileges.! e sinter
grants.
ments. 1 escheats.
t
assess*
ments.
ments.

6.8

5G.3

Kansas.-»..............................
South Atlantic:

Business
taxes and
non-busi
ness
license
taxes.

0.2

58.9

West North Central:

Poll
taxes.

61.6

70.3
52.3
59.9

East North Central:
Ohio
Illinois

1911
1910
1909
1908
1907
1906
1905
1904
1903
1902

61

6.7
6.8
7.1
8.0
8.1
8.5
7.3
7.5
7.5
7.7

Special
assess
ments.

8.7
8.9
8.5
8.0
8.2
7.0
7.7
7.7
7.7
6.3

Subven
tions,
Earnings
Earnings
Pines, for grants,
of pubuc
feits, and donations, of general Highway Rents and service
privileges.
interest.
depart
gifts,
and
escheats,
enter
ments.
pension
etc.
prises.
assess
ments.
0.5
0.5
0.6
0.6
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.8
0.6

4,7
4.5
4.9
5.0
4.8
4.7
4.8
4.9
4.4
4.3

2.1
2.0
1.9
2.4
2.5
2.2
2.1
2.2
1.9
1.8 |

1.4
1.1
1.2
1.2
0.9
1.1
0.8
0.8
0.9
0.8

1.7
1.5
1.6 ;
2.0 i
1.9
1.7
1.7
1.5
1.6
1.5

10.6
10.9
10.9
10.7
11.2
11.9
11.4
11.3
11.5
11.5

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

62

Thefiguresof Table XV disclose a number of minor percentages of the tables for that cost are so nearly
variations in the proportion of receipts obtained from uniform for the 10 years.
year to year from the several revenues. No class of
receipts show, however, a marked tendency to in Table XVI
FES CENT DISTRIBUTION OF NET
GOVERNMENTAL COST PAY
crease or decrease relatively, although those for pub
MENTS.
lic service enterprises, the general property tax, and
For
For
For
license taxes have slightly smaller percentages in
expenses. interest. outlays.
1911 than in 1902, and the receipts from special
33.1
57.9
9.1
Ten years
assessments, subventions, grants, gifts, and pension
34.1
To
56 3
1911
assessments, and highway privileges show somewhat 1910
33.0
57.5
9.5
33.6
57.0
9.4
greater percentages in the later than in the earlier 1909
35.3
55.6
190S
9.0
34.6
56.9
1907
8.6
year.
32.1
5S.S
1906
9.2
31.8
59.3
8.9
Per cent distribution of governmental cost payments in1905
32.4
59.2
1901
8.4
33.4
5S.3
1903
8.3
1911, by cities*—Payments for outlays constituted 34 1902
27.7
63.2
9.1
per cent of the total payments for governmental costs.
Twenty cities had larger percentages of govern
Per cent relation of revenue receipts to governmental
mental cost payments for outlays than for expenses
cost
payments.—Of the total revenue receipts of the
and interest. The percentages of the governmental
193
cities
covered by this report, 63.4 per cent was
cost payments of these cities represented by their
payments for outlays are as follows: Los Angeles, required for meeting expenses, 12.6 per cent for meet
Cal., 53.8; Jersey City, N. J., 62.1; Seattle, Wash., ing interest, and the balance, 24 percent, was available
61.7; Portland, Oreg., 72.9; Oakland, Cal., 52.7; for outlays and for other purposes. The cities with
Spokane, Wash., 59.7; Tacoma, Wash., 64.1; Kansas the highest and the lowest percentage of their revenue
City, Kans., 52.6; Fort Worth, Tex., 58.6; Oklahoma receipts required for meeting their governmental cost
City, OMa., 67.8; East St. Louis, HI., 57.3; Wichita, payments for the respective groups of cities are given
Kans., 66.5; Flint, Mich., 57.4; San Diego, Cal., 56.4; in the statement which follows, together with the per
El Paso, Tex., 65.8; Macon, Ga., 66.8; Roanoke, Va., centages of each for expenses and interest.
55.4; Pittsfield, Mass., 52.6; Decatur, 111., 53.5; and
PER CENT
Lynchburg, Va., 50.3.
*
PER CENT
FOR—
FOR—
The cities with the highest and lowest percentages
Highest city.
Lowest city.
Ex Inter
of governmental cost payments for interest for the
Ex Interpenses. est.
penses. est.
respective groups of cities were as follows:
Highest city.

GROUP.

I

Boston, Mass

n

in
IV
V

«Fer
cent.
19.4
16.4
19.5
20.6
25.3

Lowest city.
St. Louis, Mo ♦
Washington, D. C
Oat land, Cal ,.
Springfield, &fo.

Per
cent.
48
32
3 3
3 3
0.4

I
II
III....
IV
V

Birmingham, Ala
Chattanooga, Tenn...

80.1
63.9
71.4
79.0
77S

9.8
17.7 Los Angeles, C a l . . . .
20.1
14.6
19.8

63.9
50.8
34.8
40.9
47.8

5.7
8.2
9.9
13.8
0.4

The last column of Table 5 shows for the several
cities the percentage of governmental cost payments
represented by their revenue receipts. For 54 of the
Comparative summary of the percent distribution of net193 cities of the table there is shown a percentage in
governmental cost payments, 1902-1911.—Table XVI, excess of 100, as follows: Giicago, III, Wash;ngton,
which follows, gives the per cenjb distribution of the D. C; Providence and Woonsocket, R. I.; Louisville,
net governmental cost payments of 146 cities given Newport, Lexington, and Covington, Ky.; Bridgeport,
in Table X for the years 1902 to 1911, inclusive. and New Haven, Conn.; Elizabeth, Patcrson, and HoThe table discloses a general relative increase in the boken, N. J.; Boston, Somerville, Cambridge, Maiden,
payments for outlays and a relative decrease in the Newton, Taunton, and Everett, Mass.; McKeesport,
payments for expenses, while the percentages of the York, Reading, Chester, and Williamsport, Pa.;
table for interest payments fluctuate slightly with Springfield and St. Joseph, Mo.; Manchester, N. H.;
the years; and the percentage for the governmental Evansville, Ind.; Savannah, Ga.; Terro Haute, Ind.;
costs for 1911 differs but little from that of 1902. Quincy and Springfield, 111.; Bay City, Saginaw, and
An examination of the basicfiguresof Table X clearly Kalamazoo, Mich.: Amsterdam and Binghamton, N.
discloses the fact that the principal factor of the Y.; Lima and Springfield, Ohio; Pasadena, San Jose,
minor variations in the percentages for all three and Sacramento, Cal.; Pueblo, Colo.; Lincoln, Ncbr.;
columns is the great fluctuation in the aggregate pay Council Bluffs, Dubuque, and Davenport, Iowa; Toments for outlays, which have varied much more peka, Kans.; Tampa, Fla.; Knoxvillc, Tenn.; Char
than those for expenses or interest. The payments lotte, N. C.j La Crosse and Oshkosh, Wis.
for interest have steadily increased in proportion to
The marked excess of Springfield, 111.; Williamsport,
the aggregate of governmental costs, and hence the Pa.; and Bay City, Mich., was caused by the very large
Mobile, Ala




DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.

63

receipts from gifts and donations for public buildings
and for public trust funds for investment.

institutions located within its borders. The amount so received
for the fiscal year 1911 was $161,259.
Massachusetts.—-Table XVII, which follows, Bhows for the several
cities
of Massachusetts the special property taxes received as city
TABLE 6.
revenues in 1911. The taxes on the stock of national banks located
the state are apportioned among the cities according to the
Character of table.—In Table 6 are shown the in
number .of shares owned in each. The tax on shares held outside
revenue receipts from taxes, special assessments, fines, of the state falls to the state. The collection of the tax upon the
forfeits, and escheats; that is, the gross receipts from whole issue of stock of a given bank is made by the city in which
the revenues mentioned less receipts in error which the bank is located. The city retains its portion of such collection
and pays the remainder to the state for distribution among the
were later refunded.
other Massachusetts cities in which stock in this bank is held. In
In the introduction to this report, on pages 30 to 34, Table
XVII the taxes on national-bank stock are divided into two
are definitions of the terms "taxes," "special assess classes: (1) Those collected and retained for its own use by the
ments," "fines," "forfeits," and "escheats," and de city in which the bank is located, and (2) those received from the
scriptions of the various classes into which the principal state as apportionment of taxes collected from banks located in
revenues mentioned have been subdivided for statis other Massachusetts cities. The taxes on the capital stock of street
railways and other corporations located in the state are collected by
tical purposes.
the state, and apportioned to the cities. The street railway tax is
Receipts from the general property tax.—The receiptson a mileage basis, and taxes on other corporations are according to
of the several cities from the general property tax are the residence of the stockholders.

shown in Table 6 in three columns. Thefirst*gives
REVENUE RECEIPTS FROM TAXES <
THE CAPITAL
Table XVII
the total amounts collected in the several cities; the
STOCK O f ^ second, the amount of taxes collected as parts of the
City
Banks.
original levies; and the third, the amounts received as num*
Other
Street
All
penalties and interest on deferred payments and col ber.
corpora
rail
corpora
Located ways.
tions.
Located
tions.
lectors' fees. Of the total amounts received, 0.9 per
other
in city. in
towns.
cent were from penalties, interest, and collectors' fees.
Among the receipts included in Table 6 as from the
k5,0S2,277 $418,783 $142,063 $814,446 $3,706,985
Total.
general property tax are the amounts derived from
228,454
505,229
Boston
15,087 460,844 1,800,844
305,589
27,586
346,492
4,905
8,412
Worcester....
general and special levies. The character of the spe
102,477
13,897
1,356
27,559
145,289
42 Fall River....
132,763
11,849
3,811
161,024
12,601
47 Lowell
cial levies and the amounts and varying rates at which
132,699
62,043
18,470
215,807
2,595
48 Cambridge....
276,520
18,272
3,716
327,435
23,927
50 New Bedford.
levied are given in Table 34 and in the text accom
147,993
28,804
5,297
198,053
15,959
59 Springfield...
79,364
2,792
108,933
11,252
15,525
60 Lynn
panying the same, beginning on page —.
153,802
1,708
4,705
3,048
163,263
61 Lawrence.....
22,808
4,381
50,837
1,139
72 Somerville
79,165
Receipts from special property taxes.—Of the 193
92,733
3,929
12,049
9,309
93 Holyoke
118,020
73,449
1,151
8,276
97 Brockton
6,
m
89,047
cities covered by this report, 55 reported receipts from
63,792
3,406
29,802
122 Maiden
2,818
99,818
32,583
3,160
7,187
124 Haverhill
14,861
57,791
special property taxes amounting to $11,380,435. Of
50,765
4,351
6,333
125 Salem
1,983
63,432
51,504
53,115
141 Newton
6,587
1,252
112,458
this amount, the 22 cities of Massachusetts reported
42,148
1,878
146 Fitehburg....
3,054
6,408
53,488
56,857
2,806
163 Taunton
76,301
16,638
$5,082,277, or 44.7 per cent, and the 17 cities of New
3,397
33,205
164 Everett
21,793
58,395
1,110
14,305
166 Pittsfield
14,753
9,350
39,518
York reported $5,469,062, or 48.1 per cent.
1,036
14,232
167 Quincy
6,091
5,059
26,418
ljstt
184 Chelsea
26,553
8,432
715
36,901
The following is a brief statement of the character
and amounts of the special property taxes reported in
Michigan.—The special property tax reported for Detroit is a
Table 6 for the cities of the several states:
tax on mortgages levied at the rate of 1 per cent on all mortgages
Connecticut.—The tax receipts of Connecticut cities reported in
Table 6 in the column headed "Special property taxes" are the
receipts from the tax known locally as " corporation and bank stock
tax." It is a tax of 1 per cent levied on the market value of the
stocks of every bank, trust, insurance, investment, and bridge
company whose stock is not exempt by law. The amount of taxes
paid by the corporation on itarealproperty in the state is deducted
from the computed 1 per cent tax, and theremainderis collected
from the corporation by the state treasurer and distributed among
the taxing districts according to the amount of stock held in each.
The amounts reported in the column of Table 6 headed "Special
property taxes" for the various Connecticut cities are the aggregates
of the bank and other corporation taxes described above. The
amounts of the two classes of taxes werereportedseparately to the
Census for only the city of Hartford, which received $2,967 of taxes
on bank stock, and $358,830 on the stock of other corporations.
Delaware.—The city of Wilmington levies a special property tax
of $1 on each horse and mule in the city.
Maryland.—The taxreceiptsof Baltimore reported as from special
property taxes represent the city's portion of the state tax of onequarter of 1 per cent upon savings bank deposits. The city of
Baltimore receives three-quarters of this tax collected from the




and land contracts, paid at the time of recording. The law became
effective August 1,1911.
Minnesota.—The special property taxes reported for the cities
of Minnesota are of two kinds, a mortgage tax collected under the
state law enacted in 1907, and a specific tax on grain in elevators,
collected under a law enacted in 1909. Under the law first men
tioned, mortgages are taxed at the time of registry at the rate of
one-half of 1 per cent on the amount of the loan secured. This tax
is collected by the county treasurer, who apportions the amount
received to the state, county, and city, on the basis of the tax rate
for each. The law of 1909 levies a tax of J mill per bushel on wheat
and flax, and £ mill per bushel on other grain in elevators. The
mortgage taxes received by the cities in 1911 were as follows: Min
neapolis, $79,947; St. Paul, $29,785; Duluth, $11,451. The grain
taxes received were: Minneapolis, $8,657, and Duluth, $6,761.
New Hampshire.—The special property taxes received by Man
chester in 1911 amounted to $47,697 and were derived from the rail
road tax. This tax is levied at the average rate of levy throughout
the state. Of the amount received from the proceeds of this tax,
one-quarter is distributed to the towns in which the railroads are
located, and the remainder to the towns in proportion to the railroad
stock held therein, except that the proportion represented by stock

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

64

held outside the state is reserved for the state. The only other
special property tax received by Manchester is a tax on savings
banks of 1 per cent on the net amount of deposits after the deduction
of real estate and loans secured by mortgage at not to exceed 5 per
cent interest. The amount received in 1911 was $89,158.
New Jersey.—The only special property tax reported for New
Jersey cities is an inheritance tax received by Newark of $2,792.
New For*.—Table XVIII, which follows, shows for the cities of
New York the revenue derived in 1911 from special property taxes
which consisted of 1 per cent on the valuation of bank stock and
half of the tax on mortgages collected by the county clerk where the
mortgages are recorded, at the rate of one-half of 1 per cent on the
amount of the loan secured. After deducting the cost of collecting
the mortgage tax, half of the remainder is paid to the taxing district
in which the mortgaged property is situated and the other half to
the state.
Tattle XVIII
City
nun
ber.

1
10
25
35
53
66
74
75
77
110
149
161
173
175
178
181
186

R E V E N U E RECEIPTS FROM SPECIAL
PROPERTY TAXES.

cur.
TotaL

On capital
On
stock of mortgages.
banks.

Total....

$5,469,062

$4,038,775 91,430,287

New York
Buffalo
,
Rochester
Syracuse
Albany
Yonkers
Utica
Troy
Schenectady....
Binghamton....
Elnura
Auburn
Amsterdam....
Jamestown
Mount Vernon.
Niagara Falls...
NewBoobelle..

4,749,204
184,770
116,822
51,411
88,377
20,339
61,330
33,965
19,713
17,471
11,035
9,190
27,522
16,521
13,601
33,730
14,061

3,567,406
123,609
60,267
42,676
66,253
2,408
54,755
31,202
11,689
12,077
8,479
7,061
25,056
13,114
4,811
4,345
3,667

1,181,798
61,161
56,555
8,835
22,124
17,931
6,575
2,763
8,024
5,394
2,556
2,129
2,466
3,407
8,790
29,385
10,394

Ohio.—The statutes provide for a tax of 5 per cent on collateral
inheritance in excess of $200, to be collected by county treasurers;
75 per cent of which is to be paid over to the state, the remaining
25 per cent to be retained as county revenue. The county's share
of this tax included with the statistics of Cleveland and Cincinnati
is the only amount reported for Ohio cities in the column of Table 6
headed "Special property taxes."
Virginia.—The amounts reported in the column headed "Special
property taxes" for Virginia cities were derived from a tax of 80
cents per $100 of bank stock valuation assessed against the share
holders.
Wisconsin.—The only special property tax reported for Wiscon
sin cities is the inheritance tax. This is reported only for Mil
waukee, for which city thefiguresinclude the tax receipts of the
county, as previously explained. In Wisconsin the county treas
urers collect the inheritance tax, which is both direct and collateral,
and which rangesfrom1 per cent to 15 per cent, depending upon
the degree of consanguinity. Exemptions range from $10,000 to
$100 This is a state tax but counties retain 5 per cent of the col
lections up to $50,000, 3 per cent on the next $50,000, and 2 per
cent on all additional sums.

Receipts from poll taxes.—In some cities poll taxes
are assessed at a fixed amount per capita, as $1 or S2.
In others the polls are given an arbitrary valuation,
as S100, and are assessed at the rate for the general
property tax; and in still others they are graded
according to the occupation of the individual. All
receipts from per capita taxes, whether uniform or
graded, are included in the column headed " Poll taxes."
Poll taxes amounting to $1,552,845 were reported for




1911 by 81 of the 193 cities, located in 21 different
states. Of this amount, 22 cities in Massachusetts
reported $754,978, or 48.6 per cent; 12 cities in Penn
sylvania, 8266,171, or 17.1 per cent; 13 cities in New
Jersey, $123,406, or 7.9 per cent; 5 cities in Indiana,
$57,577, or 3.7 per cent; 5 cities in Connecticut,
S69,416, or 4.5 per cent; and 3 cities in Rhode Island,
$28,463, or 1.8 per cent.
Receipts from taxes on the liquor traffic.—Under the
heading "On liquor traffic," in the general division of
Table 6 headed "Business taxes," are included all
the revenue receipts of cities from the taxes on the
liquor traffic. Where no such receipts are reported,
either none were collected in 1911, the cities being
under general or local prohibition, or the revenue col
lected from the traffic belonged to the state or some
other civil division. The very small amounts shown
under this heading for some cities indicate that the only
liquor licenses granted in them were those permitting
druggists to sell liquors and alcohol for medicinal pur
poses only. The city of Portland, Me., from which
no receipts from taxes on the liquor traffic were re
ported, received $7,255 from the operation of a liquor
agency, which amount is shown in Table 10 under the
heading of receipts from "All other enterprises."
Receipts from lusiness taxes other than on the liquor
traffic.—Bus<ness taxes other than on the liquor traffic
are shown in Table 6 in two columns, one with the head
ing, "Collected without the issue of license," and the
other with the heading, "Collected with the issue of
license." Of the 193 cities covered by this report, all
reported receipts from business taxes other than on the
liquor traffic amounting to $10,587,143. Of this total,
$863,697 was reported by Washington, D. C, being
derived from the following sources: Street railway
companies, $188,189; savings banks, $12,347; tele
phone companies, $62,543; electric light companies,
$58,966; market companies, $535; gas companies,
$108,743; building and loan associations, $17,643;
national banks and trust companies, $215,431; life
insurance companies, $70,587; and other business
licenses, $128,713. The amounts reported in the
column headed "Collected without the issue of license"
for New Bedford and Newton, Mass., were taxes on
ships in foreign trade, and those for Duluth, Minn.,
were tonnage taxes on vessels. All taxes reported in
this column other than for the four cities mentioned
were receipts on insurance premiums.
Receipts from business taxes other than on liquor
traffic collected with the issue of license are particu
larly large in most of the cities of the Southern and far
Western states, in many of which cities licenses are
required for conducting nearly every kind of private
business. Licenses collected from street railway,
telegraph, telephone, and other public service cor
porations are also included. Among the receipts
reported in this column are those from billboard

DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES,

65

companies which rent their advertising space and 171 reported receipts aggregating $1,959,140 Jfrom
facilities to others. Receipts for permits to erect signs permits other than those of public service enterprises.
and other advertising devices which project over the Table XX, which follows, shows the character or pur
street adjacent to a place of business are, however, pose of these permits, the number of cities reporting
permits of each kind, and the aggregate receipts
tabulated as receipts from minor privileges.
Receipts from license taxes on dogs.—Of the 193 citiesreported.
covered by this report, 154 reported receipts from taxes
on dogs. Some of the cities not reporting receipts Table :
REVENUE RECEIPTS
FEOM PEB1UTS.
from dog taxes collected such taxes for the states,
KIND
Of
PERMIT.
receiving back a portion of the same as subventions,
Number of Amounts
^cities
receipts from which are included in Table 6. In other
reported.
reporting.
cities dogs are assessed as property, and receipts from
TotaL.
11,930,140
taxes on dogs are included as general property taxes.
excavation...
602,438
Receipts from general license taxes.—The term "genStreet
Building
579,524
286,914
eral license taxes'1 is used to designate the taxes Sewer connection...
224,835
Plumbing
87,094
exacted with the granting of all licenses under general Electrical
wiring.
47,424
20,598
statutes or ordinances, other than dog licenses and Excavation
Building and electrical
16,927
13,022
liquor or other business licenses. Such licenses are Health
Cesspool and vault
9,618
and plumbing...
9,955
granted without respect to the business that may be Building
Burial and disinterment...
s,on
.
5, W0
carried on by the licensee, and include those granted Elevator
Sewer and gas connection.
3,750
2,211
to persons owning vehicles, irrespective of whether Engineer
House moving
.•
2114
1,985
these are for business or pleasure. Among general Sidewalk laying
1,203
Pole
licenses which are granted by cities are those author Fence
780
205
Burial of dead animals.
izing business men to erect specified signs advertising Steam boiler
105
94
67
their own business without giving the right to occupy Fireworks
Parade
38,166
Not specified
any portion of the highway.
Table XIX, which follows, shows the kinds of general
Receipts from special assessments.—With the excep
licenses from which revenues were derived, the number
tion
of property taxes, special assessments constitute
of cities roportingeach kind, and the aggregate amount
the
largest
revenue for the majority of the cities.
reported.
Indeed for several cities receipts from special assess
ments very nearly equaled the receipts from the gen
REVENUE RECEIPTS FROM
Table X I X
GENERAL LICENSES.
eral property tax, and for Seattle, Wash,, and Wichita,
KIND 0 7 LICENSE.
Kans.,
they exceeded the latter in amount. Special
Number of
Amounts
cities
assessments
are segregated by the Bureau of the Census
reported.
reporting.
into two principal classes, special assessments for
11,190,888
expenses and special assessments for outlays.
Total..
1,112,469
Horse-drawn vehicle
Receipts from special assessments for expenses.—
Automobile
17,471
Automobile and motorcycle
Receipts
of this class were reported by 70 cities. They
13,154
Motorcycle
6,864
Bicycle
--are
shown
in the table under the same general head
6,338
Motor operator*
2,365
ing
as
special
assessments for outlays, and the seg4Auto, motorcycle, and bicycle.,
1,684
Carrying deadly weapons..
296
regation of the two classes of assessments is based
Stable!?.
174
Rolling chair
115
directly upon the general distinction between outlays
Keepingf swine
20
Hunter s
1,039
and expenses. In the tabulation it was impossible in
Not specified
many instances to separate the interest on deferred
payments
of these assessments from the interest on
Receipts from permit taxes.—Receipts from permit
special
assessments
for outlays, and where such was
taxes, or those exacted in connection with the grant
the
case
the
interest
receipts on these deferred pay
ing of permits, are usually credited by the cities them
ments
have
been
tabulated
under the title "Special
selves to the department issuing the permit. Such
assessments
for
outlays."
The
following table shows
receipts are included in Table 6, with the exception
the
different
classes
of
expenses
met from special
of receipts from permits issued by public service
enterprises, which are credited to these enterprises assessments; and for each class, the number of cities
and are tabulated in Table 10. Of the 193 cities, reporting and the aggregate amount reported.
6127°—13

5




FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

66
Table X X I

EXPENSE MET B Y SPECIAL ASSESSMENT*

Total..
Street sprinkling with water
Street lighting
Garbage removal
Waterworks maintenance
Street cleaning and sprinkling
Street sprinkling with oil ana water
Street repair
Street cleaning
Street reconstruction
*
Moth extermination
Sewer maintenance
Snow removal
Street oiling
Sidewalk repair
Boulevard maintenance
Fire protection
Grass and weed cutting
Grass and weed cutting and street sprinkling..
Dredging
Trees in streets
General street expense
.-,
Protection of property from collapse
Sewer repair
,
Grass and weed cutting and snow removal.,..
Sidewalk cleaning
Vault cleaning
Not specified
,

REVENUE BECEIPTS FROM
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS.

Number of
cities
for which
reported.

.Amount
reported.

$2,108,454
1,030,956
172,232
109,176
115,399
99,315
85,836
79,492
73,095
67,132
50,595
47,346
42,596
32,475
24,028
20,016
17,946
11,038
9,476
7,503
7,262
3,&*8
60S
591
262
11
7
213

similar corporations for meeting the cost of new
bridges and strengthening old ones, where the amounts
are exacted in accordance with the terms of the fran
chise under which the street railway company is
operating. All amounts collected in this way from
the corporations mentioned are reported in Table 9,
under the title "Major highway privileges."
Receipts from fines and forfeits.—Receipts from fines
and forfeits are classified in Table 6 as receipts from
court fines and forfeits, which consist of fines imposed
by courts of law and forfeits of bail, and as from com
mercial forfeits, which consist of forfeits of bonds and
deposits guaranteeing the fulfillment of contracts,
the good faith of bids, and the performance of certain
acts.
Receipts from escheats.—Escheats are amounts of
money received from the disposal of property the own
ers of which can not be ascertained. Receipts from
escheats were reported by 58 cities to the amount of
859,899.
TABLE 7.

Receipts from subventions and grants.—The total
Receipts from special assessments for outlays.— amount received from subventions and grants by other
Receipts from special assessments for outlays were re civil divisions was $32,844,465, of which 825,766,915,
ported by 171 of the 193 cities covered by this report. or 78.5 per cent, was for education. Of the 193 cities
The outlays for which the assessments were made varied covered by the report all but one received subventions
in the different cities. In the majority of the cities for education, the exception being Chelsea, Mass., in
special assessments were levied for the construction of which the dog tax, from which subventions for education
sewers, pavements, curbing, and sidewalks; in many cit are derived in other Massachusetts cities, was retained
ies they were levied for the grading or widening of steets, directly by the city instead of being paid over to the
the grading of hillsides, and the building of retaining county. Washington, D. C, reports a grant from the
walls, and for parks, bridges, and viaducts; and in general government of $5,689,401, which constituted
some cities they were levied for the laying of water 42.3 per cent of the total revenue receipts of that city
mains. Receipts from special assessments for outlays for the year 1911. This was received under a general
are shown under the two headings "Original levies," agreement between the United States Government and
and "Penalties, interest, and collector's fees."
the District of Columbia, by which the former assumes
Receipts from special charges for outlays.—In many one-half of the principal expenditures of that district
cities there are receipts like those from special assess which is identical with the city of Washington.
ments for outlays which are not collected under that
The cities of Pennsylvania received from the state
name nor by methods similar to those by which special subventions derived from a tax on fire insurance pre
assessments are collected. These receipts are compen miums collected from foreign companies doing busi
sation for laying a sidewalk, constructing a water main ness in the state, and assigned to the support of volun
or sewer, or paving the street in front of a property at teer fire companies.
the request of the owner, without any levy against the
Receipts from donations and gifts for meeting ex
property of others. All receipts in the form of special penses.—Ol the 193 cities covered by this rep6rt, 114
charges for such construction work similar in character reported receipts from donations and gifts for meeting
to that which is paid for by special assessments are expenses. The total of such receipts was $211,648.
tabulated separately, and in Table 6 are shown in the
Donations for meeting the expenses of hospitals,
column "Special charges for outlays." Another class schools, and libraries were reported by 6, 29, and 25
of receipts allied to those above described are amounts cities, respectively, the number of cities reporting dona
which cities secure from street car companies for pav tions for one or more of these purposes being 52. The
ing a certain portion of the street lying between or names of the cities reporting and the amounts received
adjacent to the rails, and other amounts exacted from by them are given in Table XXII, which follows.




DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
Table X X I I
City
num
ber.

REVENUE BECEIPTS TKOM DONA
TIONS FOE MEETING EXPENSES
OF—
CITY.

Hos
pitals.

Schools.

18,298
2 Chicago IU
3
5
8
9 Detroit, Mich

$43,964
'

5,216

10
13
14
15
17

2,133
32

36
131

9,684
398

100

31
32
34
35
43

699

44
48 Cambridge. Moss
51
52
54

124,620
1,648
7,150
4,649
3,378
100
60

100
208
2,516
1,101
605

19
22
26
28 St. Paul, Minn
30 Toledo, Ohio

Libra
ries.

ioo
1,121
35
998
50
20
14

750
121
2,000
190

Gifts were reported by 68 cities for the maintenance
of pension funds for policemen, sanitary policemen,
firemen, and teachers, the number of cities reporting
gifts for the four purposes being 33, 1, 48, and 8, re
Table X X I I I
City
num.
ber.

Police
men.
$12,090

New York. N . Y . . .
Chicago. Ill
Philadelphia, P a . . .
S t Louis, Mo
,
Boston, Mass
,

744

Cleveland, Ohio...,
Detroit, Mich
,
Buflalo,N.Y
San Francisco, Cal.,
Cincinnati, Ohio...

208
415

Los Angeles, Cal...
New Orleans, L a . .
Washington, D. C.
Jersey City, N . J . . .
Kansas City, Mo...
Indianapolis, I n d . .
Providence, it. I . . .
Louisville Ky
Denver, Colo
Portland, Oreg
Columbus. O h i o . . . .
Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, Cal
Richmond, Va
Faterson,N.J
Omaha, Nebr
Dayton, Ohio
Bridgeport, Conn...
Hartford, Conn
Albany, N . Y
Trenton, N . J
Des Moines, Iowa...
Yonkers^.Y
Youngstown, Ohio.

150
759
48




CITT.

Hos
pitals.

Youngstown, Ohio
Houston,
T e xT>x.
..
Fort Worth.
Utfca, N. Y .
Schenectady, N. Y

116
118
119
130
131

Little Rock, Ark.
Pueblo, Colo

137
141
145
146
147

TTfllamay/wv M f c h . . . . . . . .

156
157
162
172
179
181

Sanitary
police
men.
19

8959

8,578
3,230
1,867
15,575
536
75

10
724

84

1,550
4,475
10
5,329
345
400
270

20
163
20
2,199

415
305
2,600

235
1,106
85
3S0
80
270

110
260
150

234

......

x.

300
10,727
350
279

ChattjvnpopA, Tenn

McKeesport.'Pa

L

......

si,6i5

15
10

. . ...•••
2,292
42
26

25
103
8,882

Newton, Mass,
Montgomery, Ala.
Fitchburg, Mass
Dubuque, I o w a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1,300

Qufnojr Mass.....
I Roanoke, Va
Charlotte, N. C
Pasadena, Cal
Joplin. M o . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Niagara Falls, N. Y

5

2,656
20

3i3

3

15

50

193

spectively. The names of the cities reporting these
gifts and the amounts received by each from gifts for
the specified funds are given in Table XXIII, which
follows.
REVENUE BECEIPTS FROM GIFTS FOE
PENSION FUNDS FOB—

Firemen. Teachers.

856,617

$600

281

fiavannah.On.............
Jacksonville, F l a . .
Portland, Me
Charleston, S. C
Mobile, Ale

"Flint, W i c h . . , , , , , , ,

Libra
ries.

Schools.
SI,172
52
350
285

i.

89
90
94
96
107

REVENUE BECEIPTS FROM OUTS FOE
PENSION FUNDS FOR—

CITT.

Total.

BEVENtTE BECEIPTS FROM DONA
TIONS TOE MEETING EXPENSES
OF—

1 City
num
ber*

61
67
68
71
74
77

67

City
num
ber.

Sanitary
police
men.

Police-

Firemen. Teachers*

73
75
76
77
79

S t Joseph, Mo
Troy.N.^
Elkabetb,N.J
Schenectady, N. Y .
Akron, Ohio

82
86
87
92
95

Hoboken,N.J....
Peoria, in
Fort Wayne, I n d .
Terre Haute, Ind.
South Bend, Ind.,

96
98
99
108
111

Charleston, S. C...
Passaic, N . J
Bayonne,N. J . . . . ,
Canton, Ohio
Sioux City, Iowa..

113
119
129
136
138

Rockford, 111
Chattanooga, Tenn.
Topeka, Kans
Racine, Wis
Superior, Wis...*...

140
147
149
153
155

Macon, Ca
Dubuque, Iowa
Elmira,N.Y
Hamilton, Ohio...
East Orange, N. J .

160
169
177
178
181

Joliet,Hl
Oshkosh,Wis
Decatur, 111
Mount Vernon, N. Y .
Niagara Falls, fo.Y..

369
50

421

185
186
188
192

Aurora, HI
NewRochelle,N.Y..
La Crosse, Wis
,
Council Blufls, Iowa..

188
265
100

"$0

8209
625

$722
13
41
1,402
7

99
49
75

1221

150
2,977
250
23
50
1,492
699
77
100
2,468
10

168

100
811

10

35

133
94
2

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

68

Eighteen cities reported gifts for. meeting park ex
penses; the amounts received by each are given in the
following statement:
City
num
ber.

CITY.

Total
13
14 Newark, N . J
16
19
22 Indianapolis, Ind
25
31
32 Oakland Cfti,

City
Receipts. num
ber.
943,044
~~ 2,674 1
29 1
11,297
150
210
1,828
750
67

Receipts*

CITY.

33
46
56

65 Kansas City, Kans

83
86
88
123
136
171

Peoria. III..
New Britain, Conn....
Racine, Wis
Lansing, Mich...

$250
2,000
455
5,000
237
350
250
2,473
14,224
800

In addition to the receipts for meeting expenses
shown in the preceding tables and statement, 24 cities
reported donations and gifts for meeting miscellane
ous expenses, as shown in Table XXTV, which follows.
Table X X I V
City
num
ber.

SEVENTHS RECEIPTS FBOlf GIFTS A N D DONATIONS
FOB MEETING SPECIFIED EXPENSES.

CITY.

Amoun*
received.

Object of expense.
Total.
New York. N. V . . . .
Chicago. Ill
Philadelphia, Pa....
Detroit, Mich
San Francisco, Cal..
Newark, N . J
Washington, B . C . .

Louisville, Ky
Columbus, Ohio...
Oakland, Cal
Dallas, Tex
Springfield, M o . . . .
Des Moines, Iowa..
Wilmington, Del..
Elizabeth, N . J
Holyoke, Mass
South Bend, I n d . . .
Brockton, Mass
Springfield. Ohio...
Racine, Wis
,
Oshkosh,Wis
,
172 Pasadena, Cal
188 La Crosse, Wis
193 Lynchburg, Va....,

32
56
59
63
64
76
93
95
97
115

Table X X V
City
num-|
her.

R E V E N U E RECEIPTS FROM DONA
TIONS AND GIFTS FOB 1IEETXNQ—
CITY.

School
outlays.

60,910
200

2,1S5

$218,364

15,30$
20,000
14,253
21,150

1,012
755

205,000
12,500
1,500

*io*666
105

3,107
195
125,000
300
100

600

350

2,841

*5,"258

12S
5,500

$261,039

10S,925

7

254

Park
outlays.

1,500
300

500

10,061
6,000
500
20,000

909
25,537

821,447

Department of correction.
Not reported
Charity
Transportation of crippled children...
. Water system deficit
/Charity
™
\lnsurance. fire department
Coffee and sandwiches for policemen
and firemen.
Board of children's guardians
Charity
Firelosess
City building
Not reported.
Street cleaning
,
Fuel for poor
Extermination of mosquitoes...

Charity

7T:.

Market maintenance
Charity for children
Street cleaning
Street signs
Repairing dam.
Not specified
Charity
Charity

,

M68
190
410
71
2,746
114
35
1,234
93
759
750
81
10
687
4
705
1,812
900
324
136
102
1,135
200
528
253

Receipts from donations and gifts for establishing
trust funds.—Donations and gifts to establish or add
to the principal of existing public trust funds for
municipal uses were reported by 34 cities. The object
of these trust funds and amounts received are shown
in Table XXVI, which follows:
Table X X V I
City
num
ber.

Receipts from donations and gifts for meeting out
lays.—Donations and gifts for outlays were reported
by 42 cities in amounts aggregating $732,915. Dona
tions for school outlays were reported by 12 cities;
for library outlays, by 13 cities; for park outlays, by
12 cities. The cities reporting the$e donations and
gifts for outlays are given in Table XXV, together
with the amounts received by each. In addition to
the donations and gifts for outlays there given, 4
cities reported the receipt of donations for hospitals
and hospital equipment, as follows: Omaha, Nebr.,
$500; Dallas, Tex., $2,000; Flint, Mich., $32,365; and
Jackson, Mich., $4,465. Other donations and gifts
for outlays were reported as follows: For highways
and sewers, Los Angeles, Cal., $4,276; Minneapolis,
Minn., $2,235; Duluth, Minn., $1,469; Austin, Tex.,
$15; gifts and donations for auditoriums, St. Paul,
Minn., $26; Saginaw, Mich., $1,000; gifts for suburban
improvements, Cedar Rapids, Iowa, $500; for park
shelter, Detroit, Mich., $1,250.

REVENUE RECEIPTS FOR ESTABLISHING
OB
ADDING TO PUBLIC TRUST FUNDS FOR M U N I 
CIPAL U S E S .

Object of fund.
Total.,
Chicago, HI.




$203,344

Total..
4 S t Louis. Mo.
6 Cleveland, Onto
12 Milwaukee, Wis
13 Cincinnati, Ohio
16 New Orleans, La
' 17 Washington, D . C . . . .
18 Minneapolis, Minn...
22 Indianapolis, Ind...-.
~
24 Louisville, Ky
27 Portland, Oreg
28 St. Paul, Minn
36 New Haven, Conn...
39 Richmond, v a
41 Omaha, Nebr
47 Lowell, Mass
51 San Antonio, T e x . . . .
59 Springfield, Mo
62 Tacoma, Wash
63 Des Moines, Iowa —
66 Yonkers,tf.Y
78 Waterbury. C o n n . . . .
95 South Bend, Ind
119 Chattanooga, T e n n . . .
125 Salem, Mass.
129 Topeka,Kans
138 Superior, Wis
155 East Orange, N. J . . . .
164 Everett, Mass
165 Portsmouth, Va
178 Mount Vernon, N. Y .
184 Chelsea, Mass
.,
187 Austin, Tax
188 1 La Crosse, Wis

Library
outlays.

Philadelphia, Pa...,
Boston, Mass
Cincinnati, Ohio....
New Orleans, L a . . .
Minneapolis. Minn..
Rochester, N . Y . . . .
Denver, Colo
Atlanta, Ga.
Syracuse,N.Y
Grand Rapids, Mich.
Lowell. Mass
Cambridge, Mass
Dallas, Tex
Camden, N . J
Lynn, Mass
,
Yonkers,N.Y
,
Norfolk, Va.
72 Somerville, Mass....
74 U t i c a , N . Y .
78 Waterbury, Conn...
81
94
97
122
123
124
125

Manchester, N . B . . .
Portland, Me
Brockton, Mass
Maiden, Mass.
New Britain, Conn.
Haverhill, Mass
Salem, Mass

123 Davenport, I o w a . . .
149 Elmlra,N.Y
161 Auburn, N . Y
167 Quincy.Mass
169 Oshkosh,Wis

Amount
received.
$2,105,990

Schools

2,300

Library
100
Hospital
1,755
Park improvement
1,629,379
University
49.039
School buildings
4,310
Firemen's relief
85
Firemen's pensions
1,144
Police pensions
397
School for widows' children
60,000
Charitable institutions
35,000
3,593
Police pensions
1,500
Botanical apparatus for High School.
64
Library
3,840
do
5,000
School scholarship
G65
Firemen's pensions
.
Hteh School medal
1,009
Library
2,000
Trade school
40,000
Police pensions
742
Firemen's relief
1,478
Library
15,000
Firemen's relief
88
15
Firemen's reservo
10,000
Library.
5,150
do.
7,149
Cemetery
75,000
Children's charity.
1,000
Library
500
Firemen's pensions
18
Hifjh school scholarship
9,520
Library and charity
947
Charity
142
Firemen's pensions
3,000
School art
110
Firemen's relief
6
Police pensions
50
Children's library
134,871
Manual training school

DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.

69

Receipts from pension assessments.—Of the 193 cities held by the general fund and not turned over to the
covered by this report, 90 received pension assessments special public trust fund. The assessments reported
for public trust funds aggregating $1,490,257. Of for city employees other than policemen,firemen,and
these, 68 reported pension assessments for policemen, teachers, were as follows: Sanitary police, or employees
64 forfiremen,35 for teachers, and 4 for other city em of the health department, New York, N. Y., $14,274,
ployees. The names of the cities reporting and the Cleveland, Ohio, $180; library employees, Chicago, HI.,
amounts received by each for policemen,firemen,and $1,435; employees of board of education, other than
teachers' funds are shown in Table XXVII, which fol teachers, Chicago, 111., $8,608; janitors and engineers,
lows. The amounts reported in the table for Augusta, New Haven, Conn., $238.
Ga., were received from the assessment specified, but
Table XXVII
City
num-l
ber.

CITY.

REVENUE RECEIPTS FBOM PENSION
ASSESSMENTS FOB PUBLIC TKUST
FUNDS FOB—

Policemen.

Firemen.

Teachers.

Total.

$511,503

1238,779

8715,240

New York. N. V..
Chicago, 111
Philadelphia, Pa..
St. Louis, Mo.....
Boston, Mass

236,059
70,830

71,219
26,916

194,794
107,925
81,347

Cleveland, Ohio....
Baltimore, Md
Detroit, Mich
Buffalo, N . Y
San Francisco, Cal.

14,176
3,817

3,062

6,554
11,955
20,303

Milwaukee, Wis...
Cincinnati, Ohio..
Newark, N.J
Los Angeles, Cal..
New Orleans, La..

15,959

Washington, D. C .
Minneapolis, Minn.
Jersey City, N . J . . .
Seattle, Wash
Kansas City, Mo...

8,744
670
5,277
5,390

Indianapolis, Ind..
Providence, It. I . . .
Louisville, Ky
Rochester, N . Y . . .
Denver, Colo

4,504
11,670
4,0S4
0,323
2,375

3,159
5,577
2,798
6,188
2,452

Portland, Oreg
St. Paul, Minn
Columbus. Ohio....
Toledo, Ohio
Oakland, Cal

1,550
494

2,191

11,079
10,102
3,978

14,546
3,329
5,127
7,677
11,938
5,289
3,104
3,137
5,544
4,664

1,210
3,218

Syracuse, N . Y
New Haven. Conn.
Richmond, va
Paterson, N. J.
Omaha, Nebr..

3,335
4,840
7,854
1,560

1,052

Dayton, Ohio
Spokane, Wash...
Bridgeport, Conn.
Hartford, Conn...
Albany, N . Y

973
1,626
1,948

942
2,428
1543
737
2,616

Trenton, N . J
Salt Lake City, Utah.
Tacoma, Wash
Des Moines, Iowa

3,000

1,910

"ii3

1,725
1,143




1,497

REVENUE RECEIPTS TROlf PENSION
ASSESSMENTS FOR PUBLIC TRUST
FUNDS FOB—

City
num
ber.

Policemen. Firemen.

"52,"649
19,640
16,837
13,812
20,0S5
12,819

67,185

9,482
5,875
12,460
4,379
8,788
9,664
7,577
6,010

Wilmington, Del....
Yonkers,N.Y
Youngstown, Ohio..
Norfolk, Va..
Duluth, Minn.
St. Joseph, Mo

81,872
3,516
178
1,639

$2,345

83,425

Utlca,N.Y
Troy, N . Y
Schenectady, N . Y . .
Akron, Ohio
Evansville, Ind

1,078
3,624
936
234
814

1,975
804
1,117
264

2,307

703
576
713
488

728
726
789
610

Wilkes-Barre, Pa.
Peoria, 111
Fort Wayne, Ind.,
Terre Haute, Ind.
South Bend, Ind..

24,689

99
104
105

Teachers,

Charleston, S. C...
Passaic, N.J
Bayonne, N. J
Pawtucket, R. I . .
Springfield, 111....

1,751

61
322
2,320
72

70S

HI Sioux City, Iowa..
113 Rockford, 111
115 Springfield, Ohio..
128 Davenport, Iowa..
133 San Diego, Cal....

183
267

136
133
139
143
147

Racine, Wis
Superior, Wis
Augusta, Ga
Woonsocket, R. I .
Dubuque, Iowa...

265
496
1,973
1,509
299

149
151
155
161

Elmira.N.Y
WesfHoboken.N.J..
East Orange, N. J
Auburn, N . Y
Cedar Rapids, Iowa...

521
544
544

169
177
178
181
185

Oshkosh, Wis
Decatur, 111
Mount vemon, N. Y..
Niagara Falls, N . Y . . .
Aurora, 111

1,401

219
325
773

""205

304

186
188
190
192
193

NewRochellc,N.Y..
La Crosse. Wis
Orange.N. J
Council Bluffs, Iowa.
Lynchburg, Va

644
211
434
217

405
684
341
224

633
567
40
764

1,602

73
546

897
419
378
316

4,215
7,352

2,693
*5,"530

182

4,153
1,696
1,329

373

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

70

sources are given in Table XxVJULI. The reve
nues from the sources mentioned are what econo
mists call "contractual" as distinguished from
" compulsory" revenues tabulated as taxes, special
assessments, and fines. They all involve the ex
change of equivalents by which the cities receive
cash in return for a benefit granted in the form of serv
ices, rents, or objects sold. The statement of the last
sentence needs modification only to the extent that
the price obtained for the services, rents, or objects
sold may be either what the economists call a "pri
vate" or "competitive," or a "quasi private," "mo
nopoly," or "public" price; the former being a price
fixed in an open or competitive market, and the latter
being arbitrarily fixed above or below the competitive
level by the government acting under circumstances
that give it a monopoly of that which is furnished.
The price at which the rents and sales of the table are
fixed is nearly always .competitive, while that at which
fees and charges for services are established is gen
erally a "public" or a "monopoly" price, which in
some cases is in excess of the actual cost of the services
rendered. The amounts tabulated in Table 8 as fees
and charges are thus always those which are received
as a private or a monopoly compensation for actual
services rendered, and are to be distinguished from
those obtained for the so-called "license fees" and
"permit fees" which are included in Table 6 as from
taxes, by the fact that the latter are compensation
not for a service rendered or work performed, but for
the privilege of doing something.
Receipts from fees and charges.—The amounts re
ceived by the several cities as general departmental
fees and charges, and as such included in Table 8, are
shown separately by cities in Table XXVIII, which
follows.

TABLE 8.

Classification of general departmental receipts.—
American municipalities realize considerable amounts
of revenue from fees, charges, minor sales, and allied
sources. In addition to being classified according to
the revenue or source from which derived, these re
ceipts are classified in this report according to the di
visions and departments or accounts of the service for
which received. Thus classified they are arranged
into two principal divisions: (1) Those received by the
general departments, by which is meant the depart
ments, offices, and accounts of the government ex
clusive of the public service enterprises, and (2) those
received by the public service enterprises. The re
ceipts first mentioned are included in Table 8, and
those referred to in (2) are tabulated in Table 10.
The receipts of Table 8 are arranged in 10 principal
divisions which correspond to the classification em
ployed in tabulating the expenses and outlays for the
departments, as given in Tables 11 and 18. The 10
divisions mentioned are as follows: I, General govern
ment; II, Protection to person and property; III,
Conservation of health; IV, Sanitation, or promotion of
cleanliness; V, Highways; VI, Charities, hospitals, and
corrections; VII, Education; VHI, Recreation; IX,
Miscellaneous; X, General. The arrangement of Table
11 and the text accompanying the same fully set forth
the offices, departments, and accounts under each di
vision of the classification employed in Table 8 for re
ceipts, the arrangement of which differs from that of
Table 11 only in being somewhat condensed.
Character of receipts tabulated as from earnings.—
The greater portion of the revenue receipts included
in Table 8 is from fees, charges, rents, and minor
sales. The amounts obtained from each of these
Table XXVIII
City
num
ber.

RECEIPTS PROU—

crrr.

Bents of
depart
mental
proper
ties.

RECEIPTS PROM—

Other
sources.

Service
trans
fers.

$14,349,391 $609,564 $1,401,239 $910,384

$713,268

Fees and
charges.

6,323,674
3,474,374
2,349,995
1,103,552
1,092,796

Group III
Group IV
Group V

222,015
112,786
137,402
59,763
77,598

Minor

537,615
288,935
303,910
158,345
112,434

464,293
336,875
44,848
42,747
21,621

City
num
ber.

$995,034
1,657,758
1,5S8,726
477,426

5
6
7
8

630,376
435,836
193,279
350,239

$68,722 $110,390 $118,337
28,780
46,156 178,038
16,289
53,608
160
14,567
3,547
16,255
10,602
4,563
76,644

48,790
235,347
12,885
15,872

67,460
16,709
2,601
77,601

9 Detroit, Mich
10 Buffalo, N . Y
11 San Francisco, Gal
12
13 1 wacuuiau, vww




i

$442,481 $17,404 $102,728 $178,512
684,498
2,570
5,9S0
45,751
19,170
462,180
2,542
18,232
6,710
182,015
6,767
71,166
9,702|
«MI,O«* I
0,144 | ntiax}

14
15
16
17 Washington, D. C
18 Minneapolis, Minn....

34,892 1
3,000
47
i
i

2,630

Minor
sales.

Other
sources.

Service
trans
fers.

$284,119
303,969
228,291
335,795
174,184

$4,767
5,631
6,2S9
2S6
43,816

$23,487
7,579
13,723
4,749
54,664

$719
1
43,803
24,449

$1,700
35,695
60,991
16,434

GROUP m.—CITIES HAYINO A POPULATION OP 100,000 TO 300,000 IN 1911.

$93,088
92,147
273
36,923

$2,410

Rents of
depart
mental
proper
ties.

•

260,375
119,860'
184,763
64,580
83,688!

GEOUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OP 300,000 TO 500,000 IN 1911.

Fees and
charges.

GROUP n.-crrr£s HAYINO A POPULATION OP 300,000 TO 500,000 IN 1911-contd.

GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OP 600,000 OB OYER IN 1911.
1 NewYork,N.Y
2 Chicago, 111
.....
3 Philadelphia, P a . . .
4

crrr.

19
20
21
22
23

$48,041
121,030
63,954
42,417
105,608

24
25 Rochester, N . Y .
26
27
28 St. Paul, Minn

39,559
39,317
161,847
42,939
47,180

29
30
31
32
33

163,881
34,460
103,8SG
29,687
176,480

Columbus, Ohio
Toledo, Ohio
Atlanta. Ga
Oakland, Cat
Worcester, Mass

$1,560
4,884
1,266
2,140

$1,559
11,895
9,688
3,555
38,911

23,647
4,278
7,153
6,253
8,406
2,707
1,378
$,774
20,035
23,671
1,242
60,833
1,665
5,144
5,510 ' 3,769
264
723
2,181
32,724

$168
4,779
174
118
10,250
40
640
131
14,849
2,403
6,204
678

$20,076
7,122
1,436
594

2,901

3,507
76,597
6,225
679 11 8,456

DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
Table XXVIIIContlnued.
City
num
ber.

RECEIPTS FROM—

Fees and
charges.

R e n t s of
depart
mental
proper
ties.

Minor
sales.

RECEIPTS FROM-

Service
trans*
fers.

Other
sources.

City
num
ber.

GROUP in.—CITIES HAVING i. POPULATION OP 100,000 TO 300,000 I N 1911—contd.
191,378
33,090
47,962
49,115
6,301

Richmond, V a . . .
Paterson.N.J....
Omaha, N e b r . . . .
Fall R i v e r . Mass.
Dayton, Ohio

2-WII

37

Birmingham, A l a . . . .
Syracuse, N . Y
N e w H a v e n , Conn..,
Memphis, T e r m . . . .
Scranton,Pa

Grand R a p i d s . Mich.
Spokane, W a s h . .
Nashville. T o n n . .
Lowell. Mass
Cambridge, M a s s .
Bridgeport, C o n n . . . .
N e w Bedford, Mass..
San Antonio, T e x . . .
Hartford. Conn
Albany, N . Y

140,447

$8,219
1,500
1,972
10,126
200

$577
3,070
10,574
739
322

212
25
625
480
824

2,541
449
6,464
1,831
2,601

79,653
113,005
27,834
37,141
309,517

1,601
355
1,949
3,662
3,968

4,718
18,711
53
6,778
22,246

34
581

27,232
52,553
31,389
37,648
6,376

7,404
186
216
3,551
400

934
3,863
730
9,493
2,368

158
194
615
592
11

160
147

4
53
281
1,000
67
4,935
8,500
2,500

1,400

GROUP IV.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 50,000 TO 100,000 IN 1911.

$23,964
6,828
17,738
18,752
11,433

$674
2,006
3,435

Springfield, Mass...
Lynn, Mass
Lawrence, Mass....
Tacoma, Wash....,
Des Moines, Iowa..,

73,976
61,750
30,743
8,999
9,799

1,240
4,000
1,285
1,940
1,663

13,505
15,802
5,906
2,673
3,287

Wilmington, Dol.
Kansas City, Kans.
Yonkcrs, N. Y .
Youngstown, Ohio.
Houston, Tox

15,589
11,964
7,943
37,619
45,034

1,478
345
72
629
500

1,533
634
730
812
4,505

2,469
1,046
934

2,853
3,006
1 103
15,108
1,634

Trenton, N. J.
Reading, Pa..
Dallas, Tex.
Salt Lake City, Utah.
Camdon,N.j.

Norfolk, Va
Duluth,Minn....
Fort Worth. Tex.
Somerville, Mass..
St. Joseph, Mo....

11,325
17,612
27,384
143,212
9,436

Utica,N.Y
Troy. N . Y
Elizabeth, N. J
Schenectady, N. Y .
Waterbury, Conn...

13,232
9,100
22,191
9,201
11,839

Akron, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Manchester, N. H . . .
Hoboken,N.J
Evansville, Ind

5,630
48,428
8,324
7,450
5,388

180
19
360
14
14,909
252
148

Wilkes-Barre, Pa.,
Erie, Pa
Pooria.111
87 Fort Wayne, Ind.,
Harrisburg, Pa...,

2,131
13,292
16,986
8,135
1,546

Savannah, Qa
Jacksonville, Fla..
East St. Louis, 111.
Tcrre Haute, Ind..
Holyoke,Mass

11,494
23,736
6,220
7,712
19,191

Portland, Me
South Bend, Ind.
Charleston, B . C . .
Brockton, Mass...
Passaic, N.J

32,919
2,093
13,855
97,880
10,974

2,318

99
100
101
102
103

Bayonne, N. J....
Johnstown, P a . . .
Wichita, Kans....
Covington, K y . . .
Allentown, Pa....

5,505
10,003
10,850
2,465
2,006

56
72
1,693
2,456

104
105
100
107
108
109

Pawtucket, R. I..
Springfield, III...,
Altoona, Pa
Mobile, Ala
Canton, Ohio
,
Saginaw, Mich....

21,158
4,100
7,361
18,196
3,192
18,659

813
2,2S2
747
25
125
154




594
1,432
5

1,094
1,810

1,899
1,467
295

$3,339

$325

3,547
978
1,353

532

4,043
'499
664
362
402
502
977
565
576
6,763
1,295
223
2,475
1,485
253
4,971
130
543
553
1,854
10,148
293
904
18,073
166
28
1,747
2,351
476
1,166
4,459
817
643
592
1,016
3,968

71

$3,821
1,675

"246
5,647
12

133
12,650
204

$9,874
3,700
28,364
9,109
1,210

$510
825
300
599
1,183

$1,336
641
1,066
1,847
334

$264
49

115
116
117
118
119

Springfield, Ohio...,
Little Rock, Ark...
Sacramento, Cal....
Pueblo, Colo
Chattanooga, Tenn.

22,531
15,034
13,257
3,989
25,209

2,050
840
505
1,866
7,648

1,026
60
25,645
2,693
62

475

120
121
122
123
124

Bay City, Mich
York, Pa
Maiden, Mass
New Britain, Conn.
Haverhill, Mass

2,149
2,457
42,113
14,151
36,952

20
221
170
13,513
1,773

1,072
134
2,637
1,008
1,268

"2,#956'

125
126
127
128
129

Salem, Mass
Lincoln, Nebr....
Berkeley, Cal
Davenport, Iowa.
Topeka, Kans....

31,911
10,166
11,340
16,903
16,126

1,688

941
2,628
706
2,167
731

2,722
134
12
157

130
131
132
133
134

McKeesport, P a . .
Flint, Mich.
Tampa, Fla
San Diego, C a l —
El Paso, Tex

10,537
27,110
27,675
24,698
20,879

270
1,226

135
136
137
138
139

Wheeling, W. Va
Racine, Wis
Kalamazoo, Mich
Superior, Wis
Augusta, Oa
Macon, Ga
Newton, Mass
Butte, Mont
,
Woonsocket, R. I...
Chester, Pa
Montgomery, Ala.,
Fitchburg,Mass...
Dubuque, Iowa....
Galveston, Tex....
Elmira,N.Y
New Castle, Pa
West Hoboken, N. J.J
Knoxville, Tenn
Hamilton, Ohio
Springfield, O h i o —
East Orange, N . J . . .
Quincy, HI
Roanoke, Va
Lexington, K y . . . . . .
Huntington, W. Va.
Joliet,Bl
Auburn, N . Y
Charlotte, N. C
Taunton, Mass
Everett, Mass
Portsmouth, V a . . .
Pittsfield,Mass....
Quincy, Mass
Cedar Rapids, Iowa..
Oshkosh,Wb
Perth Amboy, N. J..
Lansing, Mich
Pasadena, Cal
Amsterdam, N. Y . . .
Jackson, Mich
Jamestown, N. Y . . . .
San Jose, Cal..%
Decatur, HI
Mount Vernon, N. Y .
Joplin,Mo
Williamsport, P a . . . .
Niagara Falls, N. Y . .
Muskogee. Okla
Lima, Ohio
Chelsea, Mass..
Aurora, Bl
NewRochelle,N.Y.
Austin, Tex
La Crosse, Wis
Newport, Ky
Orange, N. J.
Lorain, Ohio
,
Council Bluffs, Iowa.,
Lynchburg, Va

10,237
8,913
10,108
10,988
40,041
26,167
42,650
8,238
12,207
4,528
16,440
65,222
1,321
59,385
2,198
5,437
1,962
19,316
2,358
7,175
13,769
8,271
9,181
1,460
4,131
2,618
2,945
9,345
30,191
15,203
3,426
13,099
14,132
8,146
4,657
3,651
3,456
13,482
3,383
16,889
6,041
6,822
4,999
14,938
7,697
6,589
6,395
6,010
373
15,276
6,685
9,683
8,807
2,560
1,934

140
141
142
143
144

150
151
152
153
154

6,500

61

160
161
162
163
164

29,588

165
166
167
168
169

4
6,375

15
2,000

31
112
163

10,500
2,638

1,783
12
14
301,
1,759
10,713
37
3SS

Other
sources.

Binghamton, N. Y .
Sioux City. Iowa...
Atlantic City, N. J.,
Rockford, Dl
Lancaster, Pa

155
156
157
158
159

275

Minor
sales.

110!
Ill
112
113
114

1,172

60
2,821

R e n t s of
depart
mental
proper
ties*

Service
trans
fers.

GROUP v.—CITIES HAYING A POPULATION o r 30,000 TO 50,000 I N 1911.

145
146
147
148
149

763
2,070
107
519

259
105
510

Fees and
charges.

170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193

9,018
2,210
2,507
10,482

1,483
1,327
1,742

428
1,164
113
502
900
57
1,122
1,300
901
7,165
323
5,357
1,444
302
1,365
2,700
""189

84
470
155
701

25
157
33

3,087

575

566
598
400

150
"2,"526

310
185
25
1,160

177

11
717
578
460
578
129
3,091
1,207
1,040
1,074
788
1,331
1,567
1,705
10
135
3,271
388
1,875
646

25
541
237

25
656
4

615
24
691
526
1,631

2,018
7

159
992
528
34
10

6,058

1,266
1,177
908
8,907
60S
446
1,394
1,943
2,878
416

894
293

367
874
484
290
263
1,388
800
37
929
283
384
373
160
320
581
175
6,200
45
212
645
832
1,121
2,342
194

10
15
67
11
200
1,806
617
708
133
40
51
90

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

72

In the column of the table headed "Fees and
charges" are included all amounts received by the
several cities as compensation for the services rendered
the payers by the general departments of the city,
whether the services were clerical in character and the
compensation is called a "fee," or were other than
clerical and the compensation is here spoken of as a
"charge." The amounts here tabulated which are
locally called "fees" are generally established by law
in advance; while those called "charges" are gen
erally established upon completion of the work or
service. Among the special services the compensation
for which is here tabulated as charges are those for
TPftkiTig connections with sewer pipes and repairing
pavements which have been damaged by those mak
ing connections with sewers.
In this table are included for certain cities of Groups
I and II receipts from departmental fees, charges,
rents, sales, and other sources, of the counties con
taining these cities, the amounts of which are shown
in Table 3 oil the county line for those cities, in the
column "From earnings of general departments."
Of the total amount tabulated in the column of
Table XXVIII headed "Fees and charges," and in
the column of Table 8 headed "All other" in Division
II, Protection to person and property, $1,570,567, or
58.3 per cent, was for fees of public administrators,
registers of deeds, and recorders. With the exception
of Providence, It. L, and Bridgeport and New Britain,
Conn., these receipts are all those of cities in which
either the city and county functions are merged in the
municipal corporation, or a portion of the county
receipts is added to those of the city in order to ob
tain comparable statistics. Revenues from the same
sources were received by Hartford and Waterbury,
Conn., but their amount was not separately reported.
The receipts from the several cities from the fees men
tioned are given in the statement which follows:
City
num
ber.

CITT.

Total
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11

Chicago, m
Philadelphia,Pa
St. Louis, Mo
Detroit. Mich
Buflalo,N.Y

1 CityAmount. num
ber.
•.. $1,570,5671 • 12
13
321,152 I 14
15
272,198
16
236,627
17
67,152
18
43,325
23
43,716
26
45,918
49
26,114
123
26,395
101,958

CITY.

Newark, N.J
New Orleans, La
Minneapolis, Minn....
Denver, Colo
New Britain, Conn....

Amount.

$18,199
23,873
49,761
105,944
61,6 tO
43,438
32,505
11,124
31,678
5,528
2,322

ceipts from the sale of discarded equipment and
materials where the payments for replacement and
renewal of such equipment and the payments for the
services which produced the materials sold are classed
as expenses. Similar sales on outlay account are
tabulated in Table 22.
Receipts from other sources.—Table XXVIII in
cludes revenue receipts amounting to $910,384, which
are tabulated in the column headed "Other sources."
These receipts are derived principally from contractual
revenues, the same as those from fees, charges, rents,
and sales, and also include receipts which like those
obtained from rents and sales are revenues whose
amounts are established in a competitive market by
the operation of enterprises in connection with insti
tutions and parks.
Ten cities reported an aggregate of S500,263 as
receipts from the operation of institutional industries
in connection with their charitable and correctional
institutions, as follows:
New York, N. Y
Boston, Mass
Pittsburgh, Pa
Detroit, Mich
Buffalo, N . Y

$115,673
35,091
76,909
177,323
2,703

Milwaukee, Wis
$52,617
Minneapolis, Minn..... 11,903
Kansas City, Mo
470
St. Paul, Minn
14,346
Peoria, 111
13,228

Of the amounts included in Tables 8 and XXVIII,
as stated above, $160,701 represents the receipts from
the operation of productive enterprises of various
kinds connected with parks, as follows:
Chicago, 111
Springfield, 111
Rockford, 111

$160,439
253
9

Boston reported a net profit of S31,924 from the
operation of a municipal printing plant conducted for
printing public documents for the city, and 10 cities
reported receipts from various remunerative contracts:
7 from the disposal of the right to collect dead animals
and household refuse, 2 from the sale of fish and
oyster privileges, and 1 from the privilege extended to
citizens of adjoining municipalities to uso the sewers
of the city. The 7 cities above mentioned and the
amounts received by each arc as follows:
Kansas City, Mo.
Providence, R. 1
Youngstown, Ohio
St. Joseph, Mo

. $370 Maiden, Mass
100 Salem, Mass
9 Omaha, Nebr
170

$2,950
2,722
41

The cities receiving revenue from fishing privileges
and the amounts received were New Bedford, Mass.,
Receipts from rents and sales.—In Table XXVIII, $194, and Taunton, Mass., 845. The city receiving
in the column headed u Rents of departmental revenue from sewers was Buffalo, N. Y., which received
properties," are tabulated only amounts received 8546 from this source.
for the use of real property employed princi
The other amounts, aggregating 8210,349, that are
pally for departmental purposes. Similar rents of included in Table XXVIII as from "Other sources"
property used primarily for a productive enterprise are summarized in Table XXIX, which follows—a
are included in Table 10, and those for property held table which shows the amounts received from a num
for investment purposes are tabulated in Table 9. In ber of specified sources and the number of cities
the column headed "Minor sales/' are tabulated re reporting such receipts.




DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
Table X X I X
SOURCE Of RECEIPT.

Number of
cities
reporting.

Aggregate
amounts
reported.

73

TABLE 9.

Receipts from Tnajor highway privileges.—Under this
designation
are included in Table 9 all amounts
Total..
1210,349
received
from
corporations and individuals as com
Fire insurance adjustments
On account of defalcations and bank failures..
pensation
for
the
special privileges, powers, or rights
Conscience money
2,204
Judgments in favor of city
472
granted
them
in
the
streets and alleys of cities for
211
Correction of errors
56,500
Damages to and loss of city property
providing
the
citizens
with what are popularly called
1,086
Refunds
1,225
Fines...
public
utilities.
The
amounts thus tabulated have
1,068
Miscellaneous
been received as compensation for what some writers
Amounts received asfireinsurance adjustments that have called the "operating franchise" as distinguished
are expended for outlays during the same year, and from the "corporatefranchise"of the paying corpora^
"amounts received on account of losses by bank failures tion or individual.
Among the receipts from major privileges in Table 9
and defalcations during the year of loss, are not
are
those from steam and street railroads for the privi
included in the table, both being included in Table 22,
lege
of transporting freight or passengers through or
the first as receipts on outlay account and the second
across
the streets and alleys, and those from electric
as refund receipts. Likewise amounts received by
light
and
power companies, water, telegraph, and
cities on account of damages and losses to city prop
telephone
companies,
heat distribution and refrigera
erty, if for damages and losses charged as expenses, are
tion
companies,
for
the
privilege of placing wires,
included in Tables XXVIII and 8; but if for damages
pipes,
poles,
and
other
fixtures
and equipment in,
and losses met by outlays are tabulated in Table 22.
under,
over,
or
across
the
streets,
incident to the
All amounts reported on lines 1 to 6, inclusive, of
conduct
of
their
business
of
furnishing
public utilities.
Table XXIX are the debit balances of what commer
Similar
receipts
from
private
individuals
or corpora
cial accountants call accounts with losses, and are
tions
for
the
privilege
of
placing
wires,
pipes,
poles,
included in Divisions V, VI, and VIII of Table 8. All
and
other
fixtures
and
equipment
in,
under,
over,
or
other amounts included in Table XXIX are included
across
the
streets
incident
to
the
conduct
of
a
business
in Table 8 in Division X under the heading "General,"
with the exception of receipts from fines for delays in other than that of furnishing public utilities, are
returning library books and similar demerits, which classed as receipts from minor highway privileges.
It should be noted that only one class of receipts
are included in Division VII.
from public utility enterprises is included in Table 9
Service transfer receipts of general departments.—The
as receipts from major privileges, namely, such
last column of Table XXVIII is an exhibit of certain
receipts as are in return for privileges essential to the
amounts included in thefirstfour columns of that table,
distribution of public utilities. Receipts from such
principally in the column headed "Fees and charges."
enterprises or from others for privileges in streets for
The column shows the extent to which the several
purposes other than providing the public with some
cities have accounts of services performed by their
utility are tabulated as receipts for minor highway
general departments, one for the other, or for their
privileges; receipts for the temporary use of land or
public enterprises. The number of cities reporting
water fronts not involving the use of a street or alley
service transfer receipts by each of the various offices
are tabulated as receiptsfromrents; and receipts from
and institutions is given in Table XXX, together with
the vacation of streets and alleys are included as from
the amount of such service transfers.
sales of real property in Table 22. Receipts from the
same corporations and individuals which are in the
SERVICE TRANSFER
Tablo X X X
nature of taxes as defined in this report are shown in
RECEIPTS BY GENERAL
DEPARTMENTS.
Table 6 as receipts from the general property tax,
DEPARTMENT OR GOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITY FOR WHICH
special
property taxes, or business taxes, according
RECEIVED.
Number of
cities for
Amounts
to
the
subject
of taxation, and to the method by
reported.
which
reported*
which the taxes were levied and collected.
Receipts from minor highway privileges.—Under this
9713,266
TotaL.
heading
are included amounts received by cities for
Offices of General Government
19,893
2S7
Fire department
grants of what the Bureau of the Census designates
20
Inspection for protection to person and property..
2,140
as minor highway privileges. The greater number of
Health conservation
2,663
Sewers and sewage disposal
these grants are made to those occupying lands ad
3,661
Refuse collection
54,962
Highway repairs for compensation
joining the street or alley to make some one of the
2S,391
Other highway accounts
561,897
Correctional institutions
following uses of the streets or alleys in front of their
7,304
Charitable institutions
90
Schools and libraries
»
places of business: (1) To construct vaults or other
23
Parks and general recreation
31,925
Printing plant.
structures under the sidewalk, street, or alley; (2) to




74

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

maintain merchandise stands or place other property
on the sidewalk; (3) to use certain portions of the
street or alley for storing building or other materials;
(4) to extend awnings, signs, bay or show windows,
and other structures beyond the building line or across
the sidewalk or street; and (5) to construct bridges
over or tunnels or connecting pipes under the street,
including water pipes for the use of steam and street
railways.
Table 9 shows a total of 8894,653 as receipts from
minor highway privileges. Of this aggregate, New
York City reported $387,407, or 43.3 per cent, and
Chicago reported $336,914, or 37.6 per cent; while the
other cities reported only $170,332, or 19.1 per cent.
Of the amount last mentioned, it is possible that owing
to the lack of correct or fully descriptive designations
in local accounts a small portion should have been re
ported under other headings in Table 9 or in other
tables. Of the 193 cities covered by the report, only
53, or 27.5 per cent, reported receiptsfromminor high
way privileges. In the cities reporting receipts from
minor highway privileges the title of the city corpora
tion to the highway extends to the building line; while
in the majority of cities from which no receipts were
reported that title extends only to the curb line.
Table XXXI, which follows, presents a condensed
summary of the receipts from minor highway privi
leges included in Table 9, classified by the kind of
privilege for which the receipts were obtained.

and enterprises of the city. The cities reporting such
receipts and the amounts reported by each are shown
in the statement which follows:
City
num
ber.

CITY.

2
3 Philadelphia, Pa
4
7

City
Amount. num
ber.
$4,302
1,200
IS, 417
26,801

CITY.

13
23
30 Toledo, Ohio
43

Amount.

$1,814
240
200
400

Receipts from interest.—Table 9 includes all interest
receipts of the genefal treasury and of the separate
funds of the cities covered by this report except'
(1) interest on taxes and special assessments, which
is included in Table 6, and (2) accrued interest
on original loans, which is shown in Table 22. The
total or gross interest receipts tabulated in Table 9 for
some of the cities in Group I include certain amounts
representing receipts of the counties containing them,
as follows: Chicago, 111., $134,S41; Cleveland, Ohio,
$78,147; Pittsburgh, Pa., $64,807; Detroit, Mich.,
S10,379; Buffalo, N. Y., S19,979; Milwaukee, Wis.,
$17,630; Cincinnati, Ohio, $98,172; Newark, N. J.,
$59,558; Los Angeles, Cal., $42,350; and Minneapolis,
Minn., $45,367.
The first column of this section of the table shows the
total revenue receipts from interest, or the total
receipts from interest, less receipts in error later
corrected by refund«payments, and accrued interest on
original sales of debt obligations. These revenue
R E V E N U E RECEIPTS FROM
Tabic X X X I
MINOR HIGHWAY PRIVI
receipts
are arranged in five groups: Those received on
LEGES.
current deposits, those received on investments and
K I N D OF PRIVILEGE.
Number of Amounts
deposits of investment funds, sinking funds, and public
cities
reported.
reporting.
trust funds, and those received from all other sources.
In this section of the table are included three classes of
Total.
$S94,653
interest transfer receipts: (1) Those which represent
Constructing vaults and tunnels..
3S9,471
interest payments charged to outlay account, (2) those
Private spur tracks and sidings..
83,904
Use of sidewalks
,
74,5S7
charged as expenses of municipal service enterprises,
Curb stands
21,847
Bridges over streets and alleys...
24,803
and (3) the interest receipts of sinking and investment
Projecting street signs
,
17,793
Pipes and conduit3
5.C05
funds and public trust funds for municipal uses that
Platforms and scales
5,059
Use of bulkheads and areaways..
3,711
were paid by the divisions of the government of the
Temporary sheds in streets
2, SCO
Space over canal
2,400
city to these funds as interest on their debt obligations
Telephone booths
605
Bathing privileges
COO
held as investments. For further explanation, see
Storage under bridge
36
Maintaining drinking fountains..
36
introductory text, pages 26 and 40.
Not specified
258,456
The only interest transfer receipts such as those
SeceiptsfrcmirentsofmunidpaUnvestmentproperties.— mentioned in (1) that are included in Table 9 are
The receipts from rents tabulated in Table 9 com $769,573 reported by New York, N .Y., and $33,503
prise all amounts collected as compensation for the use reported by Boston, Mass. The transfer receipts men
of lands or other property not employed for general tioned under (2) aro shown in detail in Table 16. The
departmental purposes. These receipts are separated remainder of transfer receipts included in Table 9,
into two classes, those from the properties of public amounting to $14,717,224, are those mentioned under
trusts and sinking funds, and those from all other (3). The aggregate of the three classes of transfer
properties. Of the amounts reported in the first class, receipts for the cities covered by the report was
all were receipts from public trust funds excepting $15,662,052, of which $8,718,193, or 55.7 per cent, was
$32,522 from sinking funds reported for Baltimore, Md. reported by New York, N. Y. The totals of the three
Included with the receipts of sinking and public classes of interest transfers are shown for the 135 cities
trust funds for municipal uses from rents, of which reporting such receipts in the statement which follows.
mention is here made, are the receipts of 8 cities aggre The amounts of the third class for any city can be
gating 553,374, which were received by these funds as ascertained by subtracting from the figures in the
rent of their investment properties by the departments statement the amounts of classes (1) and (2).



DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
Amount.

City
num
ber.

$8,718,193
NewYork,N.Y
Chicago. Ill
, 1 47,397
682,627
Philadelphia, Pa
20,563
St. Louis, Mo
1,645,824
Boston, Mass
89,971
Cleveland, Ohio
670,4S9
Baltimore, Md
459,390
Pittsburgh, Pa
,
165,6S8
Detroit, Mich
128,900
Buffalo, N . Y
,
2,200
San Francisco, Cal..,
3,577
Milwaukee, Wis
375,553
Cincinnati, Ohio
317,220
Newark, N.J
,
38,452
New Orleans, La
851
Washington, D . C . . .
138,059
Minneapolis, Minn..,
" 217,0S8
Jersey City, N.J
25,357
Kansas City, Mo
1,320
Indianapolis, Ind.....
249,495
Providence, K.I
10,684
Louisville, Ky
11,213
Rochester, N. Y.
47,6S3
Denver, Colo
64,456
Portland, Oreg
9,114
St. Paul, Minn
137,244
Columbus, Ohio
84,300
Toledo, Ohio
154,573
Worcester, Mass.
840
Birmingham, Ala .
2,295
Syracuse, N . Y
575
New Haven, Conn...
101,240
Richmond, va
11,753
Paterson, N. J
17,552
Omaha, Nebr
14,378
Fall River. Mass
12,557
Dayton, Ohio
12,562
Grand Rapids, Mich..
1,332
Spokane, Wash
6,1S5
Nashville. Tenn
2,7S7
Lowell. Mass
47,0S3
Cambridge, Mass,
19,672
Bridgeport, Conn
20,004
New Ped/ord, Mass.. .|
90
San Antonio, Tex....
12,572
Hartford, Conn
25,109
Albany,N.Y
48,277
Trenton, N.J
,
5,740
Reading, Pa.
11,420
Dallas, Tex
24,769
Camden, N.J
16,181
Springfield, Mass
2S,352
Lynn, Mass
8,393
Lawrence, Mass
14,566
Tacoma, Wash
,
807
Wilmington, Del....u.
736
Kansas City, Kans... J
9,318
Yonkers,N.Y
'
8,262
Youngstown, Ohio. 40,76S
Norfolk, Va
10,190
Fort Worth, T e x . . . .
4,0S7
St. Joseph, Mo
1,196
UUca,N.Y
3,572
Troy. N . Y
8,577
Elizabeth, N . J
3,643
Waterbury, Conn...
5,065
Akron, Ohio
19,540
Manchester, N. n . . . .

84
85
86
S3
93
94
96
97
98
99
100
103
104
105
106
108
109
110
112
113
114
115
116
121
122
123
124
126
129
130
132
134
135
136
137
13S
141
142
143
144
146
14$
149
152
153
155
157
161
163
164
165
167
169
170
177
178
ISO
1S3
1S4
IS5
lvS6
188
190
191
193

City
num-l
ber.

Amount.
Hoboken. N.J
Evansville, Ind
,
Wilkes-Barre,Pa....
Erie, Pa
Peoria, 111
Harrisburg, Pa
Holy oke. Mass
Portland, Me
Charleston. S.C
Brockton, Mass
Passaic, N.J
Bayonne,N. J
Johnstown, Pa
Allentown. Pa
Fawtucket,R.I.....
Springfield, Ul
Altoona, Pa
Canton, Ohio
,
Saginaw, Mich
Bingham ton, N. Y . .
Atlantic City, N. J . .
Rockford,IU
Lancaster, Fa
Springfield, Ohio....,
LittloPock,Ark
York, Pa.
Maiden, M a s s . . . . . . . .
New Britain, Conn..,
Haverhill, Mass
,
Lincoln, Nebr
,
Topeka, Kans
McKeesport, Pa..?..,
Tampa, Fla
,
EI Paso, Tex
Wheeling, W . V a . . . .
Racine, Wis
,
Kalamazoo, Mich
Superior, Wis
Newton, Mass
Butte, Mont
,
Woonsockcd, R. I . . . .
Chester, Pa
Fitchburg, Mass
■
Galveston, Tox
Elmira.N.Y
,
Knox villc, Tenn
Hamilton, Ohio
East Orange, N.J
Roanoke, Va
,
Auburn, N. Y
<
Tauntcn.Mass
Everett, Mass
,
Portsmouth, Va
Quincy, Mass
,
Oshkosn,Wis
Perth Amboy, N. J . .
Decatur, 111
Mount Vernon^N. Y.,
WMiamsport, Pa
Lima, Ohio
Chelsea, Mass
Aurora, 111
NewRochelle,N.Y.,
La Crosse, Wis
Orange, N.J
,
Lorain, Ohio
Lynchburg, Va

$508
2,820
880
11,463
3,171
6,049
9,823
25,576
19,637
14,826
1,545
11*452
7,760
3,932
37,466
2,400
7,721
3,478
5,366
1,662
67,424
HI
1,793
2,526
3,750
4,349
3,590
1,095
6,312
6,750
4,508
1,600
3,005
1,4S4
2,0S6
881
2,600
360
61,5S5
304
23,610
4,704
16,761
3,750
470
2S3

sso
17,956
3,348
1,174
7,S66
12,360
300
428
3,320
4,520
4,608
4,932
1,546
6,412

49,762
4,242
1,219
9,800
11,708
4,940
7,779

TABLE 10.

Public service enterprises.'—Under tho designation
"public service enterprises" the Bureau of the Census
includes those enterprises or branches of municipal
service which are established and maintained by city
governments for the purpose of providing the public,
or the public and the city, with some utility or service.
A department or office maintained primarily to serve
the city only is called a "municipal service enterprise"
and not a public service enterprise. Thus a munici
pally operated water-supply system which supplies
water to the public alone or to the city and the public
is called a "public service enterprise," wliile one which
supplies water for the use of the fire department only
is called a "municipal service enterprise."
The statistics of municipally operated public service
enterprises are for most cities defective, in consequence
of the fact that their accounts are not completely
segregated, and the enterprises are not credited with



75

all the revenues resulting from their activities, nor
debited with all the expenses chargeable to them.
Thus they may not be credited with the interest
earned on their funds on current deposit, nor charged
with interest on their bonds. Again, in many cities
the method of accounting is faulty in that it does not
give credit to enterprises for materials furnished or
services rendered by them to the various departments
and to other public utility enterprises of the city.
Then, too, in cities crediting their enterprises with
materials or services so furnished there is no uniform
method of determining the amounts to be credited.
The only remedy for these defects is the more careful
segregation of accounts affecting enterprises of this
type and the adoption by officials in charge of munici
pal accounting of a uniform system of giving credit
for the utilities furnished by them to the departments
and other enterprises of city government.
Receipts of public service enterprises.—The total reve
nue receipts shown in Table 10 for the different classes
of public service enterprises include all revenue re
ceipts of these enterprises recorded in the city books,
with the exception of interest from current deposits.
Receipts tabulated for Philadelphia, Pa., and Toledo,
Ohio, in the column of Table 10 headed "Gas-supply
systems" were derived from systems formerly operated
by the city, but at present leased to private com
panies. The receipts shown in Table 10 in the column
headed "All other enterprises" are shown separately
in Table XXXII, which follows:
Tabic X X X I I
City
num
ber.

CITY.

Ferries.

Total
1
4
5
6
16
20
25
26
27
32
51
59
94
96
102
136
139
172
188
189

R E V E N U E RECEIPTS

NewYork.N.Y

Irriga* Rapid
Toll Lunch Miscel
tion
transit
works. facilities. bridges. rooms. laneous.

$1,262,891 $2,896 S3,283,128 $689,039 $108,335 $190,970
2,272,838 674,430

1,158,802

788,761

104,0S9

San Antonio, Tex....

54,219
5,677

221,529

New Orleans, La.....
Denver, Colo

TROU—

8,904

20,589
17,685

2,494
402

10,165
4,357
5,895
4,357

84,111
4,954
600
7,255
17,255
7
58,127
9,757

The amounts included in the foregoing table in the
column headed "Miscellaneous" were receipts of the
following enterprises: Boston, Mass., the city record;
Portland, Oreg., harbor dredging, piloting, and towage;
Oakland, Cal., water front development; San Antonio,
Tex., stone quarry; Portland, Me., liquor agency;
Charleston, S. C, "West End improvement" (an enter
prise ior filling in lowlands for building lots), $17,105,
and for powder magazine, S150; Racine, Wis., artesian
well; Augusta, Ga., canal; and Pasadena, Cal., a city
farm.

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

76

The revenue receipts presented in Tables 10 and rived; the service transfer receipts shown in the last
XXXII by enterprise are shown in the first four col column, however, being duplicated in the columns
*
umns of Table XXXIII, by the source from which de which precede.

City
num
ber.

CITY.

Fees,
Rates and
tolls.

and
permits.

B e n t s of
property
of enter-

Minor
sales.

Service
transfers.

Grand t o t a l . . . . 1*76,240,354 $2,606,029 $5,596,993 $973,194 12,060,546
39,637,574
7,269,890
12735,996
10,232,626
6,364,268

Group X . . .
Group I t . .
Group T U .
Group I V . ,
Group V . .

664,721
585,371
713,793
429,520
212,619

4,506,202 136,311
422,127
70,543
334,977 275,071
155,606
178,086 232,675

3SS,3S4
237,866
458,954
626,517

GROUP I.—CrnES HAVING A POPULATION Of 500,000 AND OVER IN 1911.
N e w York. N . Y .
Chicago, HI
Philadelphia, P a .
St. Louis, Mo
Boston, M a s s . . . .
Cleveland, Ohio.
Baltimore, M d . . .
Pittsburg*, P a . .

119,251,739
6,365,468
4,648,761
2,067,484

1

2,977,563
1,302,253
1,036,848
1,9S7,45S

$125,223 1$2,958,348
37,916
116,679
64,994
58,060
123,749
29,967

$6,5SS
9,374
1,620
60,337

$53,452
206,744
12,551
11,242

770,406
50,174
382,418
118,197

16,086
33,712
6,902
1,692

10,395
80,220
7,477
6,303

94,943
176,826
53,378
9,640

GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000 IN 1911.
Detroit. Mich.
BufTalo'N.Y
,
San Francisco, Cal..
Milwaukee, w i s . . . .
Cincinnati, O h i o . . . .

$929,564
923,159
3,545
733,748
1,139,484

$34,521
71,801

$1,735
72,705

$432
3,910

$99,222

38,094
47,784

1,765
20,583

1,389
3,214

105,173
4,307

Newark, K . J
L o s Angeles, C a L . . .
N e w Orleans, L a . . .
Washington, D . C . .
Minneapolis, Minn..

1,151,996
1,073,633
370,580
520,157
419,024

75,401
57,305
222,015
24,347
14,103

59,242
38,246
190,573
37,118
160

722
14,309
5,909
960
39,703

15,916
4,403
13
8,832

Jersey City, N . J . .
Seattle, W a s h . . . . .
Kansas City, Mo...
Indianapolis, I n d . ,
Providence, R . I . . .

$1,224,003
1,485,979
947,052

Louisville, K y . . . . .
Rochester, N . Y . . ,
Denver, Colo
Portland, O r e g . . . .
S t . Paul, M i n n . . . .

751,891
539,369
6,545
773,852
368,144

Birmingham, A l a . . . .
Syracuse, N . Y
New Haven, Conn...
Memphis, Tenn
Scranton, P a

768,358

490,726
311,073
372,707
393,844

$37,204
24,235
30,558
35
49,882

$500
3,3S3
44,394
27,783
962

$1,400
20,589
29,927

$267,534
6,161

5,749

34,659

32,533
34,335

22,049
17,461
29,567

1,771
88,749

26

161

4,029
10,78S

98,851
66,431
46,771
21,778
5,283
7,752
19,980

26,793
358,478
400,206

24,972
30,125
17,530
594
12,129

7,987
2,228
31,767

*10,"789

9,683
195

18,573
761
2,553
25,659

665,897
215,803
168,641

15,069
4,664

Grand Rapids. Mich..
Spokane, w a s h
Nashville, Tenn
Lowell, Mass
i, Mass

200,702
435,716
287,432
198,702
382,363

21,114
71,091
2,781
21,960
14,526

Bridgeport, Conn.
N e w Bedford, Ma
San Antonio, T e x . .
Hartford, Conn.,
Albany, N . Y . . .

265,975
402
324,156
366,182

28,753
2,071
5,318
6,635

7,692

85
1,497
9,939
3,769

42,806
223
"i3,"896




$237,695
241,497
203,309
299,292
247,082
416,263

$270
2,726

Des Moines, Iowa.....

64
65
66
67
68

Kansas City, Kans....
!
Yonkers,N.Y
Youngstown, Ohio... j

$290,340
146,495
995,173

$23,136
12,236
15,863
6,560

241,402
246,127
230.640
162J476
209,740

8,"409
4,466
7,622
6,920

2,233
19,856

17,441

16,746

151,843
529,553
20S.9S9
225,914

69
70
71
72
73

Norfolk, Va

74
75
76
77
78

Utica,N.Y
",#202,"277*
Troy, N . Y
Elizabeth, N. J
154,623
Schenectady, N . Y . . .
203,79S

79
80
81
82
83

Akron, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Manchester, N . H . . . .

i

242,576
191,222
171,932

Savannah. Ga
East St. Louis, HI....

132,527
659,027
553,227

94
95
96
97
99

$3,017
1,616
7,421
2,311
27,316

$4,712
66,277

7,956
6,9S0
4,537

41,940
14

1,996
45,196
2,707
691

5,064
154

14

3,226
211
12,052

27,173
1,304

1,417
1*8,292 j
8,213 j

57,146
831

4,103
67,099

105
106
107 Mobile, Ala
108 1Canton, Ohio
109

110,173
113,753
121,102
82.752
89,918

15,223
1,025
23,597
6,291
11,435

125
8,314

750
5,836
785
116

10,802!
9,615

38,692

20,790
1,932

7,873

5,709
4,164

6,956

57
5,424!

59
17,046
8.22S
7,472

17,690

17,897
403!
4,330 |
740 11,137 !
i

93
2,724

GROUP V.-CIT1E3 IUYTNO A POPULATION OF 30,000 TO 50,000 TN 1911.

115
116
117
118
119

*6,*735

374
5,000
2,045

14,944

76
9,296
2,597

576
1,361
4,017
2,413
10,005

22,505
4,19S
2,738
7,162
436
6,416

$663
5,053
231,664

3,831

14,910

137, S39
99,532
272,343

Bayonne,N.J

$20,047
4,673
15,527
7,245

5,078

66
5,069
724
3,599

100
101
102
103 j
104 1

22,755
207

14,938
27
10,400
3,246

Service
transfers.

2,160

992
1,786
3,174
9,096
4,203

117,721
246,707

334,067
90,7S6

3,859
80

1,674
2,303

22,354
1,222
17,105
10,965
6,362

137

10,842

Minor

1,217

120
10,107
116,223
109,675 ! 11,529 1
206,9S7 1 5,697
22,054
127,959

Peoria, III

$11,002
1,426

23,743
127

84
85
86
87
83

10,640
2,073

22,921

$3,140
6,596
16,109
5,125
21,027

Lynn, Mass

60
61
62
63

110
111
112
113
114

18,598

R e n t s of
property
of enter
prises.

GROUP IT.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 50,000 TO 100,000 IN 1911—COtttd.

2,584

GROUP IV.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 50,000 TO 100,000 IN 1911.
Trenton, N . J . . . . ,
Reading, P a
,
Dallas, T e x .
Salt Lake City, U t
Camden, N . J . . . . ,
Springfield, Mass.,

Fees,
charges,
and
permits.

74

14,073

""iso

Rates and
tolls.

Binghamton,N.Y...
Atlanticaty.N.J...
Rockford,Ill

Little Rock, Ark
Pueblo, Colo

120
121
122
123
124

Bay City, Mich
York, Pa.

125
126
127
128
129

Salem, Mass

130
131
132
133
134

New Britain, Conn...

$119,939
101,593
227,362
69,808
135,155

$33
410
•3,399

94,250

1,371

6,270

156,039
214,423

11,799
958

2,628
1,459
2,309

294

50
2S4

123,052

l|| II

Richmond, V a
Paterson.N.J
Omaha, Nebr.
Fall River, M a s s . . . . .
D a y t o n , Ohio

6,787
482
1,050
353
13,487

City
num
ber.

89
90
91
92
93

GROUP m.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000 IN 1911.

29 I Columbus, O h i o . . .
30 Toledo, Ohio
"* Atlanta, Ga
Oakland, Cal
Worcester, M a s s . . .

REVENUE RECEIPTS OF PUBLIC SERVICE ENTERPRISES
FROM—

REVENUE RECEIPTS OF PUBLIC SERVICE ENTERPRISES
FROM—

Table XXXIII

119,800
Flint, Mich?.

99,371
65,873
202,855
67,884

5,835
8,557
41

$205
1,015

$2,656

7,757

10,553
4,677

693

4,939
6,593
4,975

35,035

1,604 |

28,780

5,786 1
1,794
106

i,890
220
1,400

$39,500

4,071
1,365

1,701
3,191
2,043
130
247

1,160

3,266
10,754

2,000
272

1,005
112

7,754

18,964

4,217
2,029
2,365
33,124

165

1,324
I

1,140
11,649

•3 !
4,641 !

13,201
15,236

* *

DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
Table XXXIII—
Continued.
City
num
ber.

CITY.

REVENUE RECEIPTS OF PUBLIC SERVICE ENTERPRISES
FROll—

Feest
Rents of
Bates and charges, property
tolls.
and
of enter
permits. prises.

Minor
sales.

Service
transfers.

$193,355
39,546
162,715
33,501

$3,715
6,695
10,821
3,131
4,942

$3,230 $15,921
5,255
57
13,939
2,066
500
6,610

141
143 Woonsocket, R. I . • . .
144
145 Montgomery, Ala
146

154,343
124,034

948
146

72

118,853
81,393

9,155
6,099

147
148 Galveston, Tex
149 Elmira,N. Y
150
152

01,688
114,209

872
2,162
6,095
40
4,902

153
154
155 East Orange, N. J
156

165,970

135 Wheeling, W. Va
136
137 Kalamazoo, Mich
139
140

157
158
159 Huntington, W. V s . .
160 Jolict, 111
161 Auburn, N . Y
162 Charlotte, N. C
163
164

149,541
136,8i9

10,396
1,072
692

45,422

i,349
1,697

103,934
57,292
165,509
103,835

3,126
3,0S6
3,351
1,693

1,029
68
932
1

507
1,550

63

3,860
1,565
3,955

i7,840

5,029

U
6,197
3,757
589
93
4,927
675
63

REVENUE RECEIPTS OF PUBLIC SERVICE ENTERPRISES
PROM—

City
num
ber.

CITY.

1

GROUP v.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION or 30,000 TO 50,000 m 1911—continued.

6,061
1,293
4,119

GROUP V.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 3 0 , 0 0 0

i09,424
161,493
107,853

i,744
5,801
1,569

50
59

239
6,439
107

88

Jamestown. N. Y
Decatur, 111
Joplin, Mo

80,718
35,776
159,166
49,825
19,037

180 Williamsport, Pa
181 Niagara Falls, N . Y . . .
182
183 Lima, Ohio.
184
1

69,847
77,166
70,984
133,931

1,192
6,913

50,613

953
2,786
1,911
892
777

ie

2,818
748
312
660

52
25
10,543

173
174!
175
177
179

Amsterdam, N. Y

186 NewRochelle,N.Y..
187 Austin, Tex
183
189 1 Newport, K y . . . . . . . . .

2,2i3
289
14,170
4,130
1,394

Of the $76,240,354 shown in the column headed
" Rates and tolls," S74,664,525 was received as rates,
or the charges of water-supply and gas-supply systems
and electric light and power systems for the utilities
furnished by them, and $1,575,829 was received by
ferries and bridges as tolls. The amounts received as
tolls by the five cities reporting such receipts are as
follows: New York, N. Y., ferries, $926,177, bridges,
$532,378; Boston, Mass., ferries, $102,665; Covington,
Ky., bridge, $4,357; La Crosse, Wis., bridges, $5,895;
and Newport, Ky., bridge, $4,357.
Included in the column headed "Fees, charges, and
permits" is $121,029 received from the issue of permits
by the officials conducting the several enterprises.
The cities reporting such receipts with the other reve
nue receipts of the public service enterprises and the
amounts reported for each are shown in the following
statement:

190 i1 O r a n g e , N . J . . . . . . . . .
191 Lorain, Ohio
192 j Council Bluffs, Iowa..
193

City
num
ber.
21
2S
93
94

CITY.

235,533
50,192
64,977
75,076
69,825
ft, 574

$7,633
154
2,556
28

1,845
860
555
4,286
10,398

253
13,218
1,085
i,680

1,301

City
Amount. num
ber.

$3,790

$70,020

$336
6,199
938

$i,i47
3,344
169 Oshkosh, Wis
170 Perth Amboy,N. J...
477
23,500 ! 171
172

sii

ro 50,000 IN 1911—continued.

$97,660
127,431
97,329

1 185

1,743
6,072
3,884
6,369

Rents of
Fees,
Rates and charges, property Minor | Service
tolls.
and 1 of enter sales. transfers.
permits. prises.

165 Portsmouth. Va
166 Pittsfield, Mass
167
163 Cedar Rapids, Iowa..

2,393

77

!

$1,817
1.036
20

44,117

318
24,286
49
331 !
1,934

37,285

1,776
1,198

16,060
4,936

5,271

I

li,405
827
2,266

22,500

1,162
2,195
222

CITY.

96
105
123 Mew Britain, Conn....

Amount.

$17,105
3,342
9




\ijL

Over half of the total shown above was reported by
Charleston, S. C, from the sale of building lots created
by filling in the low-lying land before mentioned.
The greater portion of the remainder represents un
classified receipts of public service enterprises such as
rent of meters by water-supply systems, etc.
Service transfer receipts of public service enter
prises.—The service transfer receipts included in
Table XXXIII aggregated 82,060,546. Of this
amount, $1,174,673 was reported by 84 cities as
compensation* rendered the water-supply systems for
water furnished for various municipal purposes;
City
Amount.
cm".
num
OTT.
Amount.
§821,743 was reported by 13 cities as similar com
ber.
pensation for gas and electric current furnished the
$1,114
1121,029
66
Total
various
city departments and branches of the service;
2,687
69 Norfolk V A
719
4 St. Louis. Ho
7,277 I 87
§49,031
was reported by New York City as service
2,316
83
8
4,842
30
103
12
25,229
rendered
by the bridges of the city to other branches
8,813
17 Washington, D. C
1,718 1 109
1,352
117
18 Minneapolis, Minn....
10,954
of
the
service,
and §4,421 was reported by the same
35
120 Bay City, Mich
19 Jersey City, N. J
27,574
2
123
21
13,823
city
for
services
rendered by the docks, wharves, and
1,236
182
44 Grand Rapids, Mich..
2,753
395
1S9
53 Albany, N . Y
4,646
landings;
Boston,
Mass., reported §7,951 as service
406
65 Kansas City, Kans....
190 OrangQ, NT J-»-*
2,103
transfer receipts of the city record; Pasadena, Cal.,
Also included in the column headed "Fees, charges, reported §1,689 of a city farm, and seven cities
and permits" are sundry receipts amounting to $30,832 reported minor amounts aggregating §1,038 for other
reported by seven cities from miscellaneous sources, as service transfer receipts by their public service enter
prises.
follows:

78

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.
TABLE 11.

Payments for general departmental expenses.—In
Table 11 are presented statistics showing payments
for the accrued expenses of the various cities during
1911 for objects or purposes other than the operation
and maintenance of public service enterprises, which
are here referred to as expenses of general depart
ments. Such payments constitute by far the most
important class of payments for the costs of munic
ipal governments, comprising 51.1 per cent of the
total payments for governmental costs, as shown in
Table 5. They are given in Table 11 in sufficient
detail to show the relative expenses of the several
departments and branches of work in each city, and
to provide data for comparing the expense payments
for a given object in one city with the corresponding
payments in other cities.
These payments, like the receipts of Table 9, are
arranged in 10 general groups or divisions, to each of
which is given a specific designation, and the payments
recorded in each of these divisions is subdivided accord
ing to the specific purpose of the payments. In mak
ing comparisons between individual cities from Table
11, it should be noted that while the payments shown
in that table for the main groups of departments or
divisions, as they have been called above, are fairly
accurate and hence comparable, those for some of the
individual objects of expenditure are less exact. For
example, the expenses for the care and repair of
bridges can not in all cities be segregated from the
expenses for the care and repair of streets, pavements,
and curbing; hence the individual items of highway
expenses are les3 accurate than the aggregate of all
highway expenses. Other items of expense more or
les3 inaccurate by reason of imperfect classification by
individual cities are the expenses for street cleaning
and snow removal. In some cities,the streets are
cleaned by an independent street-cleaning depart
ment, while in others this work is performed by the
health department or street department. Where it is
done by a department having a variety of functions
and the segregation of items of expense for the differ
ent functions is not made by the local authorities, it
is often difficult or impossible for the agents of the
Bureau of the Census to secure correct statistical data.
It must not be inferred, therefore, in the case of
objects of expenditures here mentioned that a blank
in Table 11 necessarily means that there were no ex
penditures for the purpose indicated by the column
heading.
A large number of cities made payments in 1911 for
checking the spread of tuberculosis and for the care of
patients suffering from that disease. An effort was
made to include all payments for this class of expenses
among those of the health department as part of the
total payments for the prevention and cure of com
municable diseases. For most cities the larger part




of these payments are tabulated as for the health de
partment, although in several cases some of them are
tabulated as for outdoor poor relief and for hospitals.
Among the payments included in Division V are
those of 10 cities of Groups I and II as parts of the pay
ments of the counties in which these cities are located
for the maintenance of roads and bridges outside the
cities. The inclusion of these payments makes the
aggregate payments of the given cities more compar
able with those of such cities as New York, N. Y v and
New Orleans, La., which have many miles of similar
roads and many similar structures within the city
limits.
Payments for the expenses of schools, which are
given in the column headed "Schools," in Division V,
are presented in detail in Tables 35 to 42.
Payments for drinking fountains and city clocks
which are reported by a number of cities are included
in Division IX, "Miscellaneous."
Imperfect statements of expenses.—In the last column
for most of the ten divisions of Table 11 are included
certain payments that could not be distributed to the
individual items of the division, owing to imperfect
local accounts. As a rule these amounts are not large,
but until all cities are awake to the value of com
parable statistics a degree of noncomparability as
between individual • cities as to detailed items can
not be wholly eliminated.
Thefiguresof Table 11 and other tables of tliis report
will be tliis year as in previous years more or less dis
appointing to all who are interested in securing com
parable statements of costs on the basis of such units
as square yards for caring for, maintaining, or con
structing streets, cleaning streets, etc. The Bureau
of the Census finds it practically impossible with the
appropriations at its disposal to compile comparable
figures of this character; but it hopes that engineers
and all others who appreciate the value of such state
ments and are anxious for their compilation will
cooperate with it in urging upon city officials the neces
sity of keeping accounts and making local reports in
sufficient detail to provide the data for the census re
port as now presented and also to allow the presenta
tion of detailed data so classified as to permit, with the
general data relating to area, contents, etc., the com
pilation of comparable figures of unit costs. Greater
progress in this field has been realized in school statis
tics than in any other, the comparable figures for
which are presented in Tables 35 to 42. The Bureau
of the Census hopes to make as much progress in some
of the statistics that are now included in Table 11 as
has been realized in the school statistics since it began
the publication of such statistics for 1902.
Comparability of statistics of expenses of 1911 with
those of previous years.—In reports of previous years,
payments to retired policemen, firemen, and teachers
as pensions and gratuities, and payments to associa
tions of municipal employees providing such pensions

DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
have been tabulated as expenses of the police depart
ments, fire departments, and public schools. In this
report these payments are all included in Division X,
in the column headed "Pensions and gratuities," and
are given separately in text Tables XXXIX and XL,
which constitute part of the text relating to Table 11.
The amounts of these payments were given in separate
columns in the reports of 1902 to 1908, inclusive, but
are not separately shown in the reports for 1909 and
1910. To the extent of these payments the figures
under the three departments and also in Divisions
IX and X are not comparable with the figures of
preceding years. The data contained in the reports
for 1902 to 1908 permit of making comparisons for
individual cities between the present report and those
reports. To make similar comparisons between this
report and those for 1909 and 1910, deductions should
be made from the totals for police department, fire
department, and school expenses as reported in those
years in amounts somewhat less than the payments
for pensions in the accompanying Tables XXXIX
and XL.
Per capita payments for expenses.—The per capita
averages and the per cent distribution of payments for
expenses other than of public service enterprises in the
various cities are given for groups of departments, and
for several of the most important departments, in
dividually, in Tables 13 and 14. A further discussion
of the subject is presented in connection with those
tables.
Tabic X X X I V

Payments for expenses of miscellaneous general execu
tive offices.—One of the difficulties met with in the
compilation of comparative municipal statistics to
which only a slight reference was made in the introduc
tion to this report is the difference in organization of
the local governments, involving a distribution of
executive powers in a great variety of ways to a
number of different offices given various designations.
The payments for expenses for a large number of these
offices, and the payments for a number of lesser items
of expenses that are recorded in Division I of Table 11,
are included in the column "Other general executive."
The instruction to the Census agent for reporting
payments for expenses under this head was to thus
report all payments for the expenses of general gov
ernmental offices and commissions which could not
be identified with any of the offices specifically men
tioned on the schedule, the payments for which are
included in the columns of Table 11 which precede the
column here referred to. Included with the offices
thus reported are the general offices having authority
over the departments and subdivisions of the service
whose expenses are arranged in Table 11 in two or
more of the 10 principal divisions of that table. The
local names of the offices for which reports were thus
made are shown in Table XXXIV, which follows,
and the number of cities reporting offices and accounts
of a specific designation are there given, together with
the aggregate payments reported, for each class of
offices.

GOVERNMENTAL COST PAY
MENTS FOR EXPENSES.

(GOVERNMENTAL COST PAY
MENTS FOR EXPENSES.
GENERAL EXECUTIVE OFFICE OR ACCOUNT.

GENERAL EXECUTIVE OFFICE OB ACCOUNT.

Number of
cities
reporting.

149
71
17
62
40
6
10
19
2
10
4
24
6
10
9
1
5
1
7
1
1
1
1
2
4
1
3
4

Numberof
cities
reporting.

Amount
reported.
$5,057,523

Total..
Executive office:
Engineer's department
Board of public works
Public service commission
Civil service commission
City clerk
Street, sewer, and water board
Board of public improvement
Board of public safety
Bureau of surveys
Public building department
Utilities commission
City messenger
Board of control
Charter commission
Street commission
Director of health and charities....
Exciso commission
City commissioner
Board of contract and supply
Property clerk
Bureau of city property
City electrician
Board of viewers
City architect
License commission
Bureau of economy and efficiency.
Bureau of statistics
Registry clerk

79

1,237,190
1,052,201
633,300
467,911.
258,866
181,623
178,396
157,823
86,413
69,063
40,578

37,705
35,763
33,574
33,313
32,865
32,439
31,155
25,944
25,563
22,829
20,953
20,076
19,867
19,463
19,287
17,395
15,523

Executive office—Continued.
Board of liquidation
Bureau of estimate and apportionment
City secretary
Board of freeholders
Department of legislative reference
Plumbing board
Art commission
City recorder
Harbor board
Freight bureau
Park and cemetery commission
Industrial commission
Transportation bureau
Building code commission
Board of fire, police, charities, and correction....
Municipal factory-site commission
,
City statistician
Executive commission
Register of labor.
Board of supervisors' town audits
Executive account:
Entertaining
City planning
Convention of American League Municipalities..
Municipal Congress Exposition
Census
Official trips
Appalachian Exposition
Expense of state capital
Rent of tenants

Amounts
reported.

315,193
14,685
13,434
11,610
10,708
9,880
9,683
7,541
7,024
5,174
4,493
4,053
4,033
3,980
3,200
2,691
2,511
979
150
24
64,872
36,9S0
6,573
4,449
2,905
2,454
1,024
107
15

Payments for expenses for inspection for protection to division of Table 11 numbered II, in the column
person and property.—American cities employ officers "Inspection service." The local titles for the officers
called ''inspectors" who are vested with police powers whose expenses are thus tabulated are given on the
for enforcing a great variety of laws. The salaries and succeeding page, in Table XXXV, which shows the
expenses of these officers who are employed in enforcing number of cities reporting officers of each designation
the laws which have as their primary purpose to secure or class and the amount of payments for the expenses
protection to person and property are reported in the of such offices.



FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

80
Table X X X V

OFFICE, OB BOABD, OB OBJECT OF PAYMENT.

Number of
cities,
reporting.

$4,278,525

Total..,
Building inspection
Tenement house inspection
Plumbing inspection
*
Sealer of weights and measures
Electrical inspection
•
Boiler inspection
t
Wiring inspection
Gas inspection
Elevator inspection
Bureau of combustibles
Public utility
Bureau of incumbrances
Miscellaneous inspection
Meter inspection
Photometric station
Oil inspection
Inspection of bridges and street repairs
Bunding commission
Factory inspection
Light and water inspection
Commission to revise building laws
Tree and stock inspection (to protect property)..
Board of appeal
Inspection board of public works
Hack and truck inspection
Employment agency
Board of safety
Sign inspection
Printing and typewriting building code
Building permit department
Coal inspection
Street railway construction inspection

Amount
reported.

13S
8
118
110
51
29
19
19
9
5
3
1
1
8
1
7
3
2
3
2
2
4
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

1,782,659
84S,939
421,611
330,4S4

212, S4S
170,633
104,619
64,255
57,9S4
75,870
52,783
30,437

25,886
21,165
16,453
10,748
8,526

8,332

6,116
5,020
4,833
4,487
4,146
2,770
2,218
1,375
1,200
876
860
255

100
37

names of the offices, boards, commissions, and organi
zations, and objects of payments thus reported are
shown separately in Table XXXVI, together with the
number of cities reporting, the class of expenses, and
the amounts of payments therefor.
Among the payments included in Table 11 are those
for the expenses of cities for the office of public ad
ministrator, register of deeds, and recorder, whose
duties are, with a few exceptions, performed by county
officials, and are those met with in cities exercising
county functions, or those for which the census for
comparative purposes combines the county payments
with those df the city corporation. Those payments
are shown in a column under a descriptive heading in
Division II of Table 11.
Payments for expenses of educational recreation.—
The payments for expenses included in Division VIII
of Table 11, in column "Educational recreation," were
for three purposes: Operating] and maintaining (1)
museums and art galleries, (2) zoological collections,
and (3) conservatories.

Payments for misceUanecms protection to person and
property.—All payments for expenses of protection to
City
person and property that are not readily classified num
under the first six headings of Division II of Table ber.
11 axe arranged in the last column of that division
under the heading "Other protection to person and
property."
Table X X X V I
OFFICE, OB BOARD, OB OBJECT 0 7 PAYMENT.

Number of
cities
reporting.

$1,780,249

Total..
Police and fire alarm system
Humane society
Pound
Electrical bureau
„
Commission of records
Morgue
Fire marshal
Surveyor
Horticultural commission
Public administrator
Board of examining plumbers
Board of examining engineers
Employment agency
Powder magazine
Board of examining chauffeurs
Insurance department
United States Life Saving Corps
Flood commission
Levees
Harbormaster
Game warden
Bureau of construction and repair of buildings..
Tearing down condemned buildings
Trimming and removing trees
Settlement of sheep claims
Veterinarian...
Recovery of dead bodies
'.'.'.
Z-ZZZZZ."
Board of boiler examiners
,
Board of examining electricians
,
Animal rescue league
Surgeon
,
Children's aid society
,
Medical society
„
,
Board of examining elevator operators.
Life-saving boat
Reward for saving child
Unreported
,

Amount
reported.

32
59
121
8
1

14
7
2
1
4
42
19
10
3
4
1
1
1
7
10
9
2
6
4
1
1
3
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
7

318, COS
283,232
239,199
253,635
170,031
54,888
34,541
32,707
32,078
30,983
2?, 188
21,243
19,030
14,857
10,189
10f0S7
10,000

9,9S5
5,904
3,496
2,614
1,800
1,653
1,233
1,089
900
4G8
330
303
300
300
245
175
103
41

25
165,789

The payments thus tabulated are those for the
salaries and expenses paid to city officials, boards, and
commissions with various designation, and those paid
to various private associations and organizations for
securing protection to person and property* The




1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
14
15
16
17
18
20
23
26
27
28
30
31
32
33
35
37
41
43
44
45
50
52
53
54
59
62
64
74
81
85
95
96
110
117
118
119
125
126
129
137
149
16S
172
192
193

Tabic X X X V I I
crrr.

Total..
New York, N . Y
Chicago, 111
Philadelphia, Pa
St. Louis, Mo
Boston, Mass
Cleveland, Ohio
Baltimore, Md
Pittsburgh, Pa
Detroit, Mich
Buffalo, N . Y
San Francisco, Cal. ♦.
Milwaukee, Wis
Newark, w. J
Los Angeles, Cal
New Orleans, La
Washington, D. C.. ♦.
Minneapolis, Minn...
Seattle, Wash
Providence. R. I
Denver, Colo
Portland, Oreg
St. Paul, Minn
Toledo, Ohio
Atlanta. Ga
Oakland, Cal
Worcester, Mass
Syracuse, N. Y
Memphis, Term
Omaha, Nebr
Dayton, Ohio
Grand Rapids. Mich.
Spokane. Wash
New Bedford, Mass..
Hartford, Conn
Albany, N . Y
Trenton, N . J
Springfield. Mass
Tacoma,Wash
Wilmington, Del
Utica,N.Yl
Manchester, N. I I . . . .
Erie, Pa
South Bend, Ind
Charleston, S. C
Binghamton, N. Y . . .
Sacramento, Cal
Pueblo, Colo
Chattanooga, Term...
Salem, Mass
Lincoln, Nebr
Topcka, Kans
Kalamazoo, M i c h . . . .
Elmlra,N.Y
Cedar Rapids, Iowa..
Pasadena, Cal
Council Bluffs, Iowa.
Lynchburg, Va

GOVERNMENTAL COST PAYMENTS
FOE MAINTENANCE Of—

Museums Zoological Conserva
and art
tories.
galleries. collections.
$1,196,170

1519,019

545,959
89,521
218,641
34,169

201,198
31,3S5
30,000
3,628
1,452
6,798
5,213
34,869
19,082
12,149

741
IS, 613
25,010
28,209
45,906
10,000
OS,382
1,000
1,356
4,029
24,354
713

1184,733
46,032
24,999

15,171

52,222
4,031
28,820

16,527
3,832
810
87,717
1,397
2,649
2,933
5,066
410
2,956

303

2,640

7,364
8,700

219
7,500
15,980
5,344
825
6,048

1,500
2,070
1,348

3,615
'5,*937

1,500
2,520

338
700
910

7,968
4,873
1,018

1,138
4,323
""220
3,218
1,925

963
3,824
104
170
46
159
914
70
1,270
713

DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
Of the 193 cities covered by the report, 30 reported
payments for maintaining museums and art galleries,
40 for maintaining zoological collections, and 11 for
maintaining conservatories. Table XXXVII, which
precedes, gives the names of cities reporting each class
<of these expenses and the amount reported for the
same.
Payments for miscellaneous expenses. — Table
XXXVIII, which follows, presents an analysis of the
payments for expenses that are included in Division IX
of Table 11 under the heading " Miscellaneous." They
are payments for objects that can not properly be as
signed to any of the nine other principal divisions of the
table. The greater portion of the payments thus
Table X X X V I I I

Total.
New York, N . Y . . ,
Chicago,™
Philadelphia, Pa..,
St. Louis, ifo
Boston, Mass

Other
miscel
laneous.

$1,055,914

$518,298

$68,008

$166,086

45,596
35,523
12,500

1,374
28,857
410,196
21,795
2,130

46,314
1,615
77

4,999

69,793

San Francisco. CaL.
Milwaukeo,Wis....
Cincinnati, Ohio....
Newark, N.J
Los Angeles, Cal
New Orleans, La
Washington, P. C .
Minneapolis, Minn..
Jersey City, N. J
Kansas City, Mo....
Indianapolis, Ind...
Providence. R . I
Louisville, Ky
Rochester, N . Y . . . .
Denver, Colo..
S t Paul, Minn
Columbus. Ohio
Toledo, Ohio
Atlanta, Ga
Worcester, Mass
Syracuse, N . Y
New Haven, Conn..
Richmond, Va
,
Paterson. N. J
Omaha, Nobr.
Fall River. Mass
Dayton, Ohio
Lowell. Mass
Cambridge, Mass
New Bedford, Mass..
Hartford. Conn
,
Albany, N . Y . r
Trenton, N. J..
Salt Lake City, Utah.
Camden, N . j .
Springfield, Mass.
Lynn, Mass
Lawrence, Mass
Tacoma, Wash
Des Moines, Iowa...
Wilmington, Del....
Yonkers,N.Y
Youngstown, Ohio.,
Houston, Tex
Norfolk, Va
Duluth,Minn
Fort Worth, T e x . . .
Somerviile,Mass....
St. Joseph, Mo
Utica,N/Y
Troy. N . Y
Elizabeth, N. J

2,650
28,934
40,779
2,795
1,9S2

5,465
20,624
21,658

6




GOVEBNMENTAL COST FATMENT3 TOR—

Adminis Adminis
of
tration o ! tration
Soldiers'
invest*
public
ment
relief and trust
funds funds and
burial. (for munici-]
invest
pal uses.
ments.

Cleveland, Ohio..
Baltimore, Md...
Pittsburgh, Pa...
Detroit, Mich....
Buffalo, N . Y . . . .

6127°—13

reported are readily arranged under the three specific
headings of Table XXXVUI: (1) Soldiers' relief fund,
(2) Administration of public trust funds for municipal
uses, and (3) Administration of investment funds and in
vestments. All amounts included in Table 11 under the
title "Miscellaneous " not included in Table XXXVUI
under one of the three headings mentioned are included
in that table under the heading " Other miscellaneous."
The most important items of expense thus tabulated
are those for city excursions or "junkets," expositions
of various kinds, memorials, monuments, entertaining
visitors and conventions, advertising the city, pay
ments for the services of experts, and aid to railroad
construction.

GOVERNMENTAL COST PAYMENTS TOE—

207,300

9,279
34

1,250
22,021
350

1,158
1,015
4,178

794
556
459
3,694
128

500
1,0S5

567
711
1,107
2,214
14,604
144
678
312

275

1,000
*2,*525

38,275
12,000

208
21,454
40,681
27,616
47,491
78
4,000

6
236
2,503
15
74
74
481
25
10

200

55
300
4,751

72
191

12,118

40
205

1,772
275

22
577
201
159
77
41,492
1,121
2,200

21
332
113

95
96
97
98
99
101
102
104
105
108
110
111
113
115
119
122
123
124
125
129
132
133
138
139
141
143
144
146
147
148
149
153
155
158
160
163
164
166
167

in
1,433
6,721
"7*744

Adminis
Adminis tration
of investof Other
Soldiers' tration
public
ment
relief and trust
miscel
funds! funds
and laneous.
burial* {for munici-|
investpal uses.
$377
800

175
177
178
181
183
184
186
187
190
192

Savannah. Ga
Jacksonville, Fla...
Terre Haute, Ind..
Holyoke, Mass.....
Portland, Me
South Bend, Ind...
Charleston, S. C . . .
Brockton. Mass....
Passaic, N.J
Bayonne, N. J
Wichita, Kans
Covington, Ky
Pawtucket,R.I....
Springfield, 111
Canton, Ohio
Binghamton, N. Y..
Sioux City, Iowa.
Rockford.IU
Springfield, Ohio...
Chattanooga, Tenn.
Maiden, Mass
New Britain, Conn.
Haverhill, Mass
Salem, Mass
Topeka,Kans
Tampa, Fla.
San Diego, Cal
Superior, Wis
Augusta, Ga
Newton, Mass
Woonsocket,R.I...
Chester, Pa
Fitchburg, Mass....
Dubuque, Iowa
Galveston, Tex
Elmira,N.Y
Hamilton, Ohio
East Orangf, N . J . .
Lexington, Ky.
Joliet,HL
Taunton, Mass...
Everett, Mass....
Pittsfield, Mass..
Quincy, Mass...,
Lansing, Mich...
Jamestown. N. Y
Decatur* 111
Mount Vernon, N. Y .
Niagara Falls, N . Y . . .
Lima, Ohio
Chelsea, Mass
New Rochelle, N. Y . .
Austin, Tex
Orange, N.J
Council Bluffs, Iowa..

$12
152

$356

Hoboken,N.J
EvansviUe, Ind
Peoria, 111..
Fort Wayne, Ind...
90
92
93
94

2,631
633

CRT.

Schenectady, N. Y..
Waterbury, Conn...
Akron, Ohio
Manchester, N. H...

4,542

637
7,828
786
750
812

City.
num
ber.

*2,*276
10,072
609
1,271
2
397

81

107
104
103
$10,000

3,941
8,213

97
119
5,629

29,327

91,600
250

210

28
277
652
28
4
276
12

15,404
140
36,549
28,009

160
132
413
726

100
"i,"215

4,874
70
18
13,342

128
13
"50

572
357

250
12,067
8,981
9,316
1,432
3,400
147

1
290
20

68

49

15,285
424
34
1

13,170

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

82

Payments for city pensions and gratuities.—The pay
ments of cities tabulated in Division X of Table 11 un
der the beading "Pensions and gratuities" are of two
classes: (1) Those made directly to the former city em
ployees or to their heirs or dependents from the general
city treasury, or from the public trust funds under the
direct control of the city; and (2) those made to trust
funds under the control of city employees, but not
under that of the city government. The payments of
the first class are shown separately in Table XXXIX,
which gives the payments by each city for each class of
pensions, and the payments of the second class are shown
in Table XL. In addition to the payments shown in
City Table
num
ber.
Total.
New York, N . Y .
Chicago, III
Philadelphia, Pa..
St. Louis, Mo
Boston, Mass

PAYMENTS FOE PENSIONS TOR—

Policemen.

Firemen,

Teachers.

1,850,698
521,463

1,140,613
251,101

885,131
87,032
76,475
93,352

145,220

Cleveland, Ohio
Baltimore, Md
Detroit, Mich
Buffalo, N . Y
San Francisco, Cal.

72,984
23,078
42,793
64,199
69,9S5

71,2S9
23,000
24,972
69,277
71,142

18,900
18,406
22,990
20,053
19,221

Milwaukee, Wis...
Cincinnati. Ohio..
Newark, N . J
Los Angeles, Gal..
New Orleans, La..

18,332
46,480
21,424
18,026
5,972

40,183
45,918
38,0S4
10,304
23,717

50,679
20,714

Washington, D . C . .
Minneapolis, Minn.
Jersey City, N . J . . .
Seattle, Wash
~
City,Mo...
Indianapolis, Ind.
Providence,!*. I . .
Louisville, K y . . . .
Rochester, N . Y . .
Denver, Colo.

80,061
11,042
53,578
6,863
6,853

38,946
44,448
28,167
6,863
2,996

15,106
20,474
23,110
23,171
7,540

19,832
17,649
25,683
37,435
6,552

Portland, Oreg....
St. Paul, Minn....
Columbus, Ohio..,
Toledo, Ohio
Atlanta, Oa
Oakland, Cal
Worcester, Mass
Syracuse, N . Y
New Haven, Conn
Richmond, Va

1,792
5,002
12,309
12,070
2,802
6,490
13,013
12,818
2,670

14,760
7,482
18,883
823

18,083

16,816
8,126
8,250
3,000
4,800
3,660
1,334
37

4,452
1,368
11,864
11,880

6,250
2,249

Paterson.N.J
Omaha, Nebr
Fall River, Mass
Dayton, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich..

8,168
2,701
1,717
3,633
720

8,739
7,037

8,243
6,214

6,987
1,263

1,292

Spokane, Wash
Lowell, Mass
Cambridge, Mass
Bridgeport, Conn
San Antonio, Tex

5,349
8,260
7,359
130
163

3,055
2286
4604
1,025
78

Hartford, Conn
Albany, N . Y
Trenton, N . J
Salt Lake City, Utah.
Camden. N . J .

5,337
7251
1,730

5,808
11,920
3,812

Springfield, Mass...
Lynn, Mass
Tacoma, Wash
Des Moines, Iowa..
Wilmington, Del...

1,103

Somerville, Mass...
St. Joseph, Mo
,
Utica,N.Y
Troy, N . Y
Elizabeth, N . J




5,874
1,233

7,155
3,828
695
4,079

450

"4,"412
146
131
6,647
4,775
270
2,400
3,735
656
7,818
2,335

5,406
2,959
5,565
421
1,700
1,683
7,441
9,014
420

1,206
3,953

5,985

PAT1IENT3 TOR PENSIONS *Oft—

City
num
ber.

Policemen.
Schenectady, N . Y..
Waterbury, Conn...
Akron, Ohio
,
Hoboken.N.J
Evansville, Ind

S3,365,256 92,462,290 $1,467,834

38,872
126,525

Kansas City, Kans..
Yonkers,N.Y
Youngstown, Ohio..
Norfolk, Va..
,
Duluth, Minn.

Table XXXIX, certain cities paid pensions to other
employees, as follows: New York, N. Y., 840,267 for
pensions to health department employees, and $8,253
to employees of other departments; Boston, Mass., for
pensions to the health department employees, $1,254;
to public works employees, S14,331; to employees of*
charities and corrections, $1,171; to court employees,
$600; to employees of collection department, $478; to
park employees, $110; for pensions to the library
employees, $57; to cemetery employees, $140; for pen
sions to the auditor's employees, $1,188; Cleveland,
Ohio, for pensions to the sanitary police, $7,680; and
Baltimore, Md., $260 for purposes not reported.

11,100
2,445
1,140
7,949
2,769

Firemen.
$3,630

$3,336

7,126
6,932
4,465

5,496

Erie, Pa
Peoria, III
Fort Wayne, Ind.
Harrisburg, Pa
Savannah, Ga

4,733

1,557
6,300
3,599
1,000
1,591

Jacksonville, Fla..
Terre Haute, Ind.
Holyoke, Mass
Portland, Me
South Bend, Ind..

2,094
600
1,504
3,036
920

2,307
1,158
1,835
3S4

96
93
99
101
103

Charleston, S. C .
Passaic, N . J
Bayonne, N . J . . .
Wichita, Kans...
Allentown, P a . . .

2,558

104
107
108
109
110

Pawtucket, R . I
Mobile, Ala
Canton, Ohio
Saginaw, Mich
Binghamton, N. Y..

112
113
115
117
119

Atlantic City, N . J . .
Rockford.Ul
Springfield, Ohio....
Sacramento, Cal
Chattanooga, Tenn*.

122
123
124
125
123

Maiden, Mass
New Britain, Conn..,
Haverhill, Mass
Salem, Mass
,
Davenport, Iowa....

129
132
133
136
133

Topeka, Kans
Tampa, Fla
San Diego, C a l . . . .
Racine, Wis
Superior, W b

90
92
93
94
95

710

924

""199

Teachers.

1,504
213
125
3,559
594

25
*4*9C2

3,235
"l*355

COO
1,556
465
2,894
1,923
450
1,492
1,109
6,373

950

300
425
160
310

139 Augusta, Oa
140 Macon, Ga
142 Butte, Mont
145 Montgomery, Ala.
147 Dubuque, Iowa...

3,163

149 Elmira, N . Y
150 Newcastle. Pa
151 West Hoboken, N . J .
153 Hamilton, Ohio
155 East Orange, N . J . . . .

2,811
100
1,100

1,482
6S3

4,261
3,097
1,200

2,327

1,300
225
500
486
490
2,542
300

358
479
650
1,061
581
636

133

3,473
450

2,374

3,455

340
600

920
857

160 JoHet,HL
161 Auburn, N . Y
162 Charlotte, N . C
166 Pittsfield, Mass
168 Cedar Rapids, Iowa..

737
1,877
110
227

1,177

169 Oshkosh,Wis
,
170 Perth Amboy, N . J . . .
174 Jackson, Mich
177 Decatur, 111
,
178 Mount Vernon. N . Y . .
181 Niagara Falls, N . Y . . .
183 Lima, Ohio
,
184 Chelsea, Mass
188 La Crosse. Wis
,
190 Orange. N . J
192 Council Bluffs, Iowa..
193 Lynchburg, Va

1,116

1,500
544
1,215
1,700

950
187
360
547
1,975
"*426'

441
300
936
600
1,435
270
467
577

644
696

372

DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.

83

the Bureau of Survey, $143,289 for the Electrical
Bureau, and $47,155 for the Bureau of Supplies.
Among the incidental operating plants of New
Policemen. Firemen. Teachers,
England cities are those of their so-called forestry
departments. These are branches of the public serv
9103,357
$127,270
120,170
Total..
ice called into existence in many cases to combat
61,670
20,170
3 Philadelphia, Fa..,
41,584
45,468
8 Pittsburgh, Pa
the destruction of trees in parks and streets by
,
4,288
38 Scran ton, Pa
48 Cambridge, Mass..,
81
injurious
insects and other tree pests. In most cases
1,939
55 Reading, Pa
3,703
84 Wilkes-Barre,Pa..
these
departments
or bureaus care for trees in streets
22
87 FortWayne.Ind..,
1,802
88 Harrisburg, Pa
and
parks,
and
in
a
few cases care for trees on private
100 Johnstown, P a . . . . .
1,483
10G Altoona, Pa
1,429
grounds
and
receive
compensation therefor. All such
114 Lancaster, Pa
1,875
121 York, Pa
997
so-called
departments
or branches of service are
130 McKecsport, Pa...,
1,073
144 Chester, Pa
,
761
incidental
operating
plants
under the control of the
150 New Castle, Pa
965
180 Williamsport, Pa..
1,556
park board, highway department, or some other
branch of the service. With few exceptions the ex
Payments of judgments and in settlement for personal penses of these departments have been so kept that
injuries.—All payments by cities in settlement of they are distributed to the governmental activities
personal injuries, and those in satisfaction of judg to which they render service. Those for the care of trees
ments for such injuries, are included in Table 11 in in streets and parks appear among the park expenses,
the column headed "Judgments and losses." Pay while the small amount for the care of trees outside
ments for land taken under condemnation proceedings of parks and streets is included under the heading
are not included in this column, but in Table 18, in the "All other," in Division II, "Protection to person
column showing the cost of the public improvements and property."
for which the lands were condemned. All amounts
The agents of the Bureau of the Census are in
shown in Table 11 in the column headed "Judgments structed to call the attention of city officials to the
and losses'' were in payment of judgments and in desirability of distributing so-called "incidental oper
satisfaction of personal injuries, with the exception of ating expenses" so that they will appear in the final
small amounts shown in the succeeding paragraph.
report under the functional costs of which they con
Losses by defalcation and bank failures.—These losses stitute parts.
Exceptional payments for expenses by Massachusetts
are included with the payments mentioned in the last
paragraph in Table 11 in the column headed "Judg cities.—The state of Massachusetts has established for
ments and losses.'' These losses were reported by the benefit of a number of cities and towns certain
only 10 cities, as follows: Philadelphia, Pa., §126,000; metropolitan districts in and about Boston for the pur
New Bedford, Mass., S6; Trenton, N. J., S608; Man chase and improvement of parks, and for the construc
chester, N. H., S8; East St. Louis, 111., $10,606; tion and maintenance of sewers and waterworks. The
Portland, Me., 857; Kalamazoo, Mich., S190; Dubuque, cities and towns benefited are charged with the cost of
Iowa, $49,175; Jackson, Mich., $64; and Council maintaining the properties and public improvements
acquired, including the interest on loans made by the
Bluffs, Iowa, $6,686.
Payments for undistributed expenses.—The amounts state for the original outlays, and are required to make
included in Table 11 in the last column with the head contributions to the state sinking fund for the ultimate
ing "Undistributed expenses" are with few exceptions redemption of the debt incurred by the state for their
those which with perfect accounting for statistical benefit. Other payments to the commonwealth of the
reports would be distributed to the various other col same general nature are those for the abolition of grade
umns of the table. The amounts so tabulated belong crossings.
In this report, as in those for 1906,1907,1908,1909,
to two quite different classes: (1) Municipal printing
and advertising, and (2) the undistributed costs of and 1910, payments for the maintenance of the metro
such incidental operating plants as stables, garages, politan sewer and park systems are included with other
municipal service enterprises, bureaus of supplies, sewer and park expenses in Table 11, and payments for
storage yards, supply stations, and blacksmith shops. the maintenance of the metropolitan water system
For most cities these undistributed expenses are with other payments of this nature are included in
small in amount, the most marked exception in the Table 15. All payments to the state for interest are
case of printing being New York, N. Y., which reports tabulated in Table 17, and all payments to sinking
printing expenses of Si, 150,773 without distribution funds are tabulated in Table 21. The table following
to the departments or functional activities. Next in shows the amounts of these special payments to the
volume to this undistributed item of New York are state for the maintenance of the metropolitan sewers
the payments, of Philadelphia, Pa., of $242,890 for and park systems.
Tabic XI*

City
num
ber.




PAYMENTS TO ASSOCIATIONS
PROVIDING PENSIONS FOR—

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

84
Table
XI*
cur.

*

I

PAYMENTS BT MASSACHUSETTS CITIES TO STATE FOB
MAINTENANCE OF—

Metropolitan park system.
Metro
politan
sewer
system.

TotaL i Parks.

NanWell Charles
Boole- tasket
ington River
yards. Beach.
Bridge. Basin.

Total.... 8183,165 $495,447 9333,676 166,130 $21,388 $4,392 $69,861
5
48
60
72
122
141
164
167
184

Cambridge..
Somerville...
Maiden......
Everett.

79,334 [347,5281 229,154 44,588
31,177
25,143 4,396
29,097
26,177
19,52T 2,647
14,961 2,706
22,i&0
21,893
11,144 2,217
16,714
12,732
20,148
13,481 2,452
11,496
326
9,609 1 8,920 ! 7,124
7,488 6,393
9,429 ! 15,528
5,654
7,362
400
9,308

15,757 1,936
1,448 * 190
120
958
919
725
931
595
HI
913
45
346
48
386
42
260

56,093
2,925
2,5S2
1,777
3,191
1,079
1,203
1,006

Comparative summary of payments for general depart
mental expenses of llfi cities: 1902-1911.—la Table
XLII, which follows, there is presented, by principal
divisions of the departments of the city governments,
a summary of the payments for general departmental
expenses by 146 cities from 1902 to 1911, inclusive.
In this table certain payments of Table 11 are con*
solidated to agree with the tabulation of prior years.
In compiling this table certain changes have been
made in the tabulations presented in preceding reports
to cause them to agree with the tabulation for 1911,
the treatment of pensions in 1911 being different from
that of prior years. The changes referred to have
transferred pensions as reported in prior years from
Divisions II and VII to Division X.

Table X I I I
EXPENSE OF 146 CITIES FOR—

All general departments
General government
Police department
,
Fire department
All other protection to person and
property
Conservation of health
Sanitation, or promotion of cleanliness!
Highways
Charities, hospitals, and corrections..
Schools*.
Libraries, art galleries, and museums,
Recreation...Pensions and gratuities
Another.;

1911

1910

1909

1908

1907

1906

1905

1904

1903

1902

1449,312,497 $433,553,066 11407,022,426 $398,352,030 tt36S,0S9,295 1329,300,973 1305,396,391 $294,951,671 11278,571,645 1272,381,811
53,691,881
54,839,173
43,019,761

51,891,921
53,797,110
40,954,065

49,810,900
51,527,093
39,704,942

48,453,019
50,615,371
3S,9S3,745

43,325,004
46,074,136
35,559,315

34,060,325
42,664,604
32,615,929

30,569,445
40,764,403
31,722,303

28,997,741
39,973,407
29,239,377

31,911,035
38,213,320
26,978,038

33,610,346
36,378,817
25,926,393

8,617,245
8,601,095

8,052,252
8,780,836

7,460,730
7,811,110

7,288,036
7,107,815

6,836,621
6,816,013

6,025,742
5,210,883

5,059,639
4,899,000

5,610,432
4,706,560

5,417,674
4,756,817

3,621,777
4,398,911

37,054,010 34,131,737 33,281,546
53,072,490 52,618,597 43,048,836
30,648,195 29,080,979 28,133,754
127,356,885 119,054,967 114,446,034

32,667,838
43,397,522
27,873,963
111,369,209

30,273,319
44,296,868
24,589,192
103,454,440

26,776,250
38,956,930
20,799,139
95,797,977

24,964,454
36,773,272
19,448,261
87,7C0,92S

23,483,152
36,367,981
19,105,252
86,546,619

20,994,941
33,493,710
18,136,391
80,853,673

18,577,093
35,021,190
17,517,881
75,129,615

5,854,854
13,734,872
4,961,214
6,143,672

4,939,705
12,024,359
4,503,505
5,346,813

4,436,3S5
11,219,650
3,893,373
6,643,747

4,153,901
10,292,720
3,739,750
5,34S,311

4,177,212
8,461,753
3,340,558
4,911,597

4,067,969
7,262,093
3,018,377
3,437,805

3,300,334
12,213,926
3,354,051
3,401,472

5,956,277
17,209,213
7,587,266
1,659,006

7,090,865
15,774,849
7,020,578
5,304,310

6,242,855
14,076,633
6,175,078
5,302,915

An examination of Table XLII shows that the total
general departmental expenses of the 146 cities in
creased in each of the years over those of the preceding
year, that increase averaging $19,658,962, the smallest
increase being that for 1903 over 1902 and the largest
that of 1907 over 1906. The actual increase and per
cent of increase of these expenses for each year over
those of the preceding year are shown in the following
statement:

those included in the titles "Inspection service" and
"Other protection to person and property," in Tables
XXXV and XXXVI, respectively.
TABLE 13.

Payments for ike principal general departmental ex
penses, total and per capita.—In Table 13 are pre
sented the governmental cost payments, total and
per capita, for the expenses other than those of
public service enterprises, arranged in most cases ac
cording to the main groups of municipal departments,
ANNUAL INCREASE.
Amount.
Percent.
offices, and accounts given in Tablo 11, but in a few
1903 over 1902
cases showing separately the payments for the more
2 3
86,189,834
1904 over 1903
16,380,026
5 9
1905 over 1904
important individual departments, such as police and
10,444,720
3 5
1906 over 1905
23,904,582
7 8
1907 over 1906
fire
departments and schools. Group I shows the
11 8
38,788,322
1908 over 1907
30,262,735
8 2
1909 over 1908
highest
per capitafiguresfor all the expenses included in
2 2
8,670,396
1910 over 1909
26,530,640
6 5
1911 over 1910
the
table;
Groups II, III, TV, and V following in order.
15,759,431
3 6
The same order occurs in the per capita expenditures
of Groups I, II, III, and IV for each of the specified
TABLE 12.
purposes, but thefiguresin Group V are in several in
Payments for salaries of governmental employees.— stances larger than those for Group IV. The figures
Table 12 has been arranged to show the amounts in for individual cities of the different groups show striking
cluded in the first two divisions of Table 11 for sal variations, indicating that there aro other factors be
aries of governmental employees, classified according sides size which influence expenso payments.
to the office, commission, or board in which the em
Table XLIII, which follows, gives for each of the
ployees were engaged. The offices, boards, and com five groups the per capita payments for the principal
missions whose salaries are given in the division of general departmental expenses of the cities with the
general government in the column "Other general ex highest and lowest per capita of such expenses, as
ecutive" are given in detail in Table XXXIV; and shown in the table.



DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLESTable XLIII

GEOUP I.

GBOtJP H.

New
Boston, Baltimore, Washing
Mass.
Md.
ton, D. C. Orleans.
La, '
All general departments

85

Denver.
Colo.

San
Antonio,
Tex.

Mass.

Allentown, Pa.

Newton, Charlotte,
Mass. ' N . C .

126.94

$14.70

$24.79

112.39

118.24

38.37

319.64

$7.23

$24.21

$5.67

General government
Police department
Firo department
,
All other protection to person and property.
Conservation of health

2.98
3.05
2.18
0.44
0.76

"7.80
2.19
1.59
0.29
0.33

1.96
3.02
1.81
0.86
0.42

1.87
1.21
1.34
0.23
0.34

3.19
1.30
1.64
0.32
0.33

0.70
0.87
1.11
0.15
0.08

0.91
1.69
2.70
a 16
0.31

0.58
0.57
0.72
0.03
0.06

L47
2.19
1.54
0.19
0.42

Sanitation, or promotion of cleanliness
Highways
•
Charities, hospitals, and corrections
Schools

2.46
2.98
2.21
6.69

1.51
1.53
1.16
3.36

1.98
3.32
3.32
6.51

1.86
1.48
0.55
3.03

0.75
2.22
1.26
5.56

0.86
1.01
0.24
2.96

1.53
3.19
0.57
6.86

0.61
1.48

2.03
3.70
0.72
8.67

0.54
0.54
0.54
a 07
0.06
1.25
0.79

0.52
1.70
0.31
0.68

0.14
a 70

0.16
0.90
0.03
0.51

0.12
0.25

0.17
1.08
0.07
0.35

0.12
0.16

0.59
0.85
0.20
0.10

Libraries
Recreation
Miscellaneous
General

.

,
,

0.11

3.03

0.06
"6."09

0.69
2.40
0.12
0.07

\n
0.09
0.01
0.07

* Less than one-half of 1 cent.

The high per capita payments for general govern
mental expenses in cities of Groups I and II are due
largely to the fact that New York, N. Y., Phila
delphia, Pa., St. Louis, Mo., Boston, Mass., Baltimore,
Md., San Francisco, Cal., New Orleans, La., and Wash
ington, D. C, exercise all the executive and judicial
functions usually possessed by counties. To secure
comparability between the payments for all general
governmental functions, including payments for court
expenses in these cities and in other cities of Groups
I and II which exercise no county functions, cer
tain percentages of the payments for expenses of
county governments of the other cities of Groups
I and II are combined with the city payments, as
has been explained in the discussion of Table 3,
page 52. This combination of county and city ex
penses secures comparability of per capita payments
for court and other general governmental expenses
for all of the cities of Groups I and II, but those pay
ments are not comparable with similar payments of
other cities with the exception of Denver, Colo., for
which city the figures of the table include per capita
payments for expenses of the county as well as those
of the city.
Comparative summary ofihe per capita payments for
general departmental expenses: 1902-1911.—In Table
XLIV, which follows, are shown the per capita payments
for different classes of expenses other than those of
public service enterprises for all the cities covered by
the different Census reports from 1902 to 1911, and for




the different groups of cities. In this table the cities
of Groups I and II are combined, as has been done for
all the years prior to 1911. There has been a general
increase in the total number of cities covered by the
reports, and also in the number of cities in the several
groups, as cities have reached or have been estimated
to have reached a population of over 30,000, or the
minimum population of the groups having a popula
tion not exceeding 50,000. There has also been some
shifting of the cities among the different groups from
year to year, but this has had no appreciable effect
upon the per capita payments for the several groups.
For all cities combined the total per capita pay
ments for expenses other than of public service enter
prises increased from $13.02 in 1902 to $16.62 in 1911,
a gain of 21.7 per cent. The per capita payments for
each year have shown an increase over those of the
preceding year, except that those for 1909 were
slightly less than those for 1908. The per capita
payments for expenses of the general government,
including those for courts, have increased, more
uniformly during the 10-year period for all cities
combined than for the different groups of cities. It
is noticeable that the increases for Groups I, II, and
TTT have been much greater than those for Groups
IV and V. The per capita payments for the expenses
of police and fire departments have shown general
increases for all groups, as have also those for conser
vation of health and sanitation, which includes sewers,
sewage disposal, and refuse disposal, and for education.

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

86
Table XlilV

PEOTECTION TO PERSON AND
PBOPEETY.

Total.

AT,T. CITIES:

General
govern"
ment.

Police
depart1
ment.

Fire
depart"
ment.1

All
other.

CONSERVATION OT
HEALTH AND SANI
TATION.

Health
conser
vation.

Sanita
tion, or
promo
tion o!
cleanli
ness.

High
ways.

Charities,]
hospitals,
ana cor
rections.

Recrea
tion.*
1

Schools.

Libra
ries.*

$16.62
16.45
16.07
16.18
15.82
14.53
13.89
13.72
13.66
13.02

$1.95
1.95
1.96
1.96
1.86
1.50
1.38
1.35
1.33
1.43

$1.99
2.15
2.15
2.17
2.09
1.99
1.95
1.96
1.88
1.84

$1.58
1.G5
1.65
1.66
1.61
1.51
1.46
1.42
1.33
1.30

$0.31
0.30
0.29
0.29
0.29
0.26
0.27
0.26
0.13
0.10

$0.31
0.33
0.31
0.29
0.29
0.23
0.22
0.22
0.22
0.21

$1.35
1.29
1.31
1.32
1.30
1.18
1.13
1.09
0.98
0.88

$1.96
2.01
1.71
1.76
1.91
1.73
1.67
1.69
1.60
1.69

$1.10
1.03
1.10
1.13
1.05
0.91
0.88
0.89
0.85
0.84

$4.73
4.62
4.58
4.55
4.46
4.24
4.02
4.03
3.86
3.61

$0.22
0.27
0.25
0.24
0.21
0.20
0.19
0.19
0.19
0.16

$0.62
0.59
0.55
0.55
0.51
0.49
0.47
0.39
0.34
0.58

1911
1910
1909
1908
1907
1906
1903
1904
1903
1902

20.05
20.12
19.63
19.75
19.03
17.24
16.19
15.97
15.30
15.71

2.66
2.68
2.71
2.70
2.52
1.93
1.76
1.73
1.76
1.84

2.54
2.82
2.83
2.87
2.71
2.61
2.55
2.54
2.50
2.49

1.64
1.76
1.78
1.80
1.69
1.59
1.53
1.48
1.42
1.39

0.46
0.44
0.43
0.42
0.43
0.39
0.41
0.39
0.20
0.13

0.38
0.41
0.38
0.36
0.37
0.29
0.27
0.26
0.26
0.26

1.65
1.60
1.66
1.68
1.62
1.4S
1.43
1.40
1.23
1.14

2.19
2.40
1.90
1.96
2.16
1.76
1.63
1.60
1.47
1.71

1.C0
1.55
1.59
1.61
1.49
1.25
1.18
1.13
1.00
1.06

5.14
5.10
5.04
4.99
4. SO
4.64
4.29
4.45
4.27
4.05

0.24
0.32
0.29
0.27
0.25
0.23
0.22
0.23
0.22
0.19

0.82
0.78
0.73
0.74
0.63
0.67
0.63
0.51
0.46
0.93

GROUP III:
1911
1910
1909
1908
1907
1906
1905
,
1904
1903
1902
,

13.67
12.97
12.72
12.71
12.75
12.11
11.79
12.15
11.92
11.42

1.19
1.19
1.11
1.14
1.14
1.08
0.98
0.98
0.95
0.99

1.52
1.53
1.48
1.45
1.50
1.39
1.38
1.47
1.43
1.39

1.66
1.65
1.60
1.57
1.60
1.49
1.45
1.44
1.34
1.43

0.16
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.12
0.12
0.11
0.15
0.08
0.09

0.26
0.27
0.24
0.23
0.22
0.17
0.18
0.17
0.21
0.16

1.13
1.01
0.96
0.96
0.97
0.83
0.82
O.S0
0.76
0.60

1.85
1.60
1.55
1.61
1.63
1.77
1.85
1.95
1.99
1.90

0.60
0.59
0.56
0.67
0.56
0.56
0.57
0.74
0.80
0.76

4.34
4.16
4.29
4.21
4.33
4.00
3.77
3.74
3.56
3.44

0.21
0.21
0.22
0.21
0.13
0.17
0.15
0.17
0.20
0.14

0.49
0.44
0.42
0.43
0.36
0.35
0.34
0.33
0.29
0.27

GftOUP IV:
1911....
1910....
1909....
1903....
1907....
1906....
1905....
1904....
1903....
1902....

11.53
11.07
10.80
11.10
11.72
10.96
10.90
10.81
10.15
10.23

0.99
0.93
0.96
0.97
1.01
0.96
0.92
0.91
0.70
0.95

1.21
1.22
1.21
1.24
1.29
1.22
1.19
1.20
1.16
1.13

1.46
1.45
1.41
1.47
1.48
1.40
1.38
1.29
1.21
1.17

0.11
0.11
0.10
0.12
0.12
0.10
0.10
0.09
0.05
0.06

0.21
0.21
0.20
0.18
0.21
0.16
0.17
0.17
0.18
0.17

0.93
0.S3
0.83
0.S7
0.92
0.82
0.81
0.77
0.73
0.71

1.47
1.36
1.34
1.43
1.61
1.60
1.62
1.78
1.64
1.68

0.35
0.42
0.44
0.47
0.52
0.52
0.51
0.56
0.50
0.56

4.14
3.90
3.74
3.85
3.95
3.63
3.67
3.45
3.34
3.16

0.17
0.18
0.17
0.17
0.17
0.15
0.15
0.14
0.14
0.12

0.29
0.30
0.26
0.25
0.30
0.28
0.26
0.25
0.22
0.21

GBOUP V:
1911...
1910...
1909...
1908...
1907...
1906....
1905...
1904...
1903...
1902...

11.45
10.95
10.60
10.54
10.28
10.02
10.02
9.53
9.33
8.90

1.03
0.97
0.89
0.88
0.88
0.83
0.79
0.75
0.73
0.79

1.07
1.05
1.04
1.04
1.05
1.01
0.97
0.98
0.91
0.89

1.33
1.31
1.34
1.33
1.34
1.26
1.26
1.28
1.10
1.08

0.11
0.09
0.09
0.12
0.11
0.03
0.07
0.06
0.04
0.04

0.18
0.19
0.18
0.17
0.16
0.14
0.15
0.16
0.16
0.17

0.83
0.77
0.66
0.71
0.69
0.63
0.59
0.52
0.46
0.44

1.62
1.55
1.57
1.55
1.52
1.66
1.66
1.64
1.59
1.53

0.42
0.47
0.49
0.47
0.40
0.39
0.39
0.39
0.41
0.45

4.21
3.95
3.81
3.77
3.65
3.51
3.61
3.27
3.29
3.04

0.18
0.20
0.18
0.18
0.14
0.13
0.14
0.13
0.12
0.11

0.27
0.27
0.25
0.21
0.20
0.17
0.14
0.14
0.11
0.09

19H
1910
1909
1908
1907
1906
* 1905
1901
1903
1902
GBOUPS I AND II:

»Payments for pensions are included In column "Miscellaneous and general" for 1911; for the years 1902 to 1910 they ore Included with expenses of tho police, fire, and
school departments.
*
'
'
lib 'J^y™611*3 tor « x P en ses of art galleries and museums are included in column "Recreation" for 1911; for the years 1902 to 1910 they are Included with the expenses of

TABLE 14.

The percentages for police department expenses
decrease
from Group I to Group V, being 13.2, 11.1,
Per cent distribution of payments for (he principal
11.1,
10.5,
and 9.3, respectively, for the different
general departmental expenses, by object of payment.—
groups.
For
this class of expenses Jersey City, N. J.,
Table 14 shows, by principal division of the general
departmental service, the per cent distribution of the Savannah, Ga., and Mobile, Ala., show tho largest
payments for expenses other than of public service percentages, 18.1, 16.8, and 16.8, respectively, and
enterprises. This distribution represents broadly the Lincoln, Nebr., and Pasadena, Cal., the smallest, 3.9
relative importance of the principal classes of expenses and 4.4, respectively. For fire department expenses
for the several cities and groups of cities. The per the proportion was largest for the cities of Group IV,
centages for legislative expenses are lowest in Group 12.6 per cent, and smallest for the cities of Group I,
I and highest in Group V, while those for judicial 7.5 per cent. The highest percentage for any city
expenses decreased from 4*5 in Group I to 0.5 in was 25.7, reported for Omaha, Nebr., and the lowest,
Groups IV and V. The high percentage for judicial 4.8, reported for Philadelphia, Pa.
expenses in Groups I and II are due to the exercise
The percentages represented by expenses for conser
of the functions of county government by the cities of vation of health and by those for libraries, art galleries,
those groups.
and museums, vary but little for the different groups.




DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.

87

Among the different cities the largest percentage for other per capita expenses; hence the percentages
health conservation, 5.5, was reported for Lawrence, represented by school expenses as given in Table 13
Mass., and the smallest, 0.1, for Quincy, HI.
are greater for the cities of Group V than for those of
The percentages of expenses for highways and for Group I.
schools were smallest for Group I and largest for
Comparative summary offer cent distribution of gen
Group V. Huntington, W. Va., shows the highest eral departmental expenses of 1^6 cities: 1902-1911.—
percentage for highways, 42.5, and Hamilton, Ohio, Table XLV, which follows, gives a comparative sum
the lowest, 2.1. The largest percentage of expenses mary of the per cent of governmental cost payments
for schools, 54.2, was reported for Lincoln, Nebr., for the expenses of the general departments of 146
while the smallest, 14.3, was reported for Jacksonville, cities represented by those of the principal divisions
Fla. For nearly all cities a larger percentage was of such expenses from 1902 to 1911. The percentages
reported for schools than for any other one purpose are based upon the absolute amounts of Table XLH
shown in the table. Although the per capita expenses and are subject to the factors and margin of error to
for schools, as shown in Table 13, increase with the which attention was called in the text relating to that
size of the cities, they do not increase as rapidly as table.
Table XI/V

1911

GENERAL DEPARTMENTAL EXPENSE OF 140 CITIES FOB—

All Ofttf protection to person pnd property.

,

Schools.'.....!*.....'.
Pensions and gratuities
All others.... 71

,

1910

1909

1908

1907

1906

1905

1904

1903

1902

11.9
12.2
9.6
1.9
1.9

12.0
12.4
9.4
1.9
2.0

12.2
12.7
9.8
1.8
1.9

12.2
12.7
9.8
1.8
1.7

11.8
12.5
9.7
1.9
1.9

10.3
13.0
9.9
1.8
1.6

10.0
13.3
10.4
1.9
1.6

9.8
13.6
9.9
1.9
1.6

11.5
13.7
9.7
2.0
1.7

12.3
13.4
9.5
1.3
1.6

8.2
11.8
6.8
2S.3

7.9
12.1
6.7
27.5

8.2
10.6
6.9
28.1

8.2
10.9
7.0
28.0

8.2
12.0
6.7
28.1

8.1
11.8
6.3
29.1

8.1
12.0
6.3
28.6

8.0
12.3
6.5
29.3

7.5
12.0
6.5
29.0

6.8
12.9
6.4
27.6

1.3
3.8
1.7
0.4

1.6
3.6
1.6
1.2

1.5
3.5
1.5
1.3

1.5
3.4
1.2
1.5

1.4
3.3
1.2
1.5

1.3
3.4
1.2
2.0

1.4
3.4
1.2
1.8

1.4
2.9
1.1
1.7

1.5
2.6
1.1
1.2

1.2
4.5
1.2
1.2

receipts from revenues in 1902 and 40.2 per cent in
Payments for expenses of public service enterprises.— 1911.
Of the Massachusetts cities of over 30,000 inhabit
The nature of these enterprises has been explained in
ants
seven are in the metropolitan water district and
the text discussion of Table 10, on page 75. Pay
obtain
water for their several systems from the metro
ments for municipal service enterprises as distinguished
politan
water system. The metropolitan water system
from those for public service enterprises are shown in
is
operated
by the state, and all costs of construction,
detail in Table 16.
extension,
and
maintenance are apportioned among
Water-supply systems are the most important of
the
municipalities
benefited. These costs are annually
public service enterprises operated by American cities*
apportioned
among
the various cities and towns in
The total revenue receipts and payments for expenses
three
parts:
(1)
For
the
accumulation of sinking funds
of such systems have been reported for 146 cities for
to
redeem
bonds
issued
for the construction or exten
each of the years 1902 to 1911, inclusive, and a sum
sion
of
the
metropolitan
system; (2) for interest on
mary of these receipts and expenses is included in the
such
bonds,
and
(3)
for
expenses of maintenance.
statement which follows:
The expenses of maintenance are included in the
figures shown in Table 15, the interest is tabulated in
Revenue Payments for
TEAR.
expenses.
receipts.
Table 17, and the payments for interest on debt for
public service enterprises of city corporations, and the
1911
$64,397,041
$25,884,680
payments for sinking funds are tabulated in Table 20
1910
62,200,103
24,459,186
1909
23,519,487
57,105,840
with the payments on account of debt. No exhibit
1908
23,395,699
54,422,470
20,827,844
1907
52,712,870
of the amount of the metropolitan water debt charge
19,707,584
1906
50,406,039
47,390,604
1905
18,677,311
able to each city, or of the annual increase or decrease
1904
44,974,037
19,357,447
42,986,187
1903
17,448,701
of such debt for each city, has been attempted by the
1902
41,210,322
14,850,566
Bureau of the Census, but the payments made by a
From 1902 to 1911 the receipts from revenues of city to the state sinking fund may be considered as a
water-supply systems of these 146 cities increased discharge of a portion of its obligations to the state on
$23,186,719, or 56.3 per cent, while their payments for this account. The payments in 1911 above referred to
expenses increased $11,034,114, or 74.3 per cent. The for the maintenance of the metropolitan water-supply
payments for expenses amounted to 36 per cent of the system by the Massachusetts cities receiving water




TABLE

15.

88

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

government for which the enterprise performs the
service or to which it supplies materials. To permit
the compilation of comparable figures for the costs of
such services as street lighting and high-pressure water
City
City
num
Amount. nun*
Amount
service, the Bureau of the Census for the 1911 report has
ber.
ber.
treated all of these enterprises as if the latter method
18,157
$310,435
164 Everett.
5 Boston
of accounting had been followed by the several cities.
9,253
19,574
167
Quincy.
72 Somerville.
8,614
7,454
184 Chelsea.,
122 Maiden
.
Table 16 sets forth the expenses and receipts of
1,102
141 Newton
these enterprises as they might be briefly summed up
The payments for expenses of the different classes if the accounts of the cities with such enterprises were
of enterprises included in Table 15 under the heading kept as distributing accounts for assigning the costs
"All other enterprises7' are shown separately in Table of the departments or branches of the city govern
ment for which the services were rendered. This
XLVL
method of treatment has been followed in the annual
reports for years later than 190S, where municipal
Table XLVI
PAYMENTS FOR EXPENSES OF—
IK
service enterprises were treated substantially in the
cur.
Rapid
Irriga transit
same
way as were public service enterprises.
Toll
Lunch Miscel
Ferries.
tion
bridges. rooms. laneous.
works. facili
In preparing this table the Bureau of the Census has
ties.
treated as distributable expenses all allowances for
$1,839,208 $12,802 $207,616 $754,159 $105,394 $167,516
Total
depreciation and kindred expenses which the several
1 New York. N . Y . . . . 1,593,196
744,557
cities have recognized in their statements of the costs
4 St. Louis, Mo
53,915
246,012
5
19,660
10,213
of the services rendered, and in addition, in the case
6
1,065
16
187,756
of electric light plants it has included an allowance for
2ft
21,617
25 j Rochester, N . Y . . . J
18,675
interest on the reported value of the plants at the av
26!
9,048
27
116,018
erage rate paid on the debt of the cities operating such
51
3,754
59 Springfield, Mass...
10,093
plants.
(A detailed statement concerning this latter
94
7,435
96
2,669
allowance
is presented in the introduction to this re
102
2,644
136
465
port
on
page
26, under the title "Difficulties arising
*
139
17,676
17?
29 13,035
from
accounting
for interest chargeable as outlay or
188
4,314
189
2,644
expense.")
The variations in the procedure of the several cities
The payments shown under the heading "Miscella with reference to depreciation and in the case of mu
neous" in Table XLVI were for the following enter nicipal service enterprises other than electric light
prises: Boston, Mass., city record; Portland, Oregv plants to interest, make it impossible to compile ac
harbor pilotage, towing, and dredging; Portland, Me., curate or strictly comparable statistics of the cost of
liquor agency; Charleston, S. C, "West End Improve such services as those to which the expenses recorded
ment'1 (an enterprise for filling and selling low lands), .in Table 16 are distributed.
$2,634, and powder magazine, $35; Racine, Wis., arte
In the columns under the designation "Payments
sian well; Augusta, Ga., canal; Pasadena, Cal., city
for expenses" are included separate statements of the
farm.
costs of services and materials obtained from the pub
TABLE 16.
lic through city departments and enterprises for the
Municipal service enterprises.—Under the designa use of the given enterprises, and also tho allowances
tion "Municipal service enterprises," the Bureau of the for interest on the value of the plant, though these al
Census includes those enterprises of a city which are lowances are only accounting payments.
organized for the purpose of furnishing the city with
As counterbalancing these payments for expenses,
some public utility or service which most cities obtain Table 16 shows (1) tho amounts received as compensa
from or through a private enterprise. They include tion for services that were rendered to tho public inci
such enterprises as municipal electric light plants, dental to the performance of services to the city, (2)
asphalt repair plants, municipal printing offices, and the charges made to the departments and accounts of
municipal repair shops. Some of these enterprises per the city for services rendered, and (3) all undistributed
form services or supply materials for a single depart expenses or undistributed profits.
ment or office, and others for a number of different
Many cities other than those shown in this table un
offices or departments. Two different methods of doubtedly carry on in connection with certain depart
accounting for the operating expenses of these enter ments undertakings which might be considered muni
prises are in use. One of these methods is to treat such cipal service enterprises; so long, however, as cities do
an enterprise as a separate department, and its costs not regard these undertakings as distinct enterprises,
of operation as those of other departments. The nor keep separate accounts for them, it is not possible
second method is to distribute the expenses of the to include them in any presentation of the statistics
enterprise to the departments or branches of the city of municipal service enterprises.
City numb

therefrom aggregated $364,589, and were from cities
and in amounts as follows:




DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
TABLE 17.

Payments for interest on city debts.—In their ac
counting for the construction of permanent proper
ties, such as waterworks, several cities, in accord
ance with the practice in commercial accounting,
charge the interest accruing on money borrowed
for the purpose during the time that the property
is being constructed as a part of the cost of the
property. The amounts so charged to outlay ac
count are included in Table 18 of this report as part
of the costs of the permanent properties and improve
ments of the cities. They are also included in Table
17 for the purpose of showing the total payments of
the cities for the use of credit capital. The method of
adjusting the payments recorded in the two tables by
means of a contra-reccipt as interest transfers included
in Table 9 has been previously explained on page 26
under the title "Difficulties arising from accounting
for interest chargeable as outlay or as expense."
The amounts of these duplications of interest pay
ments on account of outlays and for other purposes
referred to under the heading mentioned are given in
detail on page 74 in the text accompanying Table 9.
In that text is also presented a statement of all inter
est transfers which appear at once among the interest
payments in Table 11 and also among those in
Table 17.
The interest payments of Table 17 are classified into
payments for interest on (1) funded and floating debt,
(2) special assessment loans, and (3) revenue loans
and miscellaneous debt obligations. They are all ex
clusive of payments made in error and later repaid to
the city, and of payments of interest which balance
amounts previously received as accrued interest on the
original issue of city debt obligations.
The amounts included in this table in the column
"Of other governmental units" are given in detail for
the various divisions of the city governments in the
column headed "Interest" in Table 3. Of the total
amount of interest payments, 94.3 per cent was re
ported for the city corporations, 2.6 per cent for inde
pendent school districts, and 3.1 per cent for other
independent divisions, including certain counties of
Groups I and II.
Tho aggregate of all interest payments was $101,492,215. Of this amount, SS03,076 was charged
to outlays, and S14,717,224 additional, or 14.5 per
cent, represents transfers other than those on outlay
account, or amounts of money paid by the various
divisions of the government of the city as interest on
city securities held by the sinking funds, investment
funds, and public trust funds for municipal uses. The
total amount paid to the public by the 193 cities was
$85,971,915, an addition to tho corresponding amount
paid by the 184 cities covered by the report for 1910
of $6,537,976, or 8.2 per cent, of which increase $727,733 is accounted for by the addition of 9 cities not
reported in 1910.




89

From the classification of interest according to the
kind of debt obligations on which paid, it appears that
87.8 per cent of the total interest payments were on
funded andfloatingdebt, 6.2 per cent on special assess
ment loans, and 6 per cent on revenue loans and mis
cellaneous debt obligations.
The interest on special assessment loans is seldom
paid from collections of property taxes or similar
revenues, but from special assessments, such assess
ments being collected in a number of annual or semi
annual installments, each one of which includes an
amount for meeting the interest on the bond for whose
amortization the installment is collected. In such
cases the property owner pays the interest on the debt
as well as the principal, the city neither making nor
losing anything by the transaction, and no burden is
cast upon the general taxpayer. Table 17 does not
include any payments for interest on certain special
assessment obligations issued by some cities that are
primarily debts of the individuals against whom they
are levied and not debts of the city. When the cities
collect special assessments of this class and receive
interest on deferred payments, such interest collec
tions are included as receipts for private trust funds
and accounts recorded in Table 20, and not as receipts
for special assessments recorded in Table 6; and in
like manner the payments for interest are included
among the payments for private trust funds and ac
counts in Table 21 and not in Table 17.
Exceptional payments of interest by Massachusetts
cities.—On page 83 attention is called to certain pay
ments by Massachusetts cities to the commonwealth
for the maintenance of sewer, park, and water-supply
systems that have been constructed for the benefit of
the city of Boston and the adjoining municipalities,
and the further payment to the state to reimburse
it for payments of interest on the loans which were
made to finance the construction or acquisition of the
systems. Similar payments of interest are made to the
state on the advances made by it infinancingthe cost of
changes required for the abolition of grade crossings.
Table XI/VII

INTEREST PAYMENTS B Y MASSACHUSETTS CITIES TO
THE STATE.

On indebtedness for—

City
CITY.

ber.
TotaL

Total
5
33
42
4S
50
60
72
97
122
124
141
146
164
167
184

12,038,912

1,509,549
73
Worcester.
Fall River
1,720
67,286
1803
Lynn
28,877
122,651
Brockton..
1,787
Maiden
63,677
Haverhill
1,024
73,964 1
Fitchburg
117
Everett.
50,656 1
Qufncy.,».-,,. - „ . . . .
65,652
Chelsea... x A
50,076 !

Metro,
politan
sewer
system.

Metro
politan
park
system.

Metro
politan
watersupply
system.

Aboli
tion
of
grade
cross
ings.

$326,932 £385,142 $1,301,035

$25,803

231,740 1,107,789

14,812
73
1.720
484
1,803

155,208
45,078

21,724

27,159

28,877
24,262

69,849

18,692

17,638

26,599 1

42,685

25,629

H,357
16,164
10,589

id, 056
16,467
8,749

3,931 1
1

29,108
33,021
30,738

1,381
1,787
748
1,024
1719
117
135

90

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

Table XLVH gives the payments by the several Mas of the year, and for all of the factors that should be
sachusetts cities to the state as interest assessments considered, it is evident that, from the comparison just
on the metropolitan district loans and on the state made, the majority of the cities are increasing the val
advances forfinancingthe abolition of grade crossings. uation of their permanent properties and public im
provements faster than they are increasing their
debts, while in the case of a few, if any consideration
TABLE 18.
is given to depreciation, the opposite condition of
Payments for outlays.—The payments for outlays affairs exists.
included in Table 18 comprise the amounts paid by the
Thefigurespresented in Table IS represent for each
several cities for the acquisition or construction of the city the outlays of the entire city government by prin
more or less permanent properties and public improve cipal divisions and subdivisions of governmental serv
ments, including the payments for the additions made ice. The column headed "For outlays" in Table 3
to those previously acquired or constructed, but exclu shows the net amount of these payments for outlays
sive of payments in error for the correction of which by each of the divisions of the government of the
counterbalancing amounts are later received. The city, including school districts, counties, and other
payments last mentioned are included in Table 22 divisions.
under a descriptive heading. The payments for out
Where payments for the interest on debts incurred
lays shown in Table 18 exceed the amounts reported in for construction work are made before the completion
Table 3 in the column headed "Outlays" in the case of of the work, they are tabulated as outlays, if so charged
21 cities by the amount of payments for outlays re on the city books. Thefiguresin Table 18 include such
corded in Table 18, which were offset by receipts from
interest payments charged as outlays for cities of
the public on outlay account, the most important of
Group I, as follows: New York, N. Y., $769,573, and
which were receipts from the sales of real property and
Boston, Mass., $53,503.
from fire insurance adjustments. The amount of the
Payments included in the column of Table 18
payments thus offset is shown separately in the state
headed
"All other/1 under the general heading "Pro
ment which follows. The "payments" of Table 18
are thus the total payments on outlay account less tection to person and property," were made for such
payments in error, while the "governmental cost pay purposes as the purchase, construction, or improve
ments for outlays" of Table* 3 are the payments on ment of combined police and fire-alarm systems,
outlay account which increase the value of the perma levees, subways, and conduits for wires, retaining
nent properties and public improvements that result walls, piling, planking, riprapping, and other struc
tures for guarding against damage by lakes or rivers,
from the cash transactions of the year.
lifeboats, and for the permanent equipment of elec
trical departments or bureaus, departments of public
City
City
safety, and the offices of recorders or registers of deeds.
CITT.
Amount. (num
CITY,
Amount.
num
ber.
ber.
The outlays tabulated in the column headed "All
other," under the general heading "Sanitation or pro
7
„,..
940,027
79 Akron, Ohio
$1,050
motion of cleanliness," were for equipment for street
[ 249,485
92
14 Newark.N. J
100
102
9,395
21
2,993
1
cleaning and refuse disposal, and for public comfort
104
12,320
34
5,390
111
36
56,750
374
stations,
and the drainage of low-lying lands, etc.
39
16,547 i 119 Chattanooga, Tenn....
4,000
45
82,745 1 122 Maiden, Mass
133
The
outlays
tabulated in the column headed "All
128
46
2,459
772
139 Augusta, Oa
56
240,000
10,000
other,"
under
the
general heading "Highways," were
159
Salt
Lake
City,
Utah..
57
890
Huntington, W . V a . . .
100
9,750
68
made for the improvement of bays, rivers, and har
1
bors, for viaducts, for steps to hilltops, and for stone
The grand total of the payments for outlays other crushers, and in the case of all cities with large areas
than payments in error for the 193 cities was some were made for the construction of roads and
$316,824,609, while the governmental cost payments bridges outside of the populous districts of the city.
for outlays, as above explained, were $316,079,329,
The payments tabulated in the column headed
The excess of receipts from the pubKc which increased "Miscellaneous" were for the following purposes:
municipal indebtedness over payments to the public City yards in Paterson, N. J., and Lansing, Mich.;
which decreased municipal indebtedness, as shown in city stables in Roanoke, Va., Chattanooga, Tenn.,
Table 21, was $161,676,675. The governmental cost Seattle, Wash., Salt Lake City, Utah, and Fort Worth,
payments for outlays over the excess last referred to is Tex. ($198); monument to John M. Hood in Balti
$154,402,654. This shows that for the 193 cities as a more, Md.; property yard in Washington, D. C ;
whole the net receipts from increase of debts was but a soldiers' and sailors' memorial in Albany, N. Y.; city
trifle more than half the governmental cost payments warehouse ($400) and machine shop ($3,192) in Fort
for new properties and public improvements, there Worth, Tex.; battery building in Manchester, N. H.;
being, however, great differences among the individual city tool house in Eockford, HI.; city garages in
cities, as is pointed out in the text to Table 21, page 92. Berkeley, Cal., and Spokane, Wash.; city map in
After making all needed allowances for different Elmira, N. Y.; and wiring public buildings in St.
amounts of cash on hand at the beginning and close Louis, Mo.



DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.

91

The payments for outlays for electric-light plants
Secondary classification of nonrevenue receipts and
for lighting city streets or municipal buildings aggre nongovernmental cost payments.—Table 19 presents a
gated $591,178, and those for other municipal enter classification of nonrevenue receipts and nongovern
prises had a total of 81,913,430. The objects of these mental cost payments in addition to the one described
payments, together with the amounts expended, are above. This is a classification which separates the
shown in Table 16.
receipts into "receipts from the public" and "transfer
Service transfer payments for outlays.—Service trans receipts," or receipts by one division, fund, or account
fer payments for outlays were reported in the aggregate of the city government from another. This classifi
amount of $227,351, by 30 cities as follows:
cation is also applied to the nongovernmental cost
payments, which are separated into the two correspond
ing classes of "payments to the public" and "transfer
City
City
CITY.
Amount. num
CITY.
Amount.
num
payments."
ber.
ber.
4
5
6
7
12
15
17
18
20
23
31
33
34
45
48

TABLE 20.
St. Louis, Mo
Boston, M&ss..........

Minneapolis, Minn....
Seattle, Wash
Atlanta, On

15,793
3,648
11,913
7,477
3,447
2,896 j
51,626
13,293
16,812
177!
38,299
7,949
19,455 <
3,841
103

52
57
59
60
62
65
97
116
122
133
140
157
166
167
193

Salt Lake City, Utah..
Lynn, Mass.. L ... n
Kansas City, Kans
Little Rock, Ark.
Maiden, Mass
Macon. u8
Quincy, Mass

;

$200
1,075
188
52
1,302
3,304
3,188
4,356
385
836
14,882
7,522
101
8
3,223

TABLE 19.

Summary of nonrevenue receipts.—The nonrevenue
receipts of municipalities included in this report are,
when classified with relation to the aggregate of mu
nicipal assets, readily separable into three principal
classes: (1) Receipts from the sales of investments
and supplies, which result in the exchange of one asset
for another; (2) receipts which increase indebtedness
that results from incurring expenses or making out
lays on credit or from the purchase of assets by means
of some form of debt obligation; and (3) the receipts
which have been described on page 38 of the intro
duction, where they have been given the designation
"counterbalancing receipts.'' These three classes of
nonrevenue receipts are given in detail in Tables 20,
21, and 22, respectively.
Summary of nongovernmental cost payments.—The
nongovernmental cost payments included in this report
are readily separable into the same number of prin
cipal classes as are the nonrevenue receipts, the classifi
cation being based upon the effect of these payments
upon the aggregate of municipal assets and liabilities.
These classes are (1) payments for the purchase of
.investments and supplies which exchange one asset
for another, (2) payments which decrease indebted
ness by exchanging the asset cash for an outstand
ing liability, and (3) counterbalancing payments to
which attention has been called on page 38. The
first two classes of payments are given in detail in
Tables 20 and 21, the amounts of each of the six classes
of counterbalancing payments being identical with
those of the special classes of counterbalancing receipts.
Table 22 merely presents the total of these payments.




Receipts from the sale and payments for the purchase
of investments.—Table 20 gives the receipts from the
sale of investments and the payments for their pur
chase by the cities covered by this report, classified
as receipts and payments of (1) sinking funds, (2)
public trust funds for municipal uses, (3) investment
funds, and for investments not held in funds, and (4)
private trust funds and public trust funds for nonmunicipal uses.
Receipts from the sale and payments for the purchase of
supplies.—The same table also shows the receipts from
the sale of supplies, including accounting receipts for
supplies on hand at the beginning of the year and used
during the year, and payments for supplies during the
year that were on hand at the close of the year; or,
rather, in the first case the excess of the value of
supplies used over the payments for their purchase,
and in the second case the excess of payments for sup
plies over the value of those charged as expenses and
outlays, substantially as has been described on page 24
of the introduction to this report. .
*
-Transfers of investments and supplies.—A consider
able portion of the receipts shown in Table 20 repre
sent (1) the receipts by the funds of the city for the
redemption of city securities held by them as invest
ments, (2) the receipts from the sale oi investments by
one city fund to another, and (3) the receipts from the
sale of supplies by one division of the city's govern
ment to another. The first class of receipts are bal
anced by payments recorded in the column of Table
21 headed "Bonds, notes, warrants, and judgments,"
and the second and third classes are balanced by pay
ments recorded in the columns of Table 20 showing the
payments for investments and supplies purchased.
The second and third classes of receipts are relatively
small as compared with the one first mentioned.
The payments included in Table 20 that were trans
fer payments were also of three classes: (1) Payments
by funds of the city for city securities purchased from
the various divisions of the city government for invest
ment at the date of the original issue of such securi
ties, (2) payments by one city fund for securities sold

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

92

by another, and (3) payments for supplies purchased by
one division of the city's government from another.
These three classes of payments are balanced by re
ceipts in Tables 20 and 21, substantially as set forth
above. The aggregate amounts of the transfer re
ceipts and payments mentioned under (1) for the great
majority of cities are the same as the transfer pay
ments and receipts included in Table 21, since for those
cities there are no sales or transfers of investment from
one of the funds to another. For the few cities in
which the transfers of investments are made between
the various funds, and transfers of supplies are made
between the divisions of the city government, the
transfer receipts and payments of Table 20 exceed
those of the transfer payments and receipts included
in Table 21. The aggregate of transfer receipts in
cluded in Table 20 is $33,305,366, and the aggregate
of transfer payments is 859,806,528.
Table XI/V1II
DIVISION OF CUT'S GOVERNMENT.

Number of
cities
reporting.

1« 1
95
9

*

2
1
3 1
1
1
1
Water dfetrict.*....

»

2
1

il

From bonds,
notes, and
warrants
issued.

From trust
liabilities
assumed.

PAYMENTS -WHICH DECREASED INDEBTEDNESS.

From liabilities
For amortiza
For redemption For amortiza tion of liabilities
incurred as
of bonds, notes, tion of trust
agent for
as agent
liabilities.
other civil
and warrants.
of other civil
divisions.
divisions.

!

1567,096,589

122,709,591

$51,170,576 |

|3S0,610,4SS

122,687,122

150,364,809

636,005,216
17,184,217
8,839,621
2,425,009
2,224,475

21,490,516
744,940
433,749
40,3S6

30,163,009

3G2,495,357
10,026,900
4,332,992
1,024,898
2,034,543

21,432,786
754,517
390,045
53,774
50,000

20,856,734

21,007,567

27,500
240,270
19
53,007
3,000

30,500
201,920
£0,000

46,805
947,430

93,216
277,097

General transfer receipts and payments on debt account—The receipts and payments of Table 21, in
addition to being classified as above set forth, are
also classified as receipts from and payments to the
public and transfer receipts and payments. (For the
relation of the transfer receipts and payments of
Table 21 to those of Table 20, see the text descriptive
of Table 20.)
Receipts from and payments to the public on debt
account—Receipts from and payments to the public
are the only receipts and payments relating to debt
obligations that increase or decrease the city cash.
Of the 193 cities covered by the report, 57 paid the
public more cash for the redemption of debt obli
gations than they received in transactions that increased indebtedness, and thus decreased their debt
obligations in the possession of the public. The other
136 cities received more money or its equivalent in
transactions increasing indebtedness than they paid
for the redemption of debt obligations, and for them
the holdings of city obligations by the public in
creased during the year. The fact that 57 of the 193
cities covered by the report were able in the year




Receipts which increased and payments which de
creased indebtedness.—The nonrevenue receipts of
cities which are accompanied with increase of indebt
edness, and their nongovernmental cost payments
which result in a decrease of indebtedness, are shown
in Table 21. They are separated into three principal
classes, those represented by (1) bonds, notes, and war
rants issued by the city and judgments rendered
against it; (2) liabilities arising from the assumption
of public trusts for nonmunicipal uses and private
trusts, and (3) liabilities arising from acting as agent
for other civil divisions. Classes (2) and (3) of re
ceipts and payments are subdivided by the table into
subordinate groups. Table XLVHI, which follows,
presents a classification by divisions of the govern
ments of cities of the receipts increasing indebtedness
and the payments decreasing the same.

RECEIPTS WHICH INCREASED INDEBTEDNESS.

Total
City corporation

TABLE 21.

29,508,075

3,666

10,666

1911 to decrease their debt obligations to the public,
although the 193 cities as a whole increased their
indebtedness 8161,676,675, is one worthy of considera
tion by those who have come to believe that cities
must necessarily increase their indebtedness in everenlarging proportions.
Of the 136 cities which increased their indebtedness
to the public, the increase constituted less than 20 per
cent of the payments for outlays in 24 cities, more than
20 and less than 40 in 36, more than 40 and less than 60
in 19, more than 60 and less than 80 in 25, more than
80 and less than 100 in 19, and more than 100 in the
following 13 cities: Philadelphia, Pa., New Orleans,
La., Worcester, Mass., Wilmington, Del, Troy, N. Y.,
Waterbury, Conn., Altoona, Pa., Atlantic City, N. J.,
Little Rock, Ark., Chester, Pa., Huntington, W. Va.,
Portsmouth, Va., and Orange, N. J., all of which
materially increased their cash on hand during, the
year as shown by Table 2. Some of these cities in
creased their cash balances and debt obligations to the
public by only small amounts, while others materially
increased them. The cities last referred to are
among those which are needlessly burdening their

DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.

93

taxpayers with interest payments! as has been pointed represent the repayment of the state's advances on
out in the text relating to Table 2, page 50.
account of previous years and the payments for the
Transactions which increased the debts of Massa cities' share of the current expenditures for the main
chusetts cities to the state.—Attention has been called ontenance of the separate crossing structures. As a
pages 83 and 89 to the expenditures of the common result, some of the amounts which should be included
wealth of Massachusetts through special commissions in Table 21 are doubtless included in Table 11. It is
and boards, by which lands were acquired and hoped that the reports for 1912 may present a proper
developed, and structures completed for providing segregation of the two classes of payments. The earn
the metropolitan district, including Boston and its ings of the metropolitan sinking funds for the year
suburbs, with common sewer, park, and water sys ending April 1, 1912, were as follows:
tems, and for assisting that city and others in the aboli Metropolitan sewer funds
$76,180
tion of grade crossings. The outlays for the metropo Metropolitan park funds (including Charles River Basin
improvement)
141,897
litan systems are recorded on the books of the com
Metropolitan
water
372,274
missions, which constitute parts of the official records
of the state but not of the cities. These payments by
Total
590,351
the state are transactions which increase the indebted
The greater portion of this total had the effect of
ness of the cities in the metropolitan district. In like reducing the indebtedness of the cities covered by this
manner the advances of the state for the cities' share report. No exact apportionment was possible, and
of the cost of abolishing railway grade crossings are hence no account of these earnings has been taken in
transactions increasing local indebtedness to the state. Table 9, "Revenue receipts for interest," nor in Table
The debts incurred by the state in the form of bonds 21. The payments to state sinking funds shown in
issued for the metropolitan systems were as follows:
Table XLTX are included in Table 21 in the column
Metropolitan sewers
$62,000 of payments headed "Bonds, notes, warrants, and
Metropolitan parks (including Charles River Basin im
judgments." The net effect of the two classes of
provement)
13,000 transactions above mentioned—those which increased
Metropolitan water
185,000
and those which decreased the indebtedness of Massa
Total
260,000 chusetts cities to the state on account of the metro
The greater portion of the aggregate represents the politan system—for the fiscal year covered by this
increase in the indebtedness of the cities of over report can be computed approximately from the data
30,000 inhabitants within the metropolitan area to the given in Tables LV and LVI, on pages 104 and 105,
state, the smaller portion being the increased indebted respectively, showing the net indebtedness of the
ness of the minor municipalities within the district several cities covered by those tables to the common
with a population of 30,000 or less. No portion of wealth, on account of those systems, as of April 1,1911,
and April 1,1912.
this increase is included in Table 21, it not being prac
ticable to secure the data for any accurate apportion
PAYMENTS TO SINKING FUNDS OF THE
Table X L I X
STATS FOR THE AMORTIZATION OF
ment of this increase to the several cities. The ad
INDEBTEDNESS F O B —
vances by the state for the cities' portion of the cost City
CRT.
of abolishing grade crossings were not ascertained and num
ber.
Metropol
Metropol Metropol
water*
itan sewer itan park itan
are therefore not included in any table or statement
supply
system.
system.
system.
of this report.
Transactions which decreased the debts of Massachu
$239,518
$121,607
$457,715
Total
setts cities to the state.—The financial transactions
5
186,714
45,447
407,138
7,673
23,520
48
which lessened the indebtedness of the Massachu
9,664
60
8,0SS
14,931
25,425
72
setts cities for which this report gives statistics,
5,889
10,276
9,776
122
9,693
0,696
1,445
141
were of three kinds: (1) Payments by cities to the
6,244
3,342
10,698
164
3,672
5,554
12,136
167
state for sinking funds for the amortization of state
5,821
2,901
11,297
184
debts incurred for the metropolitan system of sewers,
TABLE 22.
parks, and water; (2) payments by the cities to the
state of the assessments levied upon them by the state
Oounterbalancing receipts and payments.—On page
for the repayment of the advances made by it for the 38 of the introduction definitions are given of
cities on account of the abolition of grade crossings; counterbalancing receipts and payments, or nonand (3) the earnings of the metropolitan sinking funds revenue receipts and nongovernmental cost payments
of the state which add to the assets of those funds. recorded in revenue and governmental cost accounts.
The payments mentioned in (1) are given in detail in These receipts and payments are of six general classes
Table XLIX, which follows. The reports received by shown in Table 22 in the division relating to receipts.
the Bureau of the Census setting forth the payments As the counterbalancing payments of each class are
to the state of assessments on account of the abolition in all cases equal to the receipts shown in the several
of grade crossings did not differentiate those which columns, the table gives only the aggregate payments.




94

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

General transfer receipts and payments.—Table 22, intionjustmentioned,thefirstcolumn of Table23 indicates
addition to giving the counterbalancing receipts and the number of separate accounting systems or sets of
payments of cities, presents a statement of the general records from which data must be procured in order to
transfer receipts and payments of the cities, or receipts make a full report of thefinancialtransactions of each
by one of the independent divisions, and funds of the of the municipal governments. A large number of funds,
city that are paid by the others. For the majority of as in New Orleans, La., and Louisville, Ky., indicates
cities these transfers are equal, but for 67 of them they that many municipal transactions are not under a
differ, owing in the greater number of cases to the central accounting control and that accountability
difference in the fiscal years of the different divisions is divided among several officials. Judging from the
of the cities reporting such differences, so that the experience of the commercial world, it is believed that
transfer receipts of one year by one division appear in the bestfinancialadministration is possible only when
the transfer payments of the other division, either in all financial transactions are brought within one ac
the preceding or succeeding fiscal year. A few of the counting system, and when one official is given the
differences referred to are in cities whose divisions power and is held responsible for its proper conduct.
have the same fiscal year, but in which some of the In Washington, D. C, the Federal Government shares
payments of the given fiscal year made on the last the administration and the cost of municipal affairs
day of the year do not appear on the books of the with the District government, which fact in part ac
receiving division until the first day of the succeeding counts for the large number of funds in that city.
The term "general treasury" is applied to the aggre
year. These differences do not in the least affect the
revenue and governmental cost transactions that gate of the funds other than sinking funds over which
constitute the essential portion of the statistics of the city auditor or comptroller exercises authority.
The term "cash in transit" is the designation of cash
this volume.
which
has been entered on the books of one depart
TABLE 23.
ment
as
paid to another but has not been recorded on
Summary of all receipts, payments, and cash balances,
the
books
of that other as received. Cash in transit
by divisions and funds, of city government.—Attention
is
only
reported
in the case of cities with divisions
has been called on page 21 of the introduction, and
having
the
same
date
for closing their fiscal years.
in the text explanatory of Table 3, to the different
The
table
shows
wide
differences in the dates on
organizations of cities for governmental purposes.
which
the
fiscal
years
close.
These differences com
Table 3 summarizes revenue receipts and govern
plicate
the
work
of
compiling
comparable statistics,
mental cost payments by the independent divi
sions of the government of the cities. Table 23 especially in cities which have several independent di
presents a summary of all receipts and payments, visions of government closing their accounts on differ
cash balances, and date of the close of the fiscal year ent dates. In Ohio and a few other states the statutes
for each division there shown, and in addition it shows fix a uniform date for the close of the fiscal years of all
the receipts, payments, cash balances, and date of city corporations. A uniform fiscal period for all
the close of the fiscal year of the funds of each divi cities in Massachusetts is urged in the first report of
sion. When the city corporation is the only local the state bureau of statistics on "the cost of municipal
governmental organization, the figures for the several government in Massachusetts." Every state should
funds are presented immediately below the name of have a law establishing a uniform fiscal year for its
the city, as in the case of New York, N. Y. When cities.
several additional governmental divisions or organi
TABLE 24.
zations are included, these divisions are shown under
Sinking funds^of two distinct types.—Table 24 pre
the name of the city as coordinate with the city cor
poration, as in the case of Chicago, HI. For cities of sents a summary by cities of certain transactions of
the latter class the funds of each division are shown sinking funds, the receipts and payments and cash
as subordinate to the division to which they belong. balances of which are given in Table 23, by divisions
The grand total for all divisions is shown opposite the of the governments of the cities, and the amounts of
name of the city.
their assets in Table 26. Sinking funds are of two
classes,
those with and those without investments. The
As subordinate to each governmental unit, Table 23
shows those funds which are kept wholly separate from cities with funds of the first class number 122 and
other funds and whose transactions are recorded by those with funds of the second class number 40. The
city officials in independent systems of accounts. An cities of the latter class are St. Louis, Mo., Milwaukee,
exception is made in the case of sinking, investment, Wis., Washington, D. C, Seattle, Wash., Indianapolis,
and trust funds which are always shown separately, Ind., Syracuse, N. Y., New Haven, Conn., Memphis
whether the city officials record the transactions of and Nashville, Tenn., Salt Lake City, Utah, Wilming
these funds with other city transactions or maintain ton, Del., St. Joseph, Mo., Utica, N. Y., Oklahoma
separatesystems of accounts therefor. Withtheexcep- City, Okla., Evansville, Ind., East St. Louis, 111., Terre




DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
Haute and South Bend, Ind., Covington, Ky., Spring
field, HI., Mobile, Ala., Canton, Ohio, Bay City, Mich.,
Lincoln, Nebr., Berkeley, CaL, Davenport, Iowa, San
Diego, CaL, Wheeling, W. Va., Superior, Wis., Du
buque, Iowa, New Castle, Pa., West Hoboken, N. J.,
Springfield, Mo., Quincy, HI., Lexington, Ky., Ports
mouth, Va., Pasadena, CaL, Joplin, Mo., Austin, Tex.,
and Newport, Ky.
The sinking funds of the first class are established
and maintained primarily for the redemption of bonds
at maturity, while those of the second class are main
tained primarily for the amortization of city debt obli
gations by purchase before their maturity, or for the
redemption of serial or other bonds maturing in prac
tically equal amounts each year. Sinking funds of
both classes are met with which are employed for the
payment of interest on city debt obligations in addi
tion to the purpose mentioned, although not all of
either class are so used. The revenue of municipal
sinking funds comprise (1) the amounts annually ap
propriated by the city corporation and other govern
mental units for sinking fund purposes, and (2) certain
city revenues that have been permanently set apart or
pledged for such purposes. In addition to the reve
nues mentioned, nearly all sinking funds of the first
class also receive interest on their investments. Fluids
of the second class, as a rule, expend the greater por
tion of their revenues during the year in which re
ceived, while the revenues of the funds of thefirstclass
are in part or wholly accumulated from year to year
and expended at the maturity of the various bond
issues. The sinking funds whose transactions are re
ported in Table 24 and whose assets are shown in
Table 26 received as interest and rents on their invest
ments an aggregate of §15,334,094. This was 3.04 per
cent of the assets on hand at the close of the year.
The funds of the first class mentioned above must
have secured a higher percentage than this, while those
of the second class secured a lower rate, although the
data were not obtained for an exact computation in
either case.
In some states cities borrowing money on long-term
bonds are required by statute to maintain sinking
funds with investments, and in a limited number of
states cities under these statutes are further required
to maintain a separate fund for the amortization of
each bond issue. In states without such laws a city
can, at its discretion, maintain either type of sinking
fund, or can, if it chooses, meet maturing debt obli
gations without the maintenance of a sinking fund.
In both classes of states an increasing number of offi
cials are becoming convinced that it isfinanciallyinad
visable to maintain sinking funds with investments
and are advocating sinking funds of the second class or
the issue of serial bonds so maturing as to obviate the
necessity of any kind of sinking fund. It is to be




95

noted in this connection that of the 31 cities with no
sinking funds in 1911 the majority reported no funded
debt obligations other than serial bonds.
Transactions of sinking funds.—Table 24 presents a
summary of thefinancialtransactions of all the sinking
funds of the 162 cities having such funds at the close
of thefiscalyear 1911. The table thus includes trans
actions of sinking funds not only of the city corpora
tion, but of all of the divisions of the government of
the city. The receipts of these funds are tabulated
under five heads, and the payments under four. Of
the five headings for receipts, two are for revenue and
three for nonrevenue receipts. The receipts from reve
nues are of two distinct classes: (1) The earnings of the
funds, which consist of rent and interest on invest
ments and interest on cash deposits in bank held as
sinking fund assets, and (2) other revenue receipts.
The latter receipts in turn are of two distinct classes,
the first being revenues from specific sources which are
pledged for sinking fund purposes, and the second the
general property tax appropriated for sinking fund pur
poses, which are paid direct to the sinking funds and
never pass through the general treasury. The cities
reporting the latter class of receipts, as a rule, have
sinking funds under the control of sinking fund com
missions, and for most of them the taxes are collected
by the county rather than by the city corporation.
Of the total amount reported in Table 24 as receipts
from other revenue, $17,798,218, or 65 per cent, was
reported for New York, N. Y. The net revenues thus
reported were all pledged by charter or other provision
for sinking fund purposes for the redemption of some
particular classes of bonds or of city debt obligations
in general. The revenues thus received, which were
distinctly pledged for sinking fund purposes in New
York, N. Y., in 1911, were as follows:
Special assessments
$34,405
Business licenses
233,811
Fines and penalties
501,491
Major privileges
467,192
Minor privileges
331,359
Rents of miscellaneous real property
192,787
Stenographer's fees, judicial
20,964
Revenue of water-supply systems
8,951,595
Revenue of public markets
307,033
Revenue from docks and slips
4,376,949
Income from ferries
1, 215,307
Rapid-transit rents
501,933
Interest on bank deposits not assets of sinking funds...
662,892

Of the 162 cities with sinking funds, 58 reported pay
ments for interest or expenses which aggregated over
$10,000 each* The sinking funds of these 58 cities are
charged with the duty of paying the interest on a part
or all of the outstanding indebtedness* In a few of
the cities with payments less than $10,000 tabulated
under the heading "For municipal expenses and in
terest" the sinking funds were charged with the duty

96

FINANCIAL STA1 3TICS OF CITIES.

for what the statutes and court decisions have denomi
nated "charitable uses." In most cases the purpose
of the donation or bequest is to extend aid in certain
directions in excess of what the city is accustomed to
provide on its own account. In a smaller number of
instances the donations or bequests are to be applied
to purposes which are other than municipal in their
nature and for which the city can not make appro
priations.
Public trust funds of the class first mentioned are
established for charities, education, pensions, and
other public benefits; and those of the second class
are for "charitable uses" for which the city can not
make appropriations, but the administration of
which may legally be intrusted to municipalities as
constituting convenient agencies for accomplishing
the desired end. Funds established for city uses are
termed public trust funds for municipal uses, while
those established for purposes which are other than
municipal in their nature and for which the cities can
not make appropriations from revenues are desig
nated public trust funds for nonmunicipal uses. In
the case of the greater number of these funds the
income alone is available for the purposes for which
the funds are created; but in the case of a few, both
principal and income may be expended.
In some cities the public trust fund cash, although
applicable only to the specified purposes of the trusts,
has been merged with the general city cash, and the
transactions are not as clearly set forth on the books
as would seem essential to correct administration and
accounting. In the majority of cities, however, the
transactions are properly recorded and kept entirely
distinct from the ordinary municipal transactions and
accounts.
Transactions of public trust funds for municipal
uses.—The acceptance by a city of donations and be
quests for municipal uses acts as an appropriation
thereof, and the money*or wealth so received, if ac
counted for in a legal sense, would be shown in the
accounts or reports as " appropriated." To distinguish
such appropriations from the ordinary governmental
appropriations, they are usually set apart in special
funds denominated "public trust funds." Cash and
other wealth in these funds constitute governmental
assets, and the acceptance thereof creates no liability
other than the liability involved in the ordinary gov
ernmental appropriation. The municipal purpose
most often subserved by trust funds for municipal uses
is that of providing pensions for policemen and firemen
who have suffered disability or have completed a
specified term of service, and gratuities for the fam
ilies of those who have died in the service. The pen
sioning of teachers is finding favor in recent years,
and several cities report public trust funds for this
purpose. A nilmber of cities, for the most part in
TABLE 25.
the Eastern states, report public trust funds for
Public trust funds for municipal and nonmunicipal charitable uses, such as for the care of the poor and
uses.—CSties frequently receive donations and bequests the defective classes.
of meeting interest payments on a part of the munici
pal debt, but the smaller amounts shown under that
heading are in most cases payments of the expenses of
managing the sinking funds.
The receipts shown under the heading "From issue
of debt obligations/' and the payments in the column
headed "For redemption of debts," represent the re
ceipts by the sinking funds from the issue of debt obli
gations that were issued through the sinking fund au
thorities rather than from the general city treasury*
They also include certain small amounts of warrants
drawn by the sinking fund authorities that had not
been cashed before the close of the year, and premiums
on bonds issued from the general treasury that were
specifically dedicated for sinking fund purposes. The
amounts shown in payments under the heading men
tioned represent the amount of city debt obligations
that were redeemed directly through the sinking funds.
Many cities having sinking funds do not, however, re
deem their debt obligations by their sinking funds
directly, but instead, transfer cash to the city treasury,
which reports all payments for the redemption of debt.
These different methods of reporting the payments of
cities for the redemption of debt render it impossible
to compile comparable statistics of sinking funds with
out a combination of the transactions of these funds
with all the other funds of the city. (Attention has
been called to this fact in the introduction to this re
port on page 21, under the heading "Difficulties arising
from differences in accounting for administrative
funds.")
The receipts shown in the column headed "Other
receipts" in large part represent receipts from the sale
of investments by the sinking funds, and in like man
ner the payments included in the column headed
"Other payments" are those made by the sinking
funds for the purchase of investments.
Many cities, especially those reporting no receipts
from revenue in Table 24, or small receipts therefrom,
make no specific provision for sinking funds other than
that included in the annual appropriation. In such
cities the moneys received by the sinking funds other
than from the sale of investments and interest thereon
are by general transfer from the city treasury. In like
manner many cities which appear in the table with no
payments for the redemption of debt transfer their
cash to the general treasury, which makes payments
for debt redemption. Table 24 does not show the ag
gregate of either the receipts or payments of the sink
ing funds by transfer, but only the excess of the one
over the other.
The last two columns of the table show the amounts
by which the aggregate assets of the sinking funds in
creased or decreased during the year.




DESCRIPTION OP GENERAL TABLES.
Of the 193 cities covered by the present report, 141
reported public trust funds for municipal uses. Trust
funds for charitable uses were most numerous in
Philadelphia, Pa., and Boston and Salem, Mass., the
majority being for outdoor poor relief. Among the
specific charitable uses to which the trust funds were
applied were the support of orphans' homes, assist
ance to poor children, maintenance of a free dispen
sary, loans, excursions for poor children, and purchase
of shoes for indigent school children.
Public trust funds for educational purposes were
found in considerable numbers, especially in Boston,
Mass., Chicago, HI., Philadelphia, Pa., and Cambridge,
Mass. These funds were usually for books, medals,
prizes, or scholarships, though four of them were for
the maintenance of trade schools.
The diverse objects to which public trust funds for
municipal uses are applied may be judged from the
following examples found among the funds for miscel
laneous objects: Immigrant relief; medals and prizes
for inventors, firemen, and school children; loans to
artisans; street cleaning, lighting, and repairing; Pas
teur or other treatment for hydrophobia; music for
the public; trees in parks; public celebrations; drink*
ing fountains; buildings; and observatories.
The revenue of trust funds from taxes, fines, and
forfeits are a part of the revenues of cities derived
from the exercise of the general powers of govern
ment. The aggregate of these revenues included in
Table 25 is $906,481. If these taxes and allied
revenues were not included in the statistics of tax
receipts in Table 6, those receipts would not be
comparable as between cities; and if the attempt
were made to show the provisions for pensions,
schools, libraries, or charities, without taking into
account the payments included in Table 25, or if the
T a b l e I*
City
num-

Total.

CUT.

PAYMENTS *OR—

NewYork.N.Y
Chicago. Ill
Philadelphia, Pa
St. Louis, Ho
Boston. lifass. 4....!.* x....

6
7
10
11
12

CVwtland, Ohio..
Baltimore'* Md
Buffalo, N. Y

13
14
15
16
17

Cincinnati, Ohio. *
Newarkt N. J.
Los Anra1$s, Cal.......

1,741
1,538
7,6S2
3,029 <
217

:...*.

11,700
1,224
750
16,437
2,485
2,631
633
2,162
567
711

.......

Washington,'D, C . . . . . . . . . .

24
25 Rochester, N. Y
26 Denver. Colo
28 St. Paul, Minn
29




1959,863

1,374 1
23,933
879,765
1,328,755
2,691
24,4S6 !
32,960
37,248

Milwaukee, wis

18 Minneapolis, Min«..
19 Jersey City, N. J..
21
22
23

All other.
Charities. Recrea
tion.

$1,537,460

Total
2
3
4
5

attempt were made to make comparisons as between
cities with reference to the payments by them of
pensions, and such comparison were based upon the
fund reports summarized in Table 25, the results would
not be satisfactory, because some portions of the data
for a correct comparison would be wanting; hence the
necessity, as pointed out on page 21 in the introduc
tion, under the title "Difficulties arising from account
ing for administrative funds,'' of basing all comparable
statistics of cities upon a combination or consolidation
of the reports of all administrative funds.
The receipts of the trust funds for municipal uses
covered by Table 25 from rents and interest on invest
ments aggregated $4,116,058 for 1911. This was 5.3
per cent of the assets at the close of the year, as given
in Table 26.
Table 25 is presented as an exhibit of transactions
already included in the preceding tables, and is designed
to show in connection with the other tables the char
acter of the transactions of those funds by the several
cities, and something of the relation of the aggregate
here included to the aggregate of which they form a
part.
Table 25 gives the total payments of the several
cities for pensions and gratuities through their public
trust funds for municipal uses. A comparison of the
figures of the table with those shown ia Tables TOnTTX
and XL will show the amount of pensions and gratui
ties paid by some cities directly, without the agency of
these funds. Table 25 also gives the payments by
these funds for schools and libraries, and Table L,
which follows, gives in detail the amounts paid by
them for charities and for recreation. These amounts
are shown in Table 25 in the column headed "All
other." The payments of Table L included in the
column headed "All other" are given in detail in
Table LI.

PAYMENTS FOR—

btf.

1

97

....
.

i

2,163
2,214
14,604
144
4,403 I1

1,158
523

$10,769

$566,828 J

1,990

1,374
28,933
447,000
21 795
2,260 1

2,028
583

1,015
7,6S2
637
66

2,392
151
438

7,828
786
750
4,437
35

3,872

i2,666
2,450
!
!

'*3,730

City
numher.

1

2,631
633
2,162
567
711
2,168
2 214
14,604
144
678 1

Total.

CITY*

30
33 1Worcester* Mass—
35
36
39 Richmond, Va

$312
87
236
2,509
15

40 Paterson.N. J
41
43 Dayton, Ohio
47
48

74
74
481
2,125
5S3

49
52
53 Albany, N. Y
54
58

300
4,945
300
3
191

60
63
64
66
67
60
70
73
74
75
70
77

i

Des Moines, iowa
Yonkers,N.Y
Norfolk Va,

Utiea.N.Y
Troy.N.Y
1

680
14
322
577
201
159
77
21
1,144
332
113
490

Charities. Recrea
tion. All other.
$312
5
236
2,509
15

$81

74
74
481
25
10

2,i65
573
300
4,532

$358

680
300

338 |

1

ii3

55
300
3
191
14
22
577
201
159
77
21
806
332
113
377

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES-

98

C1TI.

)tal.

Waterbury.Conn..
Akron. Ohio
Hoboken.N.J
Evansville, I n d . . . .
Peoria, 111

ISOO
102
107 !

93
4
30

96
97
98
99

Fort Wayne, I n d . .
Jacksonville, Fla...
Terre Haute, I n d . .
Portland, Me
South Bend, Ind...
Charleston, S. C . . .
Brockton, Mass....
Passaic, N . J
Bayonne,N.J

105
108
109
110
111
113
114
115

78
79
82
83
86
87
90
92
94
95

PAYMENTS FOR-

PAYMENTS FOB—

T a b l e L—Continued.
City
num
ber.

Charities. Recrea
tion. All other.

|22

104
103

1,177

119

4,046 1
1.348

City
num
ber.

Total.
jCharitles.

Recrea
tion. All other.

ISOO
SO
107
104
103

121
124
125
135
141

York, Pa
Haverhill, Mass..,
Salem, Mass
Wheeling. W. Va.
Newton, Mass

$731

1731

1G0
4,541
ISO
1,234

3,681

93
4
30
397
119

146
147
153
155
160

Fitchburg, Mass..
Dubuque, Iowa...
Hamilton, Ohio...
East Orange, N . J,
Joliet,IU

6G6
23
30
51
521

53S

128
23
30
61
521

669

167 Quincy,!
177 Decatur, 111
178T Mount Vernon, N . Y
181 Niagara Falls, N . Y . .

1,201
1
290
20

S3

1,118

521
5
353

780
3,377
1,348

95
25

95
2

Springfield, 111
Canton, Ohio
Saginaw, Mich
Binghamton, N . Y,

23
277
558
552

28
277
558
552

183
1S4
185
186

Lima, Ohio
Chelsea, Mass
Aurora, III
NewBochelle,N.Y.

Sioux City. Iowa...
Rockford,IlI
Lancaster, Pa
Springfield, Ohio...

28
4

1,402
69

187
190
192
193

Austin, Tex
Orange, N . J
Council Bluffs, Iowa.
Lynchburg, Va

28
4
1,402

69

***508

*160
436

290
20
521

1,355 'I
34
199

S421
186
726

199

60
5
353
1,355
34
1

by the city. These properties are to be distinguished
from public improvements as defined on page 43, a
statement of whose replacement value is given in
Table 28.
566,828
Total.
The assets shown in Table 26 are classified according
516,726
Administration of funds
20,159
Paving streets
to
the fund of which they form a part and to the char
7,900
Cleaning streets..!
7,590
Lighting streets
acter
of the security or other investment held.
5,954
Interest
4,8S6
Subsidies to humane societies..
Assets
of sinking funds.—The character of the sink
1,255
Expense of police department.
950
Maintaining dog pounds
ing funds, the assets of which are presented in the first
Care of cemeteries.
Expense of fire department.
group of columns of Table 26, has been fully sot forth
Purchase of medals
in the text accompanying Table 24. Of the 162 cities
reporting sinking funds, 70 reported city securities as
TABLE 26.
Amount of specified assets and value of public prop their only asset other than cash; 6 cities reported other
erties at dose of year.—Table 26 shows, in addition to investments but no city securities; 44 reported both
the cash of the cities in their general funds, the cash city securities and other investments; 41 reported cash
and investments in their sinking and investment funds, as their only investment; and 1 city, Amsterdam, N. Y.,
public trust funds and private funds, as well as the reported no assets in its sinking fund at the close of
value of other properties held as investments. If a the year.
For the greater number of cities the sinking funds
city is to present a complete balance sheet it must in
clude therein statements of the amounts that will prob are prudently and economically administered, either
ably be collected from assessed but uncollected taxes by city officials, who act as trustees ex officiis, or by
and special assessments, of accrued interest on invest independent boards of commissioners appointed for
ments held, and of certain contingent assets that have that purpose. In a small number of cities, however,
a monetary value. No effort is here made to present the cash accumulation in the funds has been diverted
exhibits of the assets or resources mentioned, however, to the payment of current city expenses, with the
for the reason that but very few cities of the United result that the so-called assets in the fund are mere
States make such statements of all their assets, and of accounting entries, and, since they do not constitute
these few only a limited number make any allowance true offsets to the bonded debt, are not taken into
for revenues that may prove uncollectable. The figures consideration in the preparation of this report.
in the last column of Table 26 represent the total value
The figures shown in Table 26 include for seven
of the public properties which is shown in detail in cities of Group I certain amounts held in the sinking
Table 27. The term "public properties," as here used, fund of the counties containing those cities. The
comprises the land belonging to the city and used for amounts thus included at the close of the fiscal year
municipal purposes, together with all the structures 1911 were as follows: Pittsburgh, Pa., $1,457,768;
upon such land, including buildings and machinery Detroit, Mich., 8177,073; Milwaukee, Wis., $24,961;
and all appliances and equipment used for carrying on Cincinnati, Ohio, $1,318,306; Newark, N. J-, $2,157,the work of the city departments and the various pub 160; Los Angeles, Cal., $59,474; Minneapolis, Minn.,
lic service and municipal service enterprises operated $723,027.
Table LI




OBJECT Or PAYMENT.

Number of
cities
reporting.

Payments
reported.

DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.

99

At the close of the fiscal year 1911 the aggregate
In a majority of the cities reporting investment funds
assets in the sinking funds reported equaled 19 per or investments the invested assets are comparatively
cent of the total indebtedness of the 193 cities covered small. In some instances they are doubtless of a tem
by this investigation, as compared with 18.9 per cent porary nature, being held merely for a favorable oppor
in 1910,19 per cent in 1909,18.5 per cent in 1908,19.2 tunity to dispose of the securities or real estate, when
per cent in 1907, and 20 per cent in 1906. The per the proceeds are to be returned to the general treasury.
centage which the value of the assets in the sinking In some cities permanent investment funds are estab
funds represented of the aggregate amount of funded lished to enable the cities to carry their ownfirerisks
and floating debt was 21.2 per cent in 1911 as com on municipal buildings, an amount equal to the pre
pared with 21.4 per cent in 1910, 21.5 per cent in 1909, miums usually charged by fire insurance companies
21.2 in 1908, 21.8 in 1907, and 22.6 in 1906.
being set aside each year for the creation of a fund from
Assets of public trust funds for municipal uses.—The which fire losses may be paid as they occur. Such
text accompanying Table 25 contains a condensed funds are usually invested in profitable securities and
statement of the character and purpose of the funds are here classed as investment funds. Funds provided
whose assets are tabulated in Table 26 under the general for the purchase, construction, or equipment of build
heading "Assets in public trust funds for municipal ings or other municipal permanent properties which,
uses."
according to the practice of some cities, are invested
Included with the assets in public trust funds for during a period of accumulation, are here also treated
municipal uses are assets in certain funds, mostly pen as investment funds.
sion funds, which are supported largely or altogether
Of the 193 cities covered by the investigation for
by appropriations and by certain kinds of municipal 1911, 72 reported investment funds or miscellaneous
revenues assigned to them by statute, charter pro investments, their assets aggregating $75,412,102.
vision, or ordinance. Although these so-called funds
Assets of public trust funds for nonmunicipal uses.—
are in their origin and nature more nearly allied to These are city funds the income of which is devoted to
administrative funds than to trust funds, they are purposes that are not municipal, and for which the
assigned to the latter class in accordance with the municipalities do not make appropriations. In Massa
general usage of American cities.
chusetts and a few other states the cities are not only
At the close of the year 1911, 59 cities reported pub authorized but directed to accept moneys in trust to
lic trust funds for municipal uses which had no invest guarantee the care of specified monuments and graves in
ments in city securities, 23 reported funds holding no cemeteries. The acceptance of such moneys creates an
investments other than city securities, and 22 reported express public trust and makes the city a trustee in
funds holding no investments.
the same way that a private individual or corporation
Assets of investment funds, and value of miscellaneous becomes a trustee under corresponding circumstances.
investments.—Under the heading " Assets in investment The acceptance of such a trust creates a debt liability
funds, and miscellaneous investments" are shown (1) for the amount received, and such liabilities should be
all assets of funds with investments other than sinking shown in accounts and reports of public indebtedness.
and trust funds and (2) all interest-bearing securities
Assets of private trust funis.—In certain cases cities
and investments other than those of the funds men receive and hold money under conditions which create
tioned, including real property used for purposes other private trusts. The trusts of this kind most frequently
than the uses of the departments and enterprises. met with in the financial administration of cities con
Although the term "investment fund" is seldom, if cern the estates of deceased persons held in trust for
ever, employed by city officials, it seems to be an appro unknown heirs, or moneys deposited as guaranty of
priate designation for the class of fundsfirstmentioned. contracts. Sometimes the moneys held under these
The value of real estate incidentally acquired and private trusts are set aside in special trust funds, and
yielding little or no income is included under the given sometimes they are represented by private trust
heading as a miscellaneous investment, although in accounts. Private trust funds are distinguishable
previous years it has been tabulated as a portion of from private trust accounts by the method of caring for
"public properties." In some instances the assets in the cash received in trust. When cash is received in
investment funds consist of bonds or stocks acquired trust for a given person or corporation and is deposited
by the city in consideration of financial aid or grants in trust for such person or corporation, a special fund
to railroads or other public service corporations; in a is created, to which is here given the designation
few instances they consist of real estate held for the "private trust fund"; while if the cash is debited to
purpose of securing rents or the profit that may result the general city fund and an account is opened for it
from an increase in value; and in other cases they on the city books, the account is here spoken of as a
consist of bonds or mortgages received in exchange 1 'private trust account." In a number of cities but
for real estate and held as investments awaiting little attention is given to the proper recording of
maturity or a favorable market.
transactions affecting private trusts, the receipts and




FINANCIAL STAT 3TICS OF CITIES.

100

is an estimate of the value made several years before.
The result is that the valuations of public possessions
included in this report for different cities do not
furnish reliable data for comparisons.
The valuation of properties employed in public
service enterprises has received more consideration
from city officials than that of any other class of
permanent public properties, yet the need of still more
exact and systematic valuation for accounting pur
poses is almost universal. Wide differences exist in
TABLE 27.
accounting usage with respect to depreciation and with
Value of properties employed or held for specified respect to the inclusion of the franchise or privilege
purposes.—The value of all permanent public proper value of a public utility enterprise with the physical
ties except those in funds with investments is shown value of plant and equipment. A closer approach to
in Table 27, in which for convenience in treatment uniformity of method is needed to make the financial
those properties are classified as "Land, buildings, statement of an enterprise in one city comparable
and equipment of general departments,11 "Land, with that of a similar enterprise in another. Only in
buildings, and equipment of municipal service enter case of such uniformity can the figures concerning an
prises, " and "Land, buildings, and equipment of enterprise in one city be clearly intelligible to those
public service enterprises." Most of the properties in charge of a similar enterprise in another city, so
included under the first and second headings are that the experience of one may be made available to
essential to the conduct of municipal affairs and are all. Further, more regard should be given to the
unproductive; that is, any income that may be importance of a full and careful consideration of all
derived from them is merely incidental. The corre factors affecting the present value of municipal
sponding table for the 1910 report also included the possessions; not only that the valuation of such
value of property that was acquired incidental to the properties in one city may be comparable with that
conduct of governmental business and was neither in another, but as an aid to the keeping of a complete
employed in carrying on the governmental functions account of operating costs and a means of assuring
of a municipality nor held with the definite purpose honest and prudent administration of the public
of procuring an income. In this report such property resources.
is designated in Table 26 as miscellaneous investments.
Comparison of increase in value of municipal proper
The properties of public service enterprises are pro ties with municipal outlays.—The costs of providing,
ductive; that is, they are designed to furnish an in improving, and extending governmental properties by
come approximately equaling or exceeding the cost of purchase or construction during 1911 are represented
operating and maintaining them.
by the payments for outlays. Inasmuch as the in
Valuation of municipal properties.—The importance crease in the value of municipal properties from the
of carefully and accurately estimating the value of beginning to the end of the year should correspond
public properties is very imperfectly appreciated by approximately to the outlays for such properties, less
many city officials. In some cities lands and buildings depreciation, during the same year, a comparative
are given a book value equal to their original cost, presentation based on certain data for 1911 and 1910
while in others the valuation given for the year 1911 is of interest.
payments frequently being entered upon the books
as ordinary city revenues and expenses. Such ac
counting for moneys received in private trusts leads
not only to confusion and irregularity, but sometimes
even to defalcation.
In Table 26 the assets in public trust funds for nonmunicipal uses and in private trust funds are shown
together, their aggregate being $12,287,624.

TAbleLIl

TOTAL VALUE OF MUXnCITAL norXRTIXS.
GROUT.

Total.,

Group rv
Group V.

Number
of cities.

Net outlay
payments 1911
for properties.

1910

184

9313,358,749

$3,348,741,482

83,088,308,544

8160,432,938

1152,925,811

8

138,960,607
43,997,880
71,158,203
38,383,050
20,852,409

1,979,174,817
400,704,695
419,815,931
274,137,525
174,908,484

1,927,123,367
368,834,606
384,036,919
245,312,042
163,001,580

52,051,480
31,870,089
35,778,983
28,825,483
11,906,904

86,915,12
12,127,791
35,379,221
9,558,167
8,915,505

10
35
56
75

The net outlay payments for properties given in
the table are obtained by deducting the outlay pay
ments for sewers and highways given in Table 18
from the net outlay payments as given in Table 3.
These payments exceeded the increase in the reported
estimated valuation of permanent properties exclusive
of sewers and highways by $152,925,811. All of the
five groups show an excess of net outlay payments, but



1011

Excess of net
Increase In valua outlay
payments
tion of municipal over increase
in
properties.
valuation.

the differences to be noted in the excess give evidence
of great differences in the individual cities in the
methods of preparing estimates of valuations from
year to year. Taking the figures of the table as a
measure, it appears that the present outlays only
Aggregate about twice the estimated depreciation, and
that the depreciation approximates 5 per cent of the
value of the properties whoso valuation is considered.

DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.

101

Value of properties of general departments.—Of theChicago, 111., reporting over half of the total value of
valuation reported for departmental properties, amount such properties, while for New York, N. Y., Pittsburgh,
ing to $2,019,958,782, $872,245,440, or 43.1 per cent, Pa., and Nashville, Tenn., the valuations given were
represents the valuation of parks, gardens, and play between $600,000 and $660,000. The other munici
grounds, over one-half of this amount being reported palities operating electric light systems as municipal
by New York City. Next in order of value come service enterprises were Detroit, Mich., Milwaukee,
schools with a valuation of $560,951,535, general gov Wis., Newark, N. J., Los Angeles, Cal., Denver, Colo.,
ernment buildings with a valuation of $187,893,160, Nashville, Tenn., Fort Worth, Tex., Springfield, HI.,
and properties of fire departments with a valuation of St. Joseph, Mo., Little Rock, Ark., Lincoln, Nebr.,
$92,282,875. Nearly one-fifth, or 20.8 per cent of the Kalamazoo, Mich., Galveston, Tex., Decatur, 111.,
total valuation for schools, was reported by New York Aurora, HI., and Orange, N. J.
City.
The high-pressure water system in New York City
Of the total valuation, amounting to $51,067,791, was valued at $6,557,844, and the high-pressure service
of the departmental properties reported under the pipes in Baltimore at $774,609.
heading "All other," more than one-fourth, or
Fourteen cities—New York, N. Y., Pittsburgh, Pa.,
$14,640,280, represents the valuation of armories and New Orleans, La., Seattle, Wash., Kansas City, Mo.,
rifle ranges. Twenty-one cities reported armories, Indianapolis, Ind., Denver, Colo., Columbus, Ohio,
namely, New York, N. Y., Philadelphia, Pa., Boston, Omaha, Nebr., Spokane, Wash., San Antonio, Houston,
Mass., Cleveland, Ohio, Baltimore, Md., Buffalo, N. Y., and Fort Worth, Tex., and St. Josephh, Mo.—reported
Cincinnati, Ohio, Newark, N. J., Minneapolis and St. asphalt repair and paving plants valued together at
Paul, Minn., Atlanta, 6a., Richmond, Va., Duluth, $484,145. The values of the properties held by the
Minn., Elizabeth, N. J., Portland, Me., Chattanooga, other municipal service enterprises reported were as
Tenn., Augusta, Ga., Newton and Taunton, Mass., Ports follows: Departments of electricity in San Francisco,
mouth, Va., and Chelsea, Mass. Rifle ranges were re* Cal., and Washington, D. C, $883,028; printing depart
ported by eight cities in Massachusetts.
ment in Boston, Mass., $59,643; auditorium in Mil
The value of electric light and power properties and waukee, Wis., $400,000; and battery building in Man
combined police and fire-alarm systems, which were chester, N. H„ $17,040.
reported for 30 cities, was $5,998,877, and that of
In many cities the importance of special and careful
municipal baths and gymnasiums, reported by 38 valuation of* property of this kind is evidently over
cities, was $3,358,783.
looked. The usefulness of the Census statistics of
The remaining items included under the heading city enterprises depends—no less for this class of
"All other" are as follows: Public buildings, other enterprises than for the public service enterprises—
than those mentioned above, $214,000; election booths on frequent and exact valuations of the city property
and voting machines, $966,514; street lights, $626,963; employed, for only on the basis of such valuations can
city engineer's equipment, $524,553; real estate inci statistics be compiled which will have any great value
dentally acquired and not used by departments, for purposes of comparison.
$23,228,303; morgues, $183,193; public comfort sta
Value of properties of public service enterprises.—The
tions, $117,552; potter's fields and unproductive ceme reported value of properties held by public service
teries, $6,742; pounds, $20,816; and miscellaneous, enterprises increased during 1911 from $1,144,007,040
$1,181,215. Under the heading last mentioned are to $1,226,315,857, or 7 per cent. Of the total value of
included the values reported for various inspection public service enterprises, 68.7 per cent represents the
department properties, law libraries, gymnasiums, value of water-supply systems, 10.5 per cent the value
fair grounds and outing camps, a dispensary, pumps of docks, wharves, and landings, and 20.8 per cent the
and wells, a harbor master's equipment, harbor dredg value of all other enterprises. Thirty-nine and oneing properties, lifeboats, forestry department proper tenth per cent of the total value of public service
ties, drinking fountains, clocks and bells, a city store, enterprises was reported by New York City.
an ambulance house, moth-exterminating department
The total value reported for electric light and power
properties, and a greenhouse.
systems and gas-supply systems was $21,342,905.
Value of properties of municipal service enterprises.—Electric light systems were reported by 17 cities:
Of the total valuation reported for properties of muni Chicago, 111., Cleveland, Ohio, Detroit, Mich., Seattle,
cipal service enterprises, amounting to $19,120,463,52 Wash., Columbus, Ohio, Birmingham, Ala., Tacoma,
per cent, or $9,944,154, represents the value of electric Wash., Fort Wayne, Ind., Holyoke, Mass., Jackson
light systems. The other enterprises of this type, ville, Fla., Bay City, Mich., Hamilton, Ohio, Taunton,
named in the order of the valuations reported, were Mass., Lansing, Mich., Pasadena, Cal., Jamestown,
high-pressure water systems and service pipes, asphalt N. Y., and Joplin, Mo. Gas-supply systems were
repair and paving plants, and a printing department. reported by Richmond, Va., Duluth, Minn., Holyoke,
Electric light systems were reported by 19 cities, Mass., Wheeling, W. Va., and Hamilton, Ohio. Hoi-




102

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

appreciated, the valuations for many cities either
have not been made or are far from accurate or com
plete. It is on account of this fact that no totals are
given in the table. The valuation of improvements
in the new cities of the West is a comparatively easy
problem, and that fact undoubtedly accounts for the
somewhat more complete figures for tljose cities than
for the older cities in the Eastern states.
Nearly all public improvements fall naturally under
one or the other of the broad headings "Sower sys
tems" and "Highways." A few cities, however, re
City Table L I U
ported
valuations, small in the aggregate, for such
Value.
CITY AND ENTERTRISE
num
ber.
improvements as levees, unproductive docks and
wharves, retaining walls, etc., which can not logically
1193,580,800
Grand total.
be classed under either of the above headings and
95,023,235
Rapid-transit subways.
which are therefore shown by themselves in a column
75,380,335
New York, N . Y .
headed "All other public improvements."
19,647,900
Boston, Mass
Of the 193 cities, 169 reported for sewer and drain
86,814,611
Toll bridges.
86,545,404
age systems an aggregate value of S440,8S1,449; 143
1 New York, N . Y .
38,000
102 Covington, K y . . .
reported for street pavements, gutters, and curbings
185,207
188 LaCrosse, W i s . . .
46,000
189 Newport, Ky
an aggregate value of $603,4S6,923; 95 reported for
4,229,656
Public halls.
sidewalks a value of $57,313,994; 141 reported for
Pittsburgh. Pa
,
1,334,039
Buffalo, N . Y
367,000
bridges other than toll a value of $167,883,583; 55 re
Cincinnati, Ohio.....
212,500
Rochester. N . Y . . . . .
97,438
ported for all other highway improvements a value of
672,000
Denver, Colo
425,000
St. Paul, Minn
,
$48,364,572; and 19 reported for all other public im
Richmond, Va
,
37,900
Houston. Tex
344,657
provements
a value of $2,975,420.
86 Peoria, 111
70,650
101 Wichita, Kans
210,000
It
is
apparent
that there is little comparability be
,
103 Canton, Ohio
200,000
109 Saginaw, Mich
102,772
tween
the
figures
for the different cities reporting ex
119 Chattanooga, Tenn.
55,700
182 Muskogee, Okla
100,000
cept in the case of sewer and drainage systems. The
Subways for pipes and wires..
2,572,758
mileage and present cost of construction of each typo
,
7 Baltimore, Md
2,303,824
of sewer is known by every well-informed city engi
74 U t i c a , N . V
54,495
85 Erie, Pa
25,650
neer,
and there would seem little reason why the esti
123 New Britain, Conn.
35,593
150 Newcastle, Pa
90,000
mated
value shown should not correspond closely with
161 Auburn, N . Y
,
63,191
the
replacement
value. In reporting the values of
Street railways.
695,073
sewers,
however,
some cngineors have reported con
San Francisco, Cal..
185,073
New Orleans, L a . . .
510,000
struction costs and have allotted little or nothing for
Ferries..
635,200
depreciation. This is especially the case in cities which
5 Boston, Mass
610,200
have
had a modern sewer system for only a few years.
165 Portsmouth, Va..
25,000
For
such
cities the value shown is perhaps greater than
Miscellaneous..
3,605,267
the
actual
value, but the difference is not great enough
16 New Orleans, La.:
Sugar sheds
,
200,000
to
affect
seriously
the comparability of the figures.
26 Denver, Colo.:
Irrigation works.
250,000
Chicago
reported
a
greater
valuation for its sower and
27 Portland, Oreg.:
Towage equipment.,
211,322
drainage
system
than
any
other city, but tho figures
96 Charleston, S. C :
Public land
365,385
included
the
valuation
of
a
drainage canal valued at
Powder magazine...
7,050
139 Augusta, Ga.:
$35,175,846.
Tho
sewer
system
of Atlantic City, N. J.,
2,103,960
Canal
,
(
172
is
owned
by
a
private
corporation,
and hence its value
Pasadena, Cal.:
467,550
Cityiarm
,
is not reported here.
The valuation of highway improvements are incom
TABLE 28.
plete and inaccurate, yet it is gratifying to note that
Replacement valve of public improvements.—The reports for a larger number of cities wcic secured for
value shown for public improvements is either (1) such valuation than in any piior year. Tho valuations
the original cost of construction less allowances for of street pavements and bridges have received more
changes that may have occurred in the price of ma careful consideration from city officials than those of
terials and of labor and for depreciation, or (2) the other highway improvements, and for many cities the
estimated present cost less depreciation of original values of these improvements are all that were reported
structures. In theory such values may be ascertained under this heading. There are, however, other high
within a reasonable degree of accuracy, but the ad way improvements which are entitled to be listed in a
ministrative significance of such values not being complete inventory. Nearly every city has in years
yoke, Mass., and Hamilton! Ohio, operate both electric
light and gas-supply systems. The value of the plant
and equipment for electric lighting in Holyoke was
$850,016, and that for gas lighting was $625,533. The
correspondingfiguresfor Hamilton were $252,223 and
$193,002.
The several items constituting the group of mis
cellaneous public service enterprises included under
the title "All other," in Table 27 are shown in Table
LHI, which follows:




DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
past made large outlays for the purchase of land for
street purposes, for grading, etc., and as such outlays
represent wealth of the city invested in highways, in
a broad sense, a comparison of expenditures for such
purposes in different cities would be of interest. Many
cities have made large outlays for grading, but, so far
as reported, Seattle and Spokane, Wash*, Lincoln,
Nebr., Cleveland, Ohio, and St. Paul, Minn., are the
only cities that have inventoried such improvements.
The larger part of the value reported in the column
headed "Street pavements, gutters, and curbing" rep
resents the value of pavements. Where curbs and
gutters were reported, their value was generally in
cluded with that of pavements, though for a few cities
it was reported separately.
Only about half of the cities reported values for side
walks, and some of these reported only the value of
sidewalks adjoining land owned by the city.
The column in Table 28 headed "All other," under
"Highways," includes the valuation of various high
way improvements, the specific character of which was
not reported; also for Lincoln, Nebr., and St. Paul,
Minn., certain amounts for grading; and for Cleveland,
Ohio, Pittsburgh, Pa., and Cincinnati, Ohio, valuations
of county roads (in some instances these amounts in
clude payments for the purchase of turnpike roads
from private corporations). In the column headed
"All other public improvements" are shown for
Rochester, N. Y., and Akron, Ohio, the valuation of
retaining walls; and for other cities, valuations of
levees, unproductive wharves and landings, and street
lamps and standards.

103

and floating debt and those sinking fund assets which
had been specifically provided for the amortization of
such debt. In computing that net funded and floating
debt for the reports mentioned no account was taken,
of the assets in sinking funds which were provided for
the amortization of special assessment certificates. In
this report the Bureau of the Census uses the terms "net
indebtedness" and "net debt" with the exact signifi
cance assigned to the term net funded and floating
debt in the reports for 1909 and 1910, the conclusion
having been reached after some discussion and reflec
tion that the shorter terms may with propriety be used
in speaking of the debt to which the Bureau of the
Census in 1909 and 1910 gave the longer designation.
Indebtedness classified by the governmental unit by
which incurred.—In Table 29 the gross debt of the
several cities and groups of cities is first classified
according to the division of the city's government by
which the indebtedness was incurred. The net debt
of the Massachusetts cities, such as that shown in
Table LTV, is not included in either of the three,
columns provided for the classifications here con
sidered. The debt last referred to properly belongs
to a fourth division of debts, those incurred by the
state for the municipality. Of the governmental
indebtedness of the 193 cities, exclusive of the Massa
chusetts cities to the commonwealth, 94.1 per cent
was incurred by the city corporations; 2.6 per cent by
the independent school districts, and 3.3 per cent by
the other divisions of the city governments, including
for certain cities of Groups I and II that portion of the
debts of the counties in which the cities were located,
represented by the percentage of the assessed valua
TABLE 29.
tion of the property located in the county that was
Gross and net indebtedness of cities.—Table 29 has reported for the territory under the authority of the
been arranged to show both the gross and net indebt city corporation. The amounts reported in the
edness of the cities covered by this report at the close column headed "Other governmental units of city"
of the fiscal year 1911. The terms gross indebtedness were as follows: County government, $9,476,215 in Chi
and gross debt are here used as designations of the cago, 111., and the total amount reported in the specified
aggregate of all the outstanding debt obligations, and column for Cleveland, Ohio, Pittsburgh, Pa., Detroit,
the terms net indebtedness and net debt are used as the Mich., Buffalo, N. Y., Milwaukee, Wis., Cincinnati,
designations of the gross funded andfloatingdebt, less Ohio, Newark, N. J., Los Angeles, Cal., and Minneapolis,
the assets of sinking funds accumulated for their Minn.; park and driveway districts, $12,376,150 in Chi
cago, 111., and the total amount reported in the specified
amortization.
The terms "net indebtedness" and "net debt" as column for Tacoma, Wash., East St. Louis, Peoria,
here used differ materially from the use of the terms in Springfield, and Rockford, 111.; sanitary district,
preceding Census reports for cities having a population $20,392,046 in Chicago, 111., and the total amount re
of over 30,000. In the reports for the years 1902 to ported in the specified column for Oakland, Cal.; poor
1908; inclusive, the Bureau of the Census applied the districts, total amount reported in the specified column
term net debt to the total outstanding obligations of for Philadelphia, Pa.; port of Portland, total amount
cities, less the amount of sinking fund assets. The net reported in the specified column for Portland, Oreg.;
debt so computed seldom represented the actual net bridge district, $360,000 in Portland, Me.; water dis
debt, because the computation did not take account of trict, $5,029,635 in Portland, Me.; and county super
the assets of cities provided for the redemption of cur visors' fund, total amount reported in specified column
rent debt, including special assessment certificates, rev for Rochester, Syracuse, and Troy, N. Y.
If the special indebtedness of Massachusetts cities to
enue bonds, warrants, and trust liabilities. Recogniz
ing this fact, the Bureau of the Census in its reports for the commonwealth were included in the aggregate of
1909 and 1910 applied the term "net funded and float Table 29, the percentage of the aggregate that was in
ing debt" to the difference between the gross funded curred by the city corporation would be 92.4; that by



FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

104

independent school districts, 2.5; that by the state for reporting each kind of floating debt obligation and the
city corporations, 1.8; and that by other governmental aggregate amount of such obligations outstanding.
units, 3.3.
| FLOATING DEBT OBLIGA*
Indebtedness classified by character of outstanding Table LIT
TIONS.
debt obligations.—Indebtedness classified according to
KIND OF DEBT OBLIGATION.
the character of the outstanding obligations is shown
Amount
reported.
in Table 29 under three principal.headings, "Funded
or fixed/1 "Floating," and "Current." The first two
Total
$14,889,120
classes are not subdivided, but the current indebted
6,119,203
Judgments
5,970,165
revenue bonds
ness is classified under four subheadings: "Special Special
935,163
Special obligations to public trust funds.
781,959
assessment bonds and certificates," "Revenue bonds Time warrants
442,357
Interest-bearing warrants due on call....
400,378
and notes," "Warrants," and "Obligations on trust Contract
195,095
Special notes
28,000
Balance on land purchase
account."
5,271
Script (not described)
11,W0
Indebtedness classified as funded.—Under the title Not reported
"Funded or fixed" are tabulated those debts evidenced
by formal instruments which have a number of years to
Special debt obligations to public trust funds.—Among
run, and for the amortization of which no assets other the debt obligations included in Table LIV as " Float
than those of sinking funds have as yet been spe ing," the kind that ranked third in amount outstand
cifically authorized or appropriated. This class of ing was that designated "Special obligations to public
debts includes bonds, corporation stocks, certificates, trust funds." Such obligations arise when cities
. and other long-term debt obligations receiving various receive the money for public trust purposes and con
local designations. If included in Table 29, the spe vert the same to general uses. These debt obligations
cial debts of Massachusetts cities shown in Table LV were reported in 1911 by 14 cities in amounts shown
would have been tabulated in the column headed by the following statement:
"Funded or fixed."
Indebtedness classified as floating.—In the column City
City
Amount.
CITY.
Amount.; num
arr.
with the title "Floating" are tabulated the amounts of namber.
ber.
indebtedness represented by outstanding judgments,
$23,481
52
13,900
39
time warrants, and certificates of indebtedness that do
42 Fall River, Mass
104,165
61
141,16$
44
336,562
94
2,000
not conform to the Census definition of revenue loans,
7,846
3,700 1 121 York, Pa
46 Grand Rapids, Mich..
47
3,500
36,200 1 141
together with the special revenue loans to be redeemed
60,749
25,000' 146
48 Lowell, Mass
43,056
143,835 » 163
50
from the tax levy of the succeeding year, and all other
New Bedford, Mass...
i
short-term obligations where payment has not been
Indebtedness of Massachusetts cities to the state.—
provided forfromthe proceeds of the current tax levy.
The amount and character of these floating debt obli Table 29 gives the floating debt as above defined of all
gations included in Table 29 are shown in Table LIV, the 193 cities covered by this report, with the exception
which follows. This table gives the number of cities of the cities of Massachusetts*
Table I,V

N E T INDEBTEDNESS TO THE STATE, AFBIL 1 , 1 9 1 1 , ON ACCOUNT OF—

City

crrr.

ber.

Metropolitan sewer systems.
All metropoli
tan systems.

North
system.

South
system.

Metropolitan park system.
Parks.

Metropolitan
Charles Iwater system.
Boulevard*. Kanta^ket
River
Basin,
Beach.

Total.

$51,018,138

13,846,428

$5,203,868

$5,642,647

11,484,850

$443,705

S3,716,5G7

830,680,073

5
48
60
72
122

Boston
,
Cambridge..
Lynn
,
Somerville..
Maiden
,

38,660,951
2,509,656
3S5,8$5
2,712,633
1,367,238

827,753

595,504

4,135,491
366,170
253,666
222,740
146,729

989,701
109,641
51,140
60,399
54,522

335,550
26,659
17,310
15,283
10,518

2,651,127
765,292
63,769
£6,295
38,742

26,125,822

141
164
167
184

Newton
Everett
Quincy
Chelsea

233,667
94,017
101,577
88,587

53,655
45,006
90,5V>
30,168

18,8S9

69,560
23,523
26,329
21,930

92,637
685,988
778,209
724,418

.

1,635,001
1,152,583
1,445,623
1,148,565

^ " • l " "

711,771
489,873
297,631
277,506

The table does not include for the cities mentioned
their debts to the commonwealth, although it includes
all other debts. The funded debts of the Massachu
setts cities to the state are two kinds, (1) those reported
by the city's obligations to the state to reimburse it for
the advances made for the city's portion of the expense
of abolishing railroad grade crossings, and (2) those
represented by the obligations imposed on the cities by



1,166,596
441,763

c, ass
7,152
5,956

1,646,145
626,854

the state laws for reimbursing the state for the appor
tionment to the several cities of the costs of installing
the metropolitan sewer, park, and water systems, in
cluding the improvement of the Charles River Basin.
These are municipal improvements which have been
acquired and completed under the direction and super
vision of the state authorities in the interest of the city
of Boston and the adjoining municipalities. Tables LV

DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
and LVI, present statements obtained from the
state auditor, showing the net amount of the debts
of the nine cities having a population of over 30,000
within the Massachusetts metropolitan area, as of
April 1, 1911 and 1912. The net decreases in the in
debtedness of the nine cities concerned during the year
was $1,166,476. The net payments to the state as sink
ing fund assessments during thefiscalyear 1911, which
Table IiTI
City
num
ber.

141
164
167
184

Metropolitan sewer systems.

CRT*

All metropoli
tan systems.

37,800,702
2,448,295 I
373,814
2,600,627
1,348,801
1,605,836
1,131,243
1,433,671
1,108,673

North
system*

South
system.

13,774,002

15,140,997

812,167
1,218,509
698,370
480,649
292,026
272,281

Indebtedness classified as current.—In the column
headed " Special assessment bonds and certificates/7 a
subdivision of current debt obligations, are tabulated
those obligations which are to be paid from special
assessments. These obligations may be long-term or
short-term bonds or certificates, or outstanding war
rants payable at a specified time.
The amounts shown in the column headed' 'Revenue
bonds and notes" represent (1) short-term obligations
issued with the distinct pledge or general understand
ing that they are to be met from future collections of
specified current revenues other than special assess
ments, and (2) overdrafts by the financial officers of
the city. The debt obligations first mentioned have
various designations, as "revenue loans," "revenue
bonds," "anticipation tax warrants," and "tempo
rary revenue loans."
In the column with the title "Warrants" are in
cluded the amounts of noninterest-bearing warrants,
orders, vouchers, and audits due but unpaid at the
close of the year, except so-called warrants to be paid
from special assessments, which are included in the
column headed "Special assessment bonds and cer
tificates." Warrants or orders against cash derived
from special assessment loans are not themselves spe
cial assessment loans, and consequently are tabulated
in this column with the other outstanding warrants.
Outstanding warrants were reported by threefourths of the 193 cities covered by the present report,
including 5 of the 8 cities in Group I, 9 of the 10 cities
in Group II, 26 of the 35 cities in Group m , 39 of the
56 cities in Group IV, and 54 tff the 86 cities in Group
V. In some cities warrants are issued only when per
sonally called for, and are thus for the most part imme
diately presented for redemption; in others, the treas




for most of the cities approximated the calendar year,
were given in Table XLIX as $818,840; the new debts
incurred aggregated $260,000; and the sinking fund
earnings were $590,351. Allowing for the great
differences in the fiscal years for which thefiguresare
compiled, it is seen that there was a net reduction
during the year 1911 of not far from $500,000 not
shown by the payments of this report.

N E T INDEBTEDNESS TO THE STJLTE, APRIL 1 , 1 9 1 2 , ON ACCOUNT OF—

349,851,662
5
48
60
72
122 Maiden

105

Metropolitan park system.
Parks.
15,493,548

3,552,065 i 4,026,220
1
356,495
248,963
216,854
142,852
1,152,501
436,431

227,493
91,532
98,892
86,247

Metropolitan
Charles water system.
Boulevards. Nsntasket
Beach. River Basin.
8432,656

$1,442,520
961,487
106,516
49,682 I
58,677
52,967
52,126
43,752
88,005
29,308

1

$3,574,833

$29,993,106

327,194
2,550,281
25,995
740,780
16,879 1
60,290
14,902
53,223
10,257
36,628

25,571,288

18,418
6,229
6,974
5,808 !

65,765
22,240
24,893
20,733

l,558,60i
625,448
89,533
675,464
778.476
694,296

urer's books are kept open for some days or weeks
after the close of thefiscalyear, so as to charge to each
year all payments of the costs of that year; in others,
the treasurer sets aside cash in "suspense accounts"
for the redempton of unpaid warrants, which may
thus be treated as "paid" in the appropriation ac
count. In several cities the outstanding warrants are
of two classes, (1) unclaimed audits, for which war
rants have not been issued by the auditor because not
yet called for, and (2) unpaid vouchers, where the
warrants have been duly issued but not yet redeemed.
In the column with the title "Obligations on trust
account" are tabulated debt obligations arising from
the trusteeship of private trusts and public trusts for
nonmunicipal uses.
Indebtedness classified hy creditor.—Under this gen
eral heading the total gross debt included in Table 29
is separated into two classes, that which was owing (1)
to the public and (2) to city funds with investments,
including the sinking, investment, and public trust
funds*or municipal uses. In the column headed "City
funds with investments" is included the par value of all
city securities held by sinking and investment funds and
public trust funds for municipal uses, while in the col
umn headed "The public" is included the par value of
all other city debt obligations outstanding, including
the municipal liabilities by reason of public trusts for
nonmunicipal uses and private trusts. Of the total
debt, $467,689,383, or 17.6 per cent, was held by the
three classes of funds mentioned. In some cities
more than one-third of the total debt outstanding was
held by these funds, the largest portion being held, as
a rule, by the sinking funds. If the special debt of
Massachusetts cities to the state were included with
the total of debts to the public, the percentage due the

106

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

Total and per capita net indebtedness at close of
public would be 82.7, and that due the city funds
yearm—The m 0 st significant figures in Table 29 under
would be 17.3.
the general heading "Net debt at close of year" are
Indebtedness classified by purpose for which incurred.—
A third classification of Table 29 segregates debt obli those showing the per capita net indebtedness. A com
gations of cities into debts incurred for (1) the pur parison of these figures shows great variation among
poses of general departments and municipal service the individual cities, but for the main groups a pro
enterprises and (2) the purposes of public service enter gressive increase from group to group as the cities
prises and investments. Of the total debt recorded in involved become larger. It should be noted, however,
the table 70.3 per cent was incurred for general purposes that in these figures for net funded and floating in
and 29.7 per cent for public service enterprises and in debtedness the indebtedness on public service enter
vestments. If the special debt of Massachusetts cities prises is included, and hence in any comparison of such
were included in the total, the foregoing percentages indebtedness between cities the values of such enter
would be 69.4 and 30.6, respectively. The revenues prises should be taken into consideration. The per
derived by most cities from public service enterprises capita net indebtedness was in excess of SI00 for New
and investments are sufficient to meet the interest York, N. Y., Boston, Mass., Cincinnati, Ohio, New
accruing on the second class of debts. Those debts, Orleans, La., Portland, Me., Atlantic City, N. J., and
as a rule, do not rest as burdens upon the general tax Galveston, Tex. Six cities showed net per capita in
payers, as they are not met from their contributions, debtedness of less than S10. The cities of the five
but, like special assessment loans, are paid from reve groups with the highest and the lowest per capita of
nues derived from those specially benefited. The net indebtedness were as follows:
special assessment loans constituted 5.2 per cent of
Amount.
Lowest city.
Amount.
QMOVT.
Highest city.
the total indebtedness reported; hence the total burden
of debt that rests upon special classes of citizens is I
$29.02
$147.12 Chicago, m
24.12
137.57
34.9 per cent of the total, while that which is to be II
75.04
4.73
Jersey
City,
N.
J
0.27
135.72 Peoria, IU
IV
paid by taxation of the general body of citizens with m
Portland, Me
1.26
114.64
out regard to special benefits received is 65.1 per cent v
of the total.
The per capita of the special indebtedness of the
Included in the debt shown in Table 29 as incurred
Massachusetts
cities to the state, of which mention has
for public service enterprises and investments are debt
been
made,
was
for the several cities of that state as
obligations of Philadelphia, Pa., and Toledo, Ohio,
follows:
issued for the construction and acquisition of gas
works, and the debt obligations of Cincinnati, Ohio,
Amount.
Amount.
crrr.
issued for the construction of the Cincinnati & South
ern Railway. These properties are now leased to and Boston....
$40.34
$56.12 Kewton
32.36
23.53 Everett.
operated by private corporations, and hence are invest Cambridge
43.42
4.1$
Quincy.
Lynn
36.72
34.26 Chelsea.
Somervflle.
ments, and not public service enterprises. As a rule, Maiden....
29.75
the debts of cities for the purposes of the general de
partmental and municipal service enterprises were
In comparing the per capita indebtedness of cities,
considerably greater than those for public service one with another, the foregoing amounts should bo
enterprises and investments, but for several cities the added to those shown in Table 29 for the several cities.
debt outstanding for public service enterprises and in
Increase in net indebtedness during year.—The la9t
vestments was the larger. The cities with this greater column of Table 29 shows the increase or decrease dur
indebtedness for public service enterprises and invest ing thefiscalyear 1911 in the net debt of tho 193 cities
ments were Los Angeles, Cal., Tacoma, Wash., Port covered by this report. Of these cities 123 show in
land, Me., Flint, Mich., Augusta and Macon, Ga., creases in their net debt amounting in the aggregate
Pittsfield, Mass., Amsterdam, N. Y., and Newport, Ky. to $155,757,242, and 67 cities show decreases aggregat
Per capita gross indebtedness incurred for specified ing $7,690,010.
purposes.—Table 29 shows separately the per capita
TABLE 30.
gross indebtedness incurred for general purposes and
Funded and special assessment indebtedness, classified
that incurred for public service enterprises and invest
ments, as well as the per capita of all gross indebted by purposefor which incurred.—Table 30 presents a sum
ness. The following statement shows the highest and mary of those portions of the total city indebtedness
lowest per capita of gross debt incurred for all purposes: defined in the text description of Table 29 as "funded
debt" and "specialassessment bonds and certificates/'
GROUP.
Highest city.
Amount.
Lowest city.
Amount.
classified according to the reported purpose for which
they were incurred.
I
New York, N . Y
1222.63 St Louis Mo
141.02
II
Cincinnati, Ohio
170. n Detroit. Mich
29.75
The classes of debt obligations by purpose for which
UI
Spattta, Wash
130.59
20.26
Portland. Me
146.19 Terre Haute. Ind
14.57
issued
that are most accurately shown are those for the
rv
Atlantic fcity,N. J . . . . 162.60 Springfield, Mo
1.66
v
water-supply and lighting systems. The debt in


DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
curred for other public service enterprises is not so
fully exhibited, and this is also true of the debt
incurred for municipal service enterprises. Of the
debt incurred for general purposes the segregation is
thoroughly made for but few cities, as is shown by the
fact that the amount tabulated as incurred for "com
bined or unreported purposes" forms 13.6 per cent of
the total. Debt tabulated as for funding purposes is
in much the same category as that tabulated for com
bined or unreported purposes, though it is possible
that some of that incurred for refunding purposes was
tabulated for constructing municipal service or public
service enterprises.
Bonds issued under such terms as "local improve
ment," "street improvement," and "general improve
ment," have so far as possible been tabulated under
the more descriptive headings of the table, and only
when such tabulation was impossible have they been
tabulated as for "combined or unreported purposes."
Issues of bonds described as "refunding" have been
classified according to the purposes for which the
debt they replaced was incurred, whenever these pur
poses could be discovered without too extended a
search of the earlier records, and the amount tabu
lated under this heading in Table 30, representing 3.6
per cent of the grand total of funded and special assess
ment debt, includes only what could not be so classi
fied. This amount is $12,218,820 greater than the
corresponding amount shown in Table 21 of the report
for 1910.
The designation "funding" is applied to bonds
issued to meet unpaid claims and judgments and out
standing warrants, but the column so headed doubtless
includes many obligations that would more properly
bo classified as issued for refunding. The debt obliga
Table LVIII
City
num*
ber.

CITY, AND ENTERPRISE TOR TOUCH INCURRED.

Outstanding
indebtedness
incurred for
specified
miscellaneous
public service
enterprises.

Total

1326,574,392

New York, N. Y

269,415,461

Docks and ferries.
Toll bridges
Rapid transit
Markets
Philadelphia, Pa.:

109,415,763
82,155,746
74,457,337
3,386,615
1,500,000

Convention hall

18,896,700

Boston, Mass
Rapid transit
Subway.
Ferries

♦.

9,409,000
8,989,700
498,000

,

635,000
460,000
175,000

Cleveland, Ohio
Market
Cemetery
Baltimore, Md

9,320,000
,

6,265,000
3,055,000

Docks and wharves

914,720

Conduits

914,620
100

Pittsburgh, Pa.
Memorial hall
Market




107

tions reported as issued for funding purposes amounted
in all to 8.1 per cent of the grand total and was
$18,383,529 more than the amount reported under
that designation for 1910.
In Table LVII that portion of the debt incurred for
general purposes which is included in the column
headed "Miscellaneous purposes" is further classified
by the specific purpose for which incurred, and in
Table LVIII a similar classification is presented of the
indebtedness incurred for public service enterprises
and investments that is included in Table 30 in the
column headed "All other."
Table I/VII

OUTSTANDING INDEBTED
NESS INCURRED TOR
MISCELLANEOUS
PUR
POSES.

PURPOSE FOE WHICH INCURRED.

Number of
cities
reporting.
Total.,

$63,379,530

Aid to railroads.
Expositions.
Armories and military equipment
Public buildings and grounds
Street cleaning
Bathhouses and public comfort stations
Health department expenditures
Refuse disposal plants
Hospitals
Playgrounds
Protection from Hood
Expenditures for sanitation
War expenditures
Monuments
Reclamation of land
Airline
Crematory.
.
Canals and river and harbor improvements..
Voting machines and election booths
Public halls
Memorial building
Sundry departmental expenses
Sundry general expenses
Ferry
Interest
Refunding irrigation bonds
Market

City
num
ber.

Amounts
reported.

C R T , AND ENTERPRISE FOR WHICH INCURRED.

Buffalo, N. Y.:
Market
Cincinnati, Ohio.
Southern Railway.
Purchase of leaseholds....
Market house
Municipal lodging house..
Newark, N . L :
Docks
Los Angeles, Cal.:
Wharf.
New Orleans, La.:
Public Belt Railroad..
Jersey City, N. J.:
Docks
'.
Seattle, Wash.:
Market
Kansas City, Mo.:
Market
Indianapolis, Ind.:
Mark
Louisville, Ky.:
Wharves

30
2
14
7
6
19
4
24
21
15
14
12
3
3
2
1
9
6
12
3
1
5
34
1
3
1
1

17,341,477
7,589,000
6,532,826
5,029,633
3,693,152
4,538,383
3,064,000
3,013,626
1,509,829
1,130,812
1,725,438
1,982,779
733,500
644,822
515,875
450,000
416.200
1,351,180
356,815
336,750
212,500
339,379
583,924
115,000
94,050
73,575
5,000

Outstanding
indebtedness
incurred for
specified
miscellaneous
public service
enterprises.

$80,000
18,554,100
18,259,000
219,100
56,000
20,000
100,000
32,375
203,020
127,600
10,000
300,000
6,000
1,000

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

108
T a b l e I/VIII—Continued.
City
Bum*
her.

CRT,

AND ENTEBFBISE FOB WHICH KNCUSBED.

25 Rochester, N . Y . .

Outstanding
indebtedness
incurred for
specified
miscellaneous
public service
enterprises.
1244,000

144,000
100,000

Market
Convention hall..
26 Denver, Colo.:
Auditorium..

266,000

Portland, Oreg...

860,000

Docks
River improvement..
St. Paul. Minn.:
Auditorium..

450,000
410,000

Columbus, Ohio:
Market.
Toledo. Ohio:
Market....
Oakland, CaL:
Wharves...

200,000
25,000

City
num
ber.

AND ZKTERPBISB JOE WHICH INCUBBlD.

76 Elizabeth, N. J.:
Docks
79 Akron, Ohio:
Market house.
89 Savannah, Ga.:
Cemetery
90 Jackson, Mich.:
Water and electric-light plant.,
107 Mobile, Ala.:
Wharves
103 Canton, Ohio:
Market and auditorium.
109 Saginaw, Mich
Auditorium..
Market

180,000
1,150,500

CUT,

115 Springfield, Ohio:
Market house..

Birmingham, Ala.:
Cemetery

29,000

Memphis, Term.:
Market house.

119 Chattanooga, Tenn.:
Wharf;..

60,000

123 New Britain, Conn....

Fall Biver, Mass.:
Cemetery

3,000

Subway for wires*
Cemetery

Dayton, Ohio:
Market house..

35,000

127 Berkeley, CaL:
Wharf

Grand Rapids. Mich.:
Market....

75,000

136 Racine, Wis.:
Cemetery..

Nashville, Tenn.:
Hay market.

50,000

139 Augusta, Ga.:
Canal

103,553

140 Macon, Ga.:
Market...

104,000

144 Chester, Pa.:
Wharf...

405,000

150 New Castle, Pa.:
Conduit

New Bedford, Mass.:
Wharf
,
Camden, N. J.:
Docks and wharves.
Tacoma, Wash.:
Wharf and d o c k . . . .
Des Moines, Iowa:
Cemeteries
Yonkers,N.Y.:
Dock
,
Youngstown, Ohio:
Market house...
Houston, Tex..
Market and market house
Wharf and ship construction.
Norfolk, Va.
Market-house site.
Cemetery
St. Joseph, Mo.:
Market improvement.
TJtica,N.Y.:
Subways.
Troy,N.Y..
Market...
Docks....

3,000
1,200
45,000
299,000
149,000
150,000

198,000
145,000
53,000
25,000
36,000
6,300
3,000
3,300

152 Knoxville, Tenn.:
Markets.
161 Auburn, N. Y.:
Subways for pipes and wires.
162 Charlotte, N. C :
Market house
164 Everett, Mast.:
Glcnwood Cemetery greenhouse..
165 Portsmouth, Va
,
Ferry and l>oat construction.
Cemetery
188 La Crosse, Wis.:
Toll bridges..
189 Newport, Ky.:
Toll bridges..
191 Lorain, Ohio.....
Dock improvement.
Cemetery
193 Lynchburg, Va.:
Market and auditorium.

Can not segregate.

A more precise classification of debt obligations
according to purpose of issue on the part of the several
cities is still to be desired. This is particularly the
case with the special assessment debt, of the total
amount of which, 8139,075,512, as shown by Table 29,
no less than $73,539,147, or 52.9 per cent, can be
classed only as incurred for combined or unreported
purposes. It is a gratifying fact, however, that the
officials of a number of important cities are taking an




increased interest in this matter, and it is hoped that
their example may be generally followed.
Comparison of funded debt and special assessment
indebtedness with the value of municipal properties.—The
classification of funded and special assessment debts
according to the purpose for which they wore incur
red provides a basis for comparison between the
amount of such debts and the value of the proper
ties on account of which they were incurred, as

DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
shown by Table 27. Because of the fact that the pur
poses for which debt obligations were issued are often
not stated clearly, it is impossible in many cases to
accurately determine the ratio between the value of
lands, buildings, and equipment of departments, and
the debt incurred for their acquisition. The greater
part of the debt incurred for the acquisition of depart
mental properties is included under the heading "Issued
for general purposes" in Table 30, though considerable
amounts appear in the columns headed "Issued for
refunding" and "Issued for funding." Deducting the
amount of funded debt tabulated as issued for com
bined or unreported purposes from the total debt
reported as issued for general purposes, the remainder,
$1,294,917,083, may be divided into two parts. One
part, the total debt for sewers and highways, plus the
special assessment loans for combined or unreported
purposes, amounting to $628,537,569, may be said to
have been incurred for public improvements. The
other part, amounting to 8666,379,514, or 51.4 per
cent of the total, may be considered as having been
incurred for the properties of departments. To this
should be added a portion of the funded debt classified
as incurred for combined or unreported purposes, and
of that shown as incurred for refunding or for funding
purposes—that is, of the debt incurred for purposes
not definitely reported. Assuming that the same
proportion of this debt as of that incurred for specified
purposes (51.4 per cent) was for the acquisition of
departmental properties, the outstanding debt on
account of such properties would amount to
$878,959,392.
The total valuation of departmental properties in
1911, as given in Table 27, was $2,019,956,782, and
the ratio of debt to valuation was therefore 43.5 per
cent, as compared with 42 per cent in 1910. The
foregoing percentages take no account of sinking
fund assets which at the close of 1911 constituted
21.2 per cent of the outstanding funded and floating
debt. If consideration is taken of these assets, the
ratio of net funded and floating debt to property
valuation was, for the year 1911, 34.2 per cent. This
would indicate that the revenue accumulations of the
cities—that is, the interests of the cities in their per
manent properties as proprietors—were equal to 65.8
per cent of the value of those properties. This per
centage is materially larger than those given on page
51, showing the proportion of revenue receipts
expended directly or indirectly by 146 cities during
the 10 years for outlays. .This greater percentage
affords evidence that the revenue expenditures for
outlays are greater than the depreciation in property
values due to use in service and obsolescense. The
percentage given above indicates that something more




109

than two-thirds of the reported valuation of the
properties of departments represents property that
has already been paid for by the cities from revenues
received. (See tabular statement on page 100.)
The ratio between the debt incurred for watersupply systems and the total valuation of such systems
is of special interest. The valuation of the watersupply systems reported for 1911, as shown in Table
27, was $842,719,125. For these properties Table 30
shows a debt of $451,543,972, or 53.6 per cent of the
valuation, as compared with 49.4 per cent in 1910
and 46.7 per cent in 1909. In twelve cities the debt
incurred for the water-supply system was in excess
of its reported valuation.
TABLE 31.

Funded and special assessment indebtedness, classified
Jyy year of maturity.—Table 31 shows the debt obliga
tions for which statistics are given in Table 30, classi
fied according to year of maturity for the 20 years
next following 1911. For $1,151,731,400, or 46 per
cent of the total, the year of maturity is later than
1931; and for $117,729,860, or 4.7 per cent, it was not
ascertained. Of this latter amount, $2,675,560 repre
sents the principal of "premium bonds" in New
Orleans, for which the amount to mature each year
[ is determined by lot, while a considerable part conI sists of serial bonds for which the amounts maturing
each year were not specified.
TABLE 32.

Interest-hearing debt, classified ly rate of interest.—
The debt for which statistics are presented in Table
32 comprises the funded and special assessment debts
which are shown in the two tables immediately pre
ceding, together with the outstanding revenue loans
and floating debt; it is the sum of the indebtedness
shown in the first four columns under the heading
"Classified by character of outstanding debt obliga
tions," in Table 29. The larger part of the "current
debt shown in the columns headed "Warrants" and
"Obligations on trust account," in Table 29, is debt
bearing no interest. For $65,928,885, or 2.1 per cent
of the total amount shown in Table 32, the rates were
I not reported. The amounts included under the head" ing "Other reported rates," arranged according to rate,
are given in Table LIX.
The debt reported as bearing no interest consisted
of bonds or other obligations due but not presented
for redemption.
The total interest-bearing debt for which the rates
were reported was $2,543,554,657. In addition to this
amount Table 32 shows $65,928,885 for which the
I rates were not reported

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

110
Table U X

OUTSTANDING DEBTS TOTH
EXCEPTIONAL BATES O f
INTEREST.
BATE PER CENT.

Number of Amounts
cities
reporting. I, reported.
3222,957,357

5.40
5.25
4.90
4.875
4.85
4.75
4.45
4.40
4.375
4.37
4.25
4.20
4.15
4.125
4.10
3.95
3.91
3.90
3.875..
3.83
3.75
3.69
3.63
3.625
3.62
3.60
3.59
3.58
3.56
3.55
3.54
3.53
3.45
3.40
3.375
3.37
3.33
3.3
3.25
3.125
3.16
2.50

6 to 8

4,000
1,834,778
602.040
14,600
22,652
25.000
737
33,400
195,777
11 000
52.000
313.050
10,000
127.406,497
375,000
200,000
276,850
1,406,800
55,000
£0,000
275,300
409,368
4 i
50,000
1
6,445,122
10
400,000
2
116,639
1
195 864
40,000
2
334,500
1
35,000
1
25,000
1
250,000
1
262,000
1
1C0,000
1
100,000
1
100,000
1
275,000
1
35,714
1
200,000
i
254,000
3
25,000
1
65,000
1 1
8,699,000
12,652,890
13
1 000
1 j
37,900
1
10,692,750
3
2,723,695
3
300,000
1
23,795,578
1
50,000
1
950,000
1
5,000
1
464 620
11,841)800
1
771,067
38
33
6,657,549
429:820
2,000
1
1
5
6
2
1
1
1
1
4
1
2
3
1
25
•1
1
3
2
1
1
3

i.

v

1
*
'.

;.i

forbidden by statute to issue their debt obligations at
a discount, and hence the nominal rates given for 1911
and the averages given in the exhibit for the other
years are somewhat larger than the actual average
net rate paid. The difference between the nominal
and actual rate can not, however, differ greatly from
year to year, and can not therefore affect the conclu
sions to be drawn from comparison of the averages
shown:
As the composition of the four groups of cities was
not identical for the seven years covered by the table,
a slight irregularity is perhaps not surprising; but
Table LX plainly indicates for each of the six years a
lower interest rate in the larger than in the smaller
cities, and also shows a tendency for interest rates to
advance from the earlier to the later years covered.
Table LX
TBAB.

1911
1909
1908
1907
1905
1905

An cities
combined.
4.02
3.92
3.92
3.89
3.85
3.6$

Groups
land 2.
3.91
3.77
3.79
3.75
3.63
3.68

Group 3.
4.29
4.28
4.21
4.11
4.21
4.17

Group 4, Groups.
4.36
4.34
4.28
4.26
4.25
4.32

4.40
4.52
4.43
4.45
4.41
4.36

A discussion of the many elements that determine
the rates of interest that cities pay for the use of money
is not attempted in this report. It should be stated,
however, that the rates paid depend largely upon the
condition of the money market at the time when the
money is borrowed. Thus the rate of interest which a
given city will be obliged to pay on debt obligations
issued may vary considerably from year to year, so
that the average actual or net rates reported in Table
32 and those shown in Table LIX are not absolute
measures of the credit of cities, since these rates must
be considered with reference to the date of salo and
other circumstances not shown in the table.
TABLE 33.

Nominal and actual rates of interest—By a nominal
rate of interest is meant the rate per cent stated in the
Par value of debt obligations issued and redeemed
obligation itself, and by actual rate is meant the per during the year.—In Table 21, under the heading
centage which the interest payment specified in the "Bonds, notes, warrants, and judgments," are shown
obligation constitutes of the actual amount of money the receipts from the issue of city bonds, notes, and
received at its issue (which is its par value, plus the warrants, including accounting receipts for judg
premium realized, or less the discount allowed) after ments recorded against the city by the various divis
allowance has been made for the proportional amortiza ions of the city government, and the payments by
tion of the premium or the proportional distribution those divisions for the redemption or cancellation of
of the discount over the life of the obligation.
such obligations, including the payments by Massa
The interest charge for the $2,543,554,657 of out chusetts cities to the state for the reduction of their
standing debt obligations for which data were secured indebtedness to the commonwealth on account of the
as shown in Table 32 was $102,248,502. The average metropolitan district loans, and for the repayment of
nominal rate was therefore 4.02 per cent. The fol the state advances on account of the abolition of
lowing table sets forth the corresponding average rate grade crossings, as explained on pages 104 and 105, and
of all cities combined, and for each group of cities, at shown in Tables XLI, XLVH, XLVIH, LIT, and LV.
the close of the years 1909, 1908, 1907, 1906, and In Table 33 is shown the par value of the principal
1905. In considering these rates the fact should be classes of these obligations issued or entered of record
kept in mind that the great majority of cities are during 1911. In the issuing of so-called notes or




DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
warrants the cities seldom or never secure any pre
mium or are compelled to allow any discount other
than interest paid in advance, which is sometimes
spoken of as a discount. In the redemption of the
same class of obligations no discounts are secured
and no premiums paid. It is otherwise with the
issue and redemption of funded or long-term debt
obligations. They are seldom issued at par; and
if purchased before maturity for cancellation they
are seldom purchased at par. The great majority
of American cities, however, issue debt obligations
only when they can be disposed of at or above
par. Owing to this fact, tho total receipts from the
issue of funded debt obligations generally exceed the
par value; and thus the receipts shown in the column
headed "Bonds, notes, warrants, and judgments"
in Table 21 exceed the par value of those obligations
as recorded in Table 33. The amount of the excess
for the 193 cities in 1911 was $827,512. Only 16
cities reported receipts from tho issue of debt obli
gations less in amount than the par value of their
obligations issued. With an advance in the average
rates of interest on city debt obligations during the
last few years, it is found in 1911 that more cities in
redeeming their debt obligations before maturity were
able to secure a discount than were compelled to pay a
premium on the same. The foregoing statement takes
account of the special payment by Massachusetts cities
to the state for the redemption of debt. The debts
thus amortized are not shown in Table 33, and hence
on its face Tabic 33 seems to indicate a conclusion
opposite to that stated above. The amount of these
exceptional payments by Massachusetts cities for the
redemption of their metropolitan district debts to the
state as given in Table XLIX was $818,840. The
actual reduction in the city debts to the state during
tho year was somewhat greater, since the cities affected
were given credit for debt reductions equal to their
share in the earnings of tho sinking fund accumulated
for the amortization of tho metropolitan district loans,
and also for certain payments on account of advances
for tho abolition of grade crossings.
As shown in Table 33, the par value of debt obligagations issued during the year exceded the par value
of those redeemed by $187,553,903; and the nominal
debt of the cities covered by the report was thereforo
increased by that amount, less the reduction of the
debt of Massachusetts cities due to the payments to
the state and the earnings of the sinking funds for the
metropolitan district loans.

Ill

fact that certain classes of property, especially that of
corporations, are in these states subject to state taxa
tion only, so that the valuation of such property does
not appear in the report of property taxed for city
purposes. In some instances the assessed valuation
of an independent division of the government of a
city such as a school or park district, or of counties in
the case of ten cities of Groups I and II, differs from
that of the city corporation. These differences are due
to (1) differences in the areas of the city corporation and
of the independent division; for example, all of the
ten counties above referred to, the school districts of
most Ohio cities, the sanitary district of Chicago, and
the bridge district of Portland, Me., include territory
outside of the city limits, while a few school districts
include only a portion of the territory within the cities;
(2) different bases of assessment, as in Dubuque, Iowa,
where the city makes its own assessment of property,
while the school district uses a totally different assess
ment made by the county for the same property; or
(3) differences in the classes of property subject to
taxation, as in St. Louis, Mo., where the school district
receives taxes upon certain corporation franchises
which are not subject to taxation for general city
purposes.
In examining the figures of Table 34 relating to
assessed valuations it should be noted that those on a
line for the name of a city represent the assessed valua
tion of (1) the property within the territory included
in the jurisdiction of the city corporation and (2) the
property subject to taxation for the maintenance of
that corporation. Thefigureson a line for one of the
divisions of the governments of the cities represent,
except in the cases indicated by footnotes, the assessed
valuation of all the property subject to taxation for
the maintenance of such division, as appraised at the
assessment made for the purposes of such division,
whether it is the same as or different from that made
for city corporation purposes. When the assessed
valuation thus shown for any division is established
by an assessment other than that for city corporation
purposes, that fact is indicated by a percentage for
that division in the column headed "Reported basis
of assessment in practice (per cent of estimated true
value)" different from that for the city corporation.
The table gives separately, for the city corporation
and for each independent taxing division, the valua
tion of all property in the division subject to the gen
eral property tax and of that subject to special prop
erty taxes. (Definitions of the general property tax
and special property taxes are given in the introduc
TABLE 34.
tory text on page 32.)
Assessed valuation of property.—The valuation given The classification of property belonging to railroads,
in Table 34 are those of property which is subject to telegraph companies, and a number of similar corpora
taxation for the purposes of the divisions of the gov tions, varies in the different states; in some states such
ernments of the cities covered by this report. In cer properties are classified as real, in some as personal,
tain states—notably Pennsylvania—these differ some in others as both real and personal, and in still others
what from the valuations on which state and county are given a separate classification. Where such
taxes are levied. This difference results largely from the property is given a separate classification and i*




112

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

taxed for city purposes, the valuation given it is shown [ different rates, either in different sections or upon
in the table under the heading "Other property," I different classes of property. So far as the data col
under which heading are also tabulated those prop lected were sufficiently definite to make the needed
erty and franchise valuations of corporations for exhibit, such data have been so arranged in Table LXI,
which the details secured were insufficient for a more which follows, as to show for each portion or class of
property in the cities last referred to that are subject
complete tabulation.
Reported basis of assessment in practice.—The re to different rates, the assessed valuations of the prop
ported basis of assessment in practice is for most cities erty taxed at each rate, and the amount of taxes levied
an estimate, furnished by city officials, of the per at such rates.
centage which the assessed valuation of property forms
The rates given in Table LXI are all on the basis of
of its true value. For certain of the cities of Minne assessments made for the city corporation, and thus
sota, Washington, and Wisconsin the figures were in some cases differ from those shown in Table 34,
obtained from the state tax commission and represent some of which are on the basis of the city corporation
approximately the proportion that the assessed valua assessment and some on other bases.
tion bears to the selling value, thefiguresgiven having
In like manner the tax levies shown in Table LXI
been determined by a critical investigation involving differ in the case of Pasadena, Cal., Chicago, HI., Seattle
a comparison between ' the assessed valuations of and Tacoma, Wash., New Haven, Conn., and Jolinsproperty sold and the considerations received at such town, Pa., from the aggregate levies shown in Table 34
sales. Thefiguresfor both real and personal property for the same cities. In the case of the four cities first
for most cities outside of these three states are far
mentioned the figures of Table 34 include, for one or
from correct, although those for real property are the
more divisions of the government of the city, levies
more trustworthy.
upon property situated outside of the territorial limits
Tax rates.—The rates of levy for general property of the city corporation, while those of Table LXI do
taxes per $1*000 of assessed valuation and per $1,000 of not. In the cases of New Haven, Conn., and Johns
reported true value are given in detail for the several town, Pa., the differences arise from the facts to which
divisions of the city's government. In the case of footnotes of Table LXI call attention.
cities in which property is taxed at two or more rates
The amounts given under the general heading "Tax
the figures shown in Table 34 for the city as a whole
levies"
on the lines of Table 34 for the several divisions
represent average rates on the basis of the assessed
of
the
city's
government are, except as indicated by
valuation of property within the city corporation, the
footnotes,
amounts
levied for the maintenance of those
specific rates of levy on the same basis for the various
divisions
within
the
territorial limits of the city
divisions of the government of such cities being given
in Table LXI, which follows. The rates based on the corporation.
The amounts given in the same table on the lines
reported true value are subject to all the errors in
the estimates given in the column headed "Reported opposite the names of the several cities without foot
basis of assessment in practice (per cent of estimated notes are those levied within the territorial limits of
true value)."
the city corporation for the purposes of the several
Cities with two or more tax rates.—In the majority of divisions. In the case of other cities the amounts
cities all sections and all property subject to the gen given on the lines mentioned include small amounts
eral property tax are taxed at the same rate. In a of taxes for the purposes of the divisions levied outside
limited number of cities, however, this tax is levied at II of the territory of the city corporation.




DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
Table L X I

AGGREGATE TAX
KATE FEB $1,000
OF—

CITY, AKD PARTS OF CITY OB
CLASSES OP mOPEBTV.

Assessed
valuations.

Levies.
value.

Los Angeles, Cal

$332,500,774 $S,092,570

i $24.33 »S12.17

6,025,474
1,040,113
109,128
248,259
266,341
146,473
1361
107,026
27,732
36,849
83,814

24.86
24.72
24.66
23.86
19.16
21.16
19.16
21.06
20.16
19.16
21.22

12.43
12.36
12.33
11.93
9.58
10.58
9.58
10.53
10.08
9.58
10.63

120,920,650

2,332,367

> 18.38

19.19

123,300,000
2,678,700
712,800
223,150

2,260,318
52,315
13,636
6,098

18.33
19.53
19.13
27.33

9.16
9.76
9.56
13.66

45,112,005

690,863

115.31

19.20

Old city
North Pasadena..
East side

34,429,265
5,182,8U0
5,499,940

534,342
77,327
79,199

15.52
14.92
14.40

9.31
8.95
8.64

Denver, Colo..

134,261,510

4,195,4S0

131.25

115.62

100,579,160
13,757,455
2,6S3,S75
9,421,395
1,519,025

3.272,280
442,990
90,247
326,822
63,141

30.70
32.20
33.70
34.70
34.70

15.35
16.10
16.85
17.35
17.35

Oakland, Cal..
Territory outside sanitary dis
tricts
Golden Gate sanitary district
Adeline sanitary district
Melrose sanitary district
Pasadena, Cal.

Territory outside school districts
Nos. 2,7,17, and 21
School district No. 2
School district No. 7
School district No. 17
School district No. 21

16,346,S92

Pueblo, Colo.
Old cities of Pueblo and South
Pueblo.'.
Annexations
...,
School district No. I
School district No. 20
Park districts
Bridgeport, Conn.
Urban property.
Farm property..

13,148,720
3,138,172
8,573,760
7,773,132
13,616,296

541,823 IM33.14 M 16.57
305,687
7,SS9
102,8S5
104,937
20,425

• 19.30
US. 70
• 12.00
• 13.50
•150

CITY, AND PARTS OF CITY OB
CLASSES OF FBOPEBTY.

•9.65
•9.35
•6.00
•6.75
*0.75

S3,834,601

1,515,498

116.87

U6.S7

S3,683,755
4,150, $46

1,474,013
41,4S5

17.20
9.99

17.20
9.99

Urban property
Farm propcrlv
Nino school districts.,

1,382,094
3,511
333,653

• 17.31
•6.00
•4.13

•13.85
•4. SO
•3.30 <

131,659,763 •2,140,195

116.23

116.23 !

79,843,667
585,175
80,791,117

New Haven, Conn.

Wards 1 to 12:
City taxing district r
.., 122,765,129
Westvfllo taxing district«...
521,000
Ward 13
3,066,776
Wards 14 and 15:
Subject to taxes for city and
borough of Fairhavcn,
1,819,478
East
3,4S7,3S0
Subject to city taxes only... I

2,025,625
• 7,815
• 42,935

16.50
15.00
14.00

16.50
15.00
14.00

"23,202
35,618

15.50
10.50

15.50
l a 50

1,016,451

15.31

12.25

71,577
"76,505

16.00
14.46
10.70

12.80
11.56 i
8.56

53,888,696

798,300

U4.81

52,551,360
1,337,3361

788,270
10,030 i!

66,373,078

Waterbury, Conn.
Old city
City annexation
School annexation..,

54,273,078
4,950,000
7,150,000

Wilmington, Del..

111.85

15.00
12.00
7.50 J 6.00

Property taxed at full rate..
Property taxed at half rate..
i Average rate for all levies in city.
'The data are wanting for showing the exact rate for all purposes for any speci
fied part of the city. It varied from $30.70 per $1,000 of assessed valuation to
$34.30, the average being above its mean, or $33.14.
• Rate for special levy for district named in stub.
• Includes a small amount levied outside of city for school purposes.
•The data are wanting for showing the exact school rate or the aggregate city and
school rate in any one of the nine school districts. The actual school rate varied
from $2 to $7, and hence the aggregate city and school rate for $1,000 of assessed valua
tion varied in the case of urban property from $19.31 to $24.31 and on farm property
lrom$8to$l3.
• Includes state levy of $22,098.
7
All of wards 1 to 12 with exception of part of tenth ward.
• Part of tenth ward included with ward 13—Wcstvilto school district.
• Includes city, and Wcstvilie school district levies.

S

valuations.

Levies.
Assessed]
value.

90

Jacksonville, Fla.,
Property inside fire limits...,
Property outside fire limits...

132

Tampa, Ha..

Property taxed at full rate
Property taxed at reduced rate.
Aurora, HI.
185
City corporation
School district No. 129..
School district No. 131..
Chicago, m.
South Park district
,
West Chicago Park district...
Lincoln Park district:
Lake View Town.
North Chicago Town
Irving Park district
,
North Shore Park district...
The Ridge Park district
Ridge Avenue Park district..
Fern wood Park district
Other Chicago territory
Baltimore, Md.
Urban property
Suburban property..
Farm
Securities....
18

Minneapolis, Minn.
Property other than money and
credits—
,
Money and credits

28

St. Paul, Minn.
Urban property
Suburban property..
Money and credits..

21

80,428,842 • 1,719,258 M21.3S M17.10

Hartford, Conn...




AGGREGATE TAX
BATE FEB $1,000
OF—

Esti*
mated
true
value.

212,376,209
42,075,780
4,425,290
10,401,805
13,900,875
0,922,145
71,025
5,081,070
1,375,595
1,923,230
3,949,790

Old City
Annex, 1890
Annex, 1899
Annex, 1905
;
Colegrovo and East Hollywood..
Hollywood, old city
Hollywood, annex, 190S
San Pedro, old city
San Pedro, annex, 1906
San Pedro, Terminal Island.....
WflmJngton

6127°—13

113

Kansas City, Mo.

$36,343,700
34,959,480
• 1,384,220

$611,854 1$16.84
594,551
17,303

17.00
12.50

21,930,610

381,062

U7.3S

18,022,763
3,907,847

324,410
56,652

18.00
14.50

8,823,522

"313,887

134.61

8,823,522
3,376,961
5,932,368

u 150,882
1*57,409
"105,596

»34.10
"34.90

927,747,492 44,335,204

147.79

549,139,027 25,754,620
204,030,193 10,242,316

46.90
50.20

62,295,032
74,810,189
6,468,606
3,727,254
1,268,693
1,066,3S7
797,727
24,144,384

3,102,293
3,620,813
282,678
168,845
60,136
48,414
38,610
1,016,479

49.80
48.40
43.70
45.30
47.40
45.40
48.40
1*42.10

612,135,168

8,866,640

114.48

404,687,336
12,762,187
28,851,410
165,834,235

8,012,809
165,908
190,420
497,503

19.80
13.00
6.60
3.00

225,849,148

5,606,697

124.83

193,910,208
26,938,940

5,539,349
67,348

27.84
2.50

150,696,619

2,731,939

U8.13

107,676,803
18,609,435
24,410,3S1

2,295,669
387,448
48,822

21.32
20.82
2.00

167,368,480

3,760,469 |i"22.47

Property not taxed for park pur
poses
Property taxed for park pur-

107,754,000

1,346,925

• 12.50

School district.

59,614,480
151,932,683

894,217
1,519,327

• 15.00
•10.00

643,068,500 [1*12,178,499

113.94

St. Louis, Mo
Property in general
Property of dramshops..
Property of m - %
ufacturers..
Steamboats.

560,064,683 W 11,515,722
34,437
4,304,600
78,520,067
179,150

20.56
8.00

628,161
179

8.00
1.00

Albany, N . Y .

87,605,958

1,785,531

120.38

Property inside fire limits...
Property outside fire limits..
Amsterdam, N. Y
173

87,373,173
232,785
12,120,525

1,782,412
3,119
230,846
227,754
2,794
298

20.40
13.40

53

U9.05

19.18
11,874,550
Property in general
13.46
207,550
Farmlands
,
7.75
38,425
Real property of pensioners.
333,302
115.69
21,247,813
161
Auburn, N. Y
15.74
332,312
21,103,240
Property in general
139,573 i
7.09
990
Real property of pensioners,
i« Includes city and Fairhaven East Borough levies,
u Includes school district and city levies.
i* Includes levy for city corporation and school district.
i>
Includes levy for city corporation
purposes only atA ~$17.10.
"Includes
cc
i< Levy for school district.
!• Rate In specified school districts for city and school purposes.
i< Average rate for city, school, county, and sanitary districts.
fled
$22.1
_
—
the city'corporatlon the aggregate Yax rate varied from $12.50 to $15, plus the un
known rate for school purposes.
!• Includes levy on $5,464,010 valuation of certain corporation franchises taxed
for school purposes but exempt from taxes for city corporation.

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

114

CITY, AND PARTS OP CITY OR
CLASSES OF PROPERTY.

valuations.

Elmira,N.Y..

$21,267,862

Property in general,
Real;property of pensioners.

21,035,197
• 212,665

Property in general
Real property of pensioners.
Schenectady, N. Y
Property inside hydrant limits.
Property outside hydrant limits.
inside lighting district
erty outside hydrant limits,
outside lighting distric"
district.
Real property of pensioners
Troy, N . Y .
Old Troy
North Greenbush and St. Marys
Sycaway
Erie, P a .
Territory other than in Boule
vard Park addition
Boulevard Park addition
Johnstown, Pa

i $443,941 3S20.87 *$18.82
17.02
21.01
1442,401
5.86
7.24
1,540

134

51

*16.27

156

23.40
1

16.38
1.14

18,216,763,287 [142,240,655

117.31

* 17.31

5,937,8S0,465 102,276,798
1,745,026,899 30,625,222
451,909,227 7,849,663
81,946,696 1,4SS,972

17.23
17.55
17.37
18.17

17.23
17.55
17.37
18.17

175,511,832 4 3,470,405

»19.77

* 15.81

175,074,132 '3,467,107
3,298
437,700

15. $4

1

50,224,854

1,04$, 614

19.80
7.
*20.88

45,508,514

960,230

21.10

17.30

19.10

15.66

4,619,715

U7.12

40,650
55,975

724
430

18.00
7.68

14.76
6.30

58,486,266

1,159,941

*19.83

U9.43

49,757,408
7,880,421
639,037
209,400

6 176,414
11,146
3,893

19.46
22.34
17.44
18.59

25,321,493

582,301 *»«23.00 M i l . 50

25,218,180
103,313

580,180
2,121

23.00
20.53

430,951

•22.76

•11.38

427,550
3,401

<22.86
•15.12

•11.43
•7.56

"15.00 "15.00
"14.50

"14.50

"11.67

"11.67

62

"10.00 "10.00
"9.75

"9.75

0.50
0.33
0.25

0.50
0.33
0.25

74,356,454

1,032,861

* 13.89

2 11.11

Urban property
Suburban property.
Farm property

57,345,654
10,456,665
6,554,135

127,435
72,194

14.53
12.19
11.01

11.62
9.75
8.80

76,382,663

1,125,566

a 14.74

2 11.06

66,945,873
9,336,790

1,001,188
121,378

15.00
13.00

11.25
9.75

i Includes levy of $54,985 collected by city on assessment for 1912 of $21,941,735
to reimburse county for payment of sundry city expenses.
* Average rate for all levies in city.
■ Includes levy of $1,900 collected by city on assessment for 1912 of $13,695,209
to reimburse county for payment of sundry expenses.
* Includes levy of $146,521 collected by city on assessment for 1912 of $174,452,617
to reimburse county for payment of sundry city expenses.
»Includes small amount of school taxes levied outside of city.
* Rates are computed on basis of city assessment.
' Includes occupations valued at $431,000.

159

12

valuations.

Levies.

El Paso, Tex
Property outside of improve
ment district
Improvement district

$31,074,920

$603,362

21,121.940
9,952,9*0

401,306
202,05G

San Antonio, Tex
Property outside of improve
ment districts
Improvement district No. 1
Improvement district No. 2
Improvement district No. 3
Improvement district No. 4
Improvement district No. 5
Improvement district No. 7
Improvement district No, 8
Improvement district No. 9
Improvement district No. 10
Improvement district No. 1 1 —
Improvement district No. 12...,
Improvement district No. 13

81,907,925

1,215,526

35,878,050
2,281,925
2,536,400
2,819,125
7,117,925
759,450
2,419,275
5,329,573
3,461,800
2,253,000
15,764.625
31S.225
938,550

516,615
34,457
38,807
43,877
103,922
11,408
38,224
82,075
54,004
35,597

Norfolk, Va
Property in general outside sev
enth ward
Property in general inside sev
enth ward
Intangible personal property...
Bank stock

59,236.140

879. W0

44.719.350

737,869

Portsmouth, Va
Property in general outside sixth
and seventh wards
Property in general inside sixth
and seventh wards
Intangible personal property....
Bank stock
-.

12,234,601

1S4,6SS

7,056,519

119.966

Seattle, Wash
,
Old city property taxed at first
rate
,
Old city property taxed at sec
ond rate
West Seattle
,
Ballard
Southeast Seattle
Georgetown
p.
South Seattle.
Yessler.
Columbia
Ravenna.
South P a r k . . .
Tacoma, Wash..
District No. 1
District No. 2
Districts Nos. 3 and 4.
District No. 5

" 11.33 "11.33

Scranton, P a . . . .




20

1,547,603,593 22,830,437 *»»14.76 M14.76

Urban property subject to highest rate
1,347,277,959 "20,209,170
Urban property subject to lowest
rate
'
96,982,488 | " 1,406,246
Suburban property subject to
highest rate
27,203,942 "317,379
Suburban property subject to
lowest rate
52,655,080 "596,757
Farm property subject to high
est rate
9,849,676
"98,497
Farm property subject to lowest
rate
13,634,448 "132,936
Property subject to additional
levies for poor district:
48,491
Urban property
96,982,448
Suburban property
52,655,080
17,552
Farm property
•.
13,634,448
3,409

Nashville, Tenn.,

165

11.50
10.27

M8,929,055

Old territory..,
New territory.,

69

19.27
21.89
17.09
18.22

Territory outside old Coopersdale school district
* 18,701,906
Old Coopersdale school district..
•227,149
Philadelphia, P a . .

CITY, AND PARTS OP CITY OR
CLASSES OF PROPERTY.

Esti
I Assessed mated
true
value.
value.

223.24

13,799,425

13,703,540
95,885

Real property of pensioners.
New York, N . Y

Levies.

a 320,765

Jamestown, N. Y
Property in general

County of New York
County of Kings
County of Queens
County of Richmond
Rochester, N . Y . .

AGGREGATE TAX
RATE PER $1,000
OF—

AGGREGATE TAX
RATE PER $1,000
OF—

T a b l e E.XI—Continued.

Huntington, W.Va..
Property outside of center of city.
Property in central part of city..
Milwaukee, Wis

West sewer district
East sewer district
South sewer district (old part).
Bay View sewer district
Superior, Wis
138
Property outside specified sewer
districts
Sewer districts Nos. 2 , 3 , and 4.
Sewer district No. 5.
Sewer district No. 6

2.S4S.410
6,133.5*0
5.534,S00

2,022,383
535.685
597,331

* $19.42

236,499
4,965
15,016

4M24
49.069 t
44,278

50.559
7,467
6.690 il

211,887,076 I" 4,023,130 :
159,475,016

3,069,89! i|

24,417,304
8,989.510
5,5SS,733
3,756,350
2,903,766
1,786.330
1,411.364
1,14S,629
1.006.616
9i5,29S
455.130

447.811
15I.0S0
100,541
66.300
f»8,23S
30.618
21.963
18.654 ..
17.525 I
16,684
7.819

60,299,2SS |" 1,209.920 I
57,753.184
9,007.206
1.952.899
5S5.909

1,019,313
153,754 i
28,532
8,300 j|

2S.591.163

240,969

27.895.113
606.020
442.932,255

235.714 ,
5.255 !
6.559,826 j

231,736,450
llS.Stl.270
£2.450.865
"9,S73.670
22,546,723

3.438,315
1,72*. 643 il
1,241.277 !
151.561
491,528

19,736,386
1,766.740
171,772
871.825

427,543
40,031
4,579 ,
22,372

• City and school assessment on different bases, Valuations given arc on basis of
city assessment.
» The data are wanting foreshowing the exact rate for all purposes for any speci
fied part of the city. The rate varied from $10 to $15.50 per $1,000 of assessed valua
tion, the rate on property in poor districts being from 25 to 50 cents higher than on
other property.
" For city corporation and school district purposes only.
" Exclusive of small amount of school taxes levied outside of city.
" New part of south sewer district taxed separately for old debt.

DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
Special property taxes in New York cities.—Table
LXII shows the assessed valuation of property sub
ject to special property taxes, together with the
special property taxes levied in New York cities on
bank stock and on mortgages recorded in 1911. The
tax on bank stock is levied at the rate of 1 per cent;
that on mortgages is levied at the rate of one-half of
1 per cent, and is collected by the county, which, after
deducting the cost of collection, distributes the pro
ceeds—one half to the state and the other half to the
taxing district in which the mortgaged property is
situated. The bank-tax levy for Troy included S402
distributed to the Lansingburgh school district.

115

and 64.5 per cent of the total appropriations and
receipts from all sources shown in the table. As a rule,
in cities for which amounts are shown in the column
headed "Revenue appropriations of city" the schools
are operated as a department of the city government,
while in those for which amounts are shown in tho
column headed "The general property tax" they are
operated by independent school districts. For most
cities, therefore, amounts are reported in only one
of the two columns mentioned. For a few cities,
however, the table shows amounts in both columns,
as in Pittsburgh, Pa., where a part of the schools
were operated as a department of the city corporation
and the remainder by independent school districts;
ASSESSED VALUATION.
LEVIES.
Tabic
LXII
and in Cincinnati, Ohio, where the schools are operated
City
num
CITT.
by
an independent school district, with the exception
ber.
Bank stock. I Mortgages. Bank stock. 'Mortgages.
of the University of Cincinnati, which is operated as a
department of the city corporation.
'$356,549,453 1$467,096,050 $3,565,495 $1,167,740
1 Now York
' 13,5W,6I6 26,989,322
61,161
10 Buffalo
135,896
8,017,212
For the cities in which the schools were operated
6,026,711
i> 40,086
25 Rochester
60,267
3,655,08s
»IS,276
4,529,423
35 Syracuse
45,294
as departments of the city corporation, the amounts
4,GS7,896
11,720
53 Albany
6,6S6,454
«66,865
17,931
7,172,368
66 Yonkcrs
240,797
2,40$
reported in the column headed "Revenue appropria
7,979
74 Utica
3,191,424
5,657,491
56,575
2 763
75 Troy
2,357,813 •1,848,707
« 31,013
8,024
77 Schenectady....
tions of city" represent as accurately as could be ascer
3,209,500
573,595
5,936
4,113
110 Binghamton....
1,645,323
1,219,430
12,194
2,818
149 Elmira
tained the school income from the general property
1,131,200
856,4S8
8,565
2,783
161 Auburn
1,113,344
726,200
7,262
2,694
173 Amsterdam....
tax.
1,077,580
1,363,789
13,638
3,408
175 Jamestown
1,3G3,02S
U , 146,946
Ml,469
8,970
178 Mount Vernon.
Liquor taxes as school revenues.—Only a few cities,
3,516,156
4S1.099
4,811
15,505
181 Niagara Falls...
6,201,852
566,606
5,666
10,394
186 Newltochcllc..
reported receipts for school purposes from liquor taxes.
4,157,600
366,660
3,667
In most states receipts from this source are applied to
* Of this amount, $20,043 was town audit levy.
purposes other than the support of schools.
* Mortgage tax received by city in 1911 included portion of 1910 tax.
* Of this amount, $9,138 was town audit levy.
Miscellaneous taxes as school revenues.—The receipts
« Received in 1912.
• or this amount, f6SG,5Sl was assessed for the county supervisors and $56,862
M
reported in the column headed "Other taxes" were
for schools.
* Only a part of this was received in 1911. Of this amount, $6,866 was county
from the following sources: Mortgage and bank taxes
supervisors' levy and $569 school district levy.
_ ' Of this amount, $476,781 was assessed for tho school district. Of this amount,
in New York cities, newsboys' permits in Salem, Mass.,
$4,768 was school district levy.
dog licenses in Terro Haute, Ind., vessel tonnage tax
TABLE 35.
in Duluth, Minn., and poll taxes in a number of cities.
Subventions by other civil divisions.—The principal
Summary of appropriations, receipts, payments, and
balances for schools.—Table 35 presents a summary of revenue receipts for schools, other than from the gen
school appropriations, receipts, payments, and bal eral property tax, are from subventions by the states or
ances for tho 193 cities covered by this report. For the counties. In some states subventions are apportioned
city of Pittsburgh, Pa., the data presented in this table upon the basis of the number of children of school age
and in tho other tables relating to schools are for the or the number of days of school attendance, while in
fiscal year 1910, no report having been prepared for the others a part is apportioned in one of the ways men
year 1911, because of tho difficulties that would have tioned and the remainder in proportion to the number
been encountered on account of the consolidation of teachers or otherwise. The amounts thus appor
during 1911 of the independent school districts into a tioned are derived largely by the state and county from
department of tho city. School appropriations and the general property tax and from interest on perma
receipts are classified in Table 35 under five general nent school funds, although in some states they are in
headings: (1) "Revenue appropriations of city," (2) part derived from poll taxes.
School fees and charges, including tuition fees.—The
"Revenue receipts," (3) "Receipts from issue of city
and district debt obligations," (4) "Receipts from sales amounts tabulated in the column headed "School fees
of property, investments, and supplies," and (5) and charges, including tuition fees," were derived largely
"Receipts from other sources." Revenue receipts are from tuition fees. The other receipts so tabulated
further classified under seven different subheadings, represent amounts received as compensation for dam
ages to books and other property as reimbursement for
according to the sources from which derived.
Revenue appropriations of city and receipts from the expenses, and as teachers' examination fees, laboratory
general property tax.—Thefiguresincluded in the two fees and charges, library fees and charges, fees for
columns headed "Revenue appropriations of city" and diplomas, use of telephone, etc.
Interest and rents as school revenues.—In the col
"The general property tax" should be studied together.
umn
headed "Interest and rents as school reve
In these two columns are included 82.2 per cent of the
total revenue appropriations and receipts from revenue nues" are included receipts from interest on bank



116

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

balances and the income of trust and investment funds 1 ings, the alteration of old buildings, and new equip
^hich are in the custody of the school authorities. ment. The payments recorded in these two columns
The column does not include all interest received on are the only ones in the table that are strictly com
permanent funds set apart for educational purposes, parable for all cities. The column headed "For
since a part of these funds are under the control of interest" includes only those payments for interest
officials other than the school authorities, their revenue which were made by school districts or directly from
being turned over to the city and later appropriated to school appropriations by cities operating their schools
the schools. It will be observed that most of the as departments of the city corporation. In this con
entries in this column are for cities having independent nection it should be noted that in most cities with
schools operated as a department of the city corpora
school districts.
Other generalfund revenues of schools.—The amountstion, payments on account of the principal and interest
tabulated in the column headed "Other general fund of public debt incurred for school purposes are never
revenues" were receipts from sales of old material, stated separately, and hence are never shown as pay
receipts of trust funds used for school purposes, and ments on account of school debt in the reports upon
amounts balancing payments by health departments which these statistics are necessarily based.
Nongovernmental cost payments of schools.—The non
for physical examination of children and for nurses.
Nonrevenue receipts of schools.—The nonrevenue regovernmental cost payments included in the column
ceipts included in the table are those obtained (1) headed "For redemption of city and district debt obli
from the issue of city or district debt obligations; gations" were for the redemption of general bonds and
(2) from the sale of property, investments, and sup revenue loans, and for the redemption of -warrants of
former years. The amounts reported in the column
plies; and (3) from other sources.
School receipts from issue of debt obligations.—Theheaded "For investments and supplies" represent
amounts reported in the column headed "Receipts nongovernmental cost payments for investments ac
from issue of city and district debt obligations" were quired for profit, and for the purchase of such books
derived (1) from the sale of general bonds, (2) from and supplies as were designed to be sold to teachers
revenue loans, and (3> from warrants issued for school and pupils. The column headed "For other objects"
purposes and remaining unpaid at the close of the includes nongovernmental cost payments for a number
of purposes, the principal of which were payments in
year.
School receipts from sales ofproperty, investments, anderror, refunds, payments of special assessments, pay
supplies.—In the column headed "Receipts from sales ments for increasing stocks of supplies, and canceled
of property, investments, and supplies" are included appropriations.
Receipts and payments of independent school dis
receipts from sales of real property and securities, and
of such books and supplies as were sold to teachers tricts.—Table LXIII, which follows, presents an ana
lytical summary of the revenue receipts and the pay
and pupils.
School receipts from other sources.-^In the columnments for governmental costs of the 100 cities with
headed " Receipts from other sources " are included the independent school districts whose receipts and pay
nonrevenue receipts that can not be classified under ments are included in Tables 35 to 42, with the excep
either of the two headings immediately preceding. tion of 5 cities, namely, Wichita, Kans., in which gov
Among these receipts are receipts in error, refunds, ernmental costs for schools were paid from revenues,
receipts from a decrease in stocks of supplies, and from cash on hand at beginning of year, and from
receipts from premiums and accrued interest on bonds receipts from sales of debt obligations, and New
Haven, Hartford, and Watcrbury, Conn., and Troy,
sold, and fromfire-insuranceadjustments.
School payments.—Payments for school purposes are N. Y., in which only a small part of the schools are
classified under six headings: (1) "For expenses," (2) independent. This table is arranged to show to what
"For outlays," (3) "For interest," (4) "For redemp extent those districts are meeting their governmental
tion of city and district debt obligations," (5) "For costs, including outlays as well as expenses and interest
investments and supplies," and (6) "For other objects." charges, without incurring indebtedness therefor.
School payments for governmental costs.—The termsFrom thefiguresof that table it appears that of tho 95
"expenses," "outlays," and "interest" are here used cities, 21 incurred indebtednesses in meeting their
with the same significance as in other tables of this governmental costs for schools, while 74 incurred no
report. The payments therefor comprise those which such indebtedness. Of the latter number, 40 paid all
in this report are given the designation "governmental current costs of schools from revenue receipts, and 34
cost payments." In the column headed "Forexpenses" met them from revenue receipts and cash on hand at
are presented as nearly as can be determined the actual the beginning of the year. No corresponding statis
costs of school administration and instruction, and of tics can be presented for the cities not included in this
the maintenance and operation of school buildings. table, since, as a rule, no accurate statement of the
The column headed "For outlays" includes payments interest payments on account of city indebtedness for
for the purchase of land, the construction of new build- schools can be made for tbe other cities.




DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
Tabic IiXIM

GOVERNMENTAL COST PAYMENTS.

Revenuo
receipts.

CITY.

i

TotaL

For

For
interest

Total

{$19,112,619' $16,408,978 $12,955,043 $757,043 82,696,892

Los Angeles, Cal.
Kansas City,, MVo .
Portland, Oreg..
Oakland, Cal..
Dayton, Ohio

2,767,394
1,706,411
1,973,307,
1,257,213

064,8051

2,735,975
1,065,47$
1,612,417
1,130,195
593,775

2,076,761
1,157,1«
1,053,354
877,310
565,647

85,256
119,837
25,691
57,610
19,022

573,958
388,458
533,372
195,275
9,106

San Antonio, T e x . .
Reading, P a
Tacoma, Wash
Kansas City, K a n s .
Savannah, Ga

394,094
319,794
779,408
527,116
157,564

366,885
302,677
096,658
470,891
154,364]

304,629
286,073
473,571
372,557
145,577

10,606
16,004.
42,968
42,053
2,552

180,119
56,281
6,235

91
92
100
105
108

E a s t St. Louis, Til..
Terre H a u t e , Ind..,
Johnstown, P a
Springfield, U K . . . .
Canton, Ohio

288,754]
334,011
251,389!
354,521
262,84-

242,854
330,119
246,257
266,404
224,588

219,511
259,018
196,466
235,745
196,985

18,583
9,800
14,283
385
19,596

4,700
61,301
35,508
30,274
8,007

109
115
116
118
120

Saginaw, M i c h . . . . ,
Springfield, Ohio...
Little Rock, A r k . .
Pueblo, Colo
Day City, M i c h . . .

310,8941
324,270,
309,405 !
241,134,
231,214

265,195
293,182
240.786!
22I.314J
192,151;

251,512
189,172
149,37<H
202,738
186,747'

2,6S5
11,352
11,251
10,780
4,936]

10,998
92,658
80,159
7,796
468

121
126
12S
129
130

York, P a
,
Lincoln, Nebr
Davenport, I o w a . .
Topeka, Kans
McKeesport, P a . . .

322,997,
336,217;
275,678,
346,344,!
2*8,785'

280,533'
245,109,
266,025
317,996
236,196

231,6161
233,677
238,206
238,961
211,573

14,505
11,449
12,934
23,09d
19,460

34,412
43
14,885
55,936
5,163

133
137
144
147
153

San Diego, C a l . . . .
Kalamazoo, M i c h .
Chester, P a
Dubuque, I o w a . . .
Hamilton, O h i o . . .

299,104'
237,638,
164,429!
140,947;
185,212

252,678.
229,803
163,511<
126,1091
179,074

230,218
197,333
140,4S6
122,169
162,45d

18,527
13,532
14,986
3,940.
16,61SL

3,933
18,938
8,039

154
156
ICO
171
172

Springfield, M o . . . .
Quincy, 111
Joliet,Ill
Lansing, Mich
..
Pasadena, Cal

192,9SI
178,900'
194,815||
209,312,
393,618

149,1471
165,080
190,526
205,912
330,071;]

116,278
132,717
150,372
134,388
292,662

750
5,94<H
1,02S
19,725

32,119
27,017
39,126
09,524
18,284

176
180
183
191
192

San Jose, Cal
Williamsport, P a
Lima, Ohio
Lorain. Ohio
Council Bluffs, I o w a .

25S,S37i
150,258,'
162,876,,
149,857,
167,037

233,831
130,245'
147,328
142,50S
163,870

208,097
128,291
121,341
112,379
151, SS7

16,99W
1,954
9,833
13,517
10,403

16,154
16,612
1,580

2,H

51,650

8,744

n.—CTTTES m v r a i c n ALL GOVERNMENTAL COSTS FOR SCHOOLS W E R E PAID FROM
REVENUES A N D FROM CASH ON HAND AT BEGINNING OF T E A R .

Total
Chicago. Ill
St. Louis, M o . . . .
Cleveland, O h i o . .
Pittsburgh, P a . . .
Cincinnati, O h i o .
Seattle, W a s h . . . .
Indianapolis, Ind

$38,885,530 $43,132,41(1 $31,281,506 $1,219,709 $10,631,201
13,307,126! 13,436.630 10,127,93fl
4,229,300: 4,349,106 3,220,135
2,832,283
3,068,919, 3,991,533
2,749,787
2,062,626 3,695,420
3,239,527]" 2,00S, 922
2,900,944
1,834,887
1,398,918

1,965,101
1,442,020;

1,471,900
1,122,612

23,6411 3,285,056
1,128,971
149,957, 1,009,293
694,459
251,174
97,233 1,073,372
154,434
47,152]

GOVERNMENTAL COST PAYMENTS.

Revenue
receipts.

For
outlays.

I.—COTES IN WHtCH ALL GOVERNMENTAL COSTS FOB SCHOOLS W E R E PAID FROM
REVENUES.

338,767
272,262

117

TotaL

For
For
For
expenses. interest. outlays.

H.—CITIES I N WHICH ALL GOVERNMENTAL COSTS FOR SCHOOLS W E R E PAID FROM
R E V E N U E S A N D FROM CASH ON H A N D AT BEGINNING OF Y E A R — C o n t i n u e d .

Columbus. Ohio..
Toledo, Ohio
Scranton, Pa

$1,146,594 $1,203,991,
979,027
919,610
878,511
702,240

$927,840
750,530
610,473

$44,713
49,&J5
60,547

$231,435
178,652
207,491

Grand Rapids, M i c h . .
S t . Joseph, Mo
Akron, Ohio
Evansville,lnd....
Wilkes-Barre, P a . . .

727,892,
481,579
422,055'
326,861
331,580

786,438
492,548
483,529
345,213
469,911

550,184
380,404
277,152
273,183
255,081

23,615
55,274
19,375
3,234
30,805

212,639
56,870
187,002
68,796
184,025

Peoria, HI
Fort W a y n e , I n d . .
Harrisburg.Pa....
South B e n d , I n d . .
Charleston, 6 . C . . .

411,779]
334,534]'
344,288
301,624
131,092

452,047
389,303
592,263
419,373
148,096|

352,572
260,640}
310,644
225,647
116,958

1,384
19,568
39,407
9,896

98,091
109,095
242,212
183,830
31,138

Sioux City, I o w a . .
Sacramento, C a l . . .
Berkeley, Cal
Flint, Mich
Wheeling, W . V a .

284,729
296,591
379,319
154,025'
212,5061

299,609
303,284
382,617
232,506
218,902]

238,468

17,011

329,561
139,258
165,683

28,592
7,030
9,325

44,130
14,357
24,464
86,218
43,894

B u t t e , Mont
Galveston, T e x .
Newcastle, Pa
Cedar Rapids, I o w a .
Jackson, Mich

250,550
99,488
211216
257,759
161,416]

266,059
110,522
246,393
350,296.
165,278

225,347
110,522^
141,923
171,96a
121,201

9,643

31,069

5,251
10,823
5,337

99,219
167,511
38,740

Decatur, HI
JopIin,Mo
Muskogee. Okla.,
Aurora, 111
,

194,881
147,955
102,071
148,507

272,842
187,839
180,147
156,523

126,597
119,345
96,272
121,554]

8,205
12,581
20,919
3,735

138,040
55,913
62,956
31,234

HI.—CITIES IN WHICH ALL GOVERNMENTAL COSTS FOR SCHOOLS WERE PAID FROM
REVENUES AND FROM RECEIPTS FROM SALES OF DEBT OBLIGATIONS.

Total

$6,889,203 $9,832,381 $5,819,031 $505,71983,507,631
631,678
673, im
646,316
639,64S
337,855

47,096
79,143
54,159
44,161
14,963

473,772
173,847
367,978
317,087
373,164

779,809
999,209
401,839
155,729

421,315
366,749
252,149
102,507

55,800
53,05fl
16,660
3,132

302,664
579,410
133,030
50,090

224,621
243,119
100,606
263,171

282,745]
311,6601
149,943
356,481

170,874
215,137
105,638
235,482

24,903
25,260
2,35M
10,646]

86,968
71,263
41955
110,453

Lancaster, P a
Tampa, F l a
Augusta, Ga
Macon, Ga

170,0161
111,502'
121,165
104,155

184,190
119,939
148,731
106,697

151,921
66,476
125,085
102,229

17,269
13,827
3,491
481

15,000
39,636
20,155
3,987

Huntington, W . V a . .
Jamestown, N . Y . . . .
Mount Vernon, N . Y .
Austin, T e x

106,281
161,418
240,687
101,701

143,834
223,821,
420,562
173,214'

90,901
146,315
237,949
99,666

5,43(J
11,985
20,39H
1,617

47,497
65,521
162,223
71,931

Omaha, Nebr
Spokane, Wash
Salt Lake City, U t a h .
Des Moines, I o w a .
Youngstown, O h i o . . .

797,420. 1,152,544
926,103,
767,730
827,088' 1,068,453
707,305 1,000,896
443,844
725,9821

D u l u t h , Minn.
Oklahoma City, Okla
Erie, Pa
Jacksonville, F l a

691,340
287,935
284,879
131,220

AUentown, P a
Altoona, P a
Mobile, A l a
Rockford,m

which they were usually classified on a different basis
from that employed in the table* The school authori
Payments for school expenses.—Table 36 presents in ties of many cities have expressed great interest in
considerable detail the payments for school expenses the classification employed by the Bureau of the
for the 193 cities covered by this report, including the Census, and promise to cooperate in establishing stand
payments for expenses of school administration, in ard accounts with classifications more or less in har
struction, operation of school plant, and maintenance mony with that used in Table 36. To the extent that
of school plant, together with other school expenses this cooperation is secured it is believed that the cor
grouped under the designation "Miscellaneous ex responding tables of future reports will contain statis
penses. " With the exception of the payments for tics more accurate and more nearly comparable than
expenses of administration, the payments for school those given in Table 36.
expenses, as given in Table 36, are classified according
Payments for expenses of general administration of
to the kind of school or other educational activity for schools.—The expenses of general administration in
which they were made. The payments thus pre clude all general expenses, or "overhead charges," as
sented are as nearly comparable as it has been possible they are frequently called in the commercial world.
to make them from data derived from local accounts, in They are the costs that can not readily be assigned




TABLE 36.

118

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

to functional groups and classified according to the can readily be distinguished by the fact that those for
kind of school or educational activity for which they libraries maintained for the use of the school and the
are incurred. The various expenses included in this public are tabulated on a line by themselves with the
group are described in the text accompanying Table designation "Library" in the stub, while those for
37, and the payments for each subdivision or class are school purposes only are tabulated with the expenses
of the particular class of schools using them. Table
given in that table.
Payments for expenses of instruction.—The payments 36, by including statistics of the cost of operating and
for expenses of instruction, as shown in Table 36, are maintaining these public libraries and other exceptional
arranged in seven groups under specific and descriptive institutions and branches of service, gives a complete
titles. The first two groups, with the titles, "Salaries statement of the expenses of all the differont activities
and other expenses of supervisors of grades and sub under school authorities and financed from school
jects " and "Salaries and other expenses of principals," revenues or appropriations; but in computing the
comprise the payments for the expenses of supervision. cost of school instruction per pupil these special costs
The payments for thefirstof these groups are not given must be disregarded, or the figures obtained will not
separately for all cities. In some of the citie3 for be comparable.
In the column of this table headed "All other" are
which no payments for "Salaries and other expenses
of supervisors of grades and subjects" are shown, the included those costs of instruction, such as expenses
school principals act as supervisors and the amounts connected with graduation exercises andflagsfor school
shown in the column headed "Salaries and other buildings, which are not assignable to any of the other
expenses of principals" include the payments for both columns in this division of the table.
classes of supervision. In a second class of cities the
Payments for expenses of operation of school plant.—
supervision of grades and subjects constitutes a part Under the foregoing heading are shown all payments
of the duties of the general superintendent of schools, for the operation of the school plant, including those
and the payments for this class of expenses are included for salaries and wages of janitors, engineers, and others
among the expenses of general administration. In a employed in this branch of the school servico, together
limited number of cities the total payments for the with the payments for janitors' and other supplies, fuel,
expenses of supervision referred to are included under light, water, and power.
one or the other of the two titles above mentioned by
Payments for expenses of maintenance of school
reason of the fact that the local accounts are so kept plant—Under the heading "Expenses of maintenance
that no proper segregation of the two classes of ex of school plant" are shown paymonts for the main
penses could be secured. It should be noted that the tenance of the buildings and grounds of the school
expenses of the supervisors of grades and subjects and systems, including those for repairs and insurance,
those of principals include the salaries of the clerks which are tabulated in columns with descriptive
employed to assist them.
headings.
Payments for miscellaneous school expenses.—Under
The character of the payments shown in the columns
headed "Salaries of the teachers" and "Free text the heading "Payments for miscellaneous school ex
books" is fully indicated by their titles. In the col penses" are tabulated the paymonts to private schools
umn with the title "Other supplies used in instruc and institutions, to schools and institutions of other
tion" are included payments for such supplies as maps, civil divisions, and to schools for the instruction or caro
charts, globes, paper, pencils, erasers, rulers, and chalk; of children who from choice or necessity are attending
the wood, clay, metal, and tools used in art and manual or are confined at the school foj which or to which the
training instruction; the cloth, scissors, and cooking money is paid; payments for the transportation of
supplies used in domestic science instruction; type pupils to and from schools; payments for ponsions
writers and supplies used in instruction in commercial granted to teachers and employees; and paymonts for
branches, laboratory apparatus and supplies, including rent of school buildings. In the caso of a few cities
chemicals and biological material; gas, electricity, and payments for other objects are tabulated as for "Mis
fuel for cooking and manual training; and all materi cellaneous expenses," because the method of kooping
als destroyed in the using, as well as the charges for the accounts in these cities was such that those pay
ments could not be otherwise classified.
•
freight, express, and cartage on such supplies.
Payments for expenses of schools for colored pupils.—
In the column headed "School library w are included
the salaries and other expenses not only for libraries The payments for the expenses of schools for colored
maintained exclusively for the benefit of the teachers pupils in the 51 cities for which separate statistics
and pupils of certain schools, but also for those main could be obtained are presented in Table LXIV, which
tained by boards of education for the use of the general follows. This is an exhibit tablo, all tho data being
public. The expenses for the two classes of libraries included in Table 36.




DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
Table I J X I V
city
num
ber.

CITY, AND KIND OF SCHOOL FOB COLORED PUPILS.

Total pay
ments for
expenses.1

Salaries for
instruction.

$2,370,194 j

Textbooks
and
schoolroom
supplies.

$1,886,685 j

210,611

151,871
121,542
30,329

7

* 211,718

165,141
126,742
29,466
8,933

18,823
13,954
4,282
587

31,785

66,950
66,950

3,079
3,079

17

651,655

520,794
387,255
10S,769
17,563 1
7,207 ;

33,009
28,927
3,843
30
209

.

53,286 1

8,239
5,381
2,853 1

16

Night

Expenses Expenses
Other
for opera- | for mainte Miscel
expenses of I tion of
nance of
laneous.
instruction.] school
school
plant. plant, j

School
library.

$88,050 1

4

119

5104,592 j

$32,021

373
100
273

28,350
15,272
, 13,078

16,718 |
8,524
8,194

5,060
5,060

140

21,828
18,020
3,808

1,860
1,270
590

3,926
2,816

5,163
5,163

4,260
4,260

2,333
2,333

65,924
54,812
9,936

16,349 1
13,752
2,401

12,360
8,372

i,i76

191

75

16,560
12,034
4,119
167
240

6,850
5,775
1,052
23

1,075
653
331
86

10,148
7,496
1,264
126
1,262

4,982
4,336
627
19

767
767

4,596
4,138
458

8,323 I
8,067!
256

832
832

$249,938 |

85,622 |

140

2,085

1,134
256
92

i,272
813

387 |
399
85,736 i
|
1
|
;

21
Night...!

.

60,055
43,499
15,701
357
493

1,956
1,264
662

!
j

94,530
70,704
16,042
1,765
6,019

3,543
2,819
611
67
46

•

31,916
31,916

115,476

24
Night
31 Atlanta,Ga.?

34,003

.

1

34 Birmingham, A l a . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Elementary

56,505 !

37 Memphis, Tcnn

77,925

|

Secondary.

240 !
109!
131

75

30
431
397
13
21

i;no

3,988

2,087
2,037

42,189
39,207
2,9S2

507
416
91

61

64,806
59,366
5,440

817
417
400

60
60

8,050
6,989
1,061

3,988
3,535
453

204
190
14
1,607
1,607

61

39 Richmond,Va......
Elcmvntary.

95,704

82,419
71,622
10,797

336
317
19

602
494
103

6,317
5,490
827

4,423
4,026
397

46 Nashville,Tenn
Elementary

72,451

59,100
54,210
4,120
770

1,425
1,230
123
72

609
434
175

7,260
6,648
435
177

4,057
4,022
35

51 San Antonio, Tex.

29,726

25,279
24,144
1,135

81
84

3,040
3,040

1,323
1,323

56

41,833

36,523
28,890
6,122
1,511

500
350
150

3,534
2,396
1,133

1,116
779
337

85
85

21,128

16,810
16,810

837
837

2,992
2,992

303
303

186
186

€5 Kansas City, Kans
Elementary........

47,870

35,717 1
25,005 !
10,712

1,642
381
1,261

85
20
65 j

7,292
4,225
3,067

2,419
1,942
477

715
715

68

47,34S

38,873
32,729 i
6,144

2,143
1,805
33S

'
!

4,388
3,909
479

1,944
1,455
489

69 Norfolk Va

20,910

17,748
17,748

175
175

!
|

2,175
2,175

I

17,036
12,401
4,635

185
125
60

21,913 I
!
|

16,305
10,719
5,586

424
336
88

i
39 1
13
26

2,415
1,510
905
3,018
2,454
564

2,127
1,611
516

718
718

2,114
2,114

1,478
1,473

21,468
15,868
5,600

950
350
600

2,386
1,700
6S6

1,745
1,550
195

1;

7,007
7,007

740
740

1,928
1,928

530
530

89

21,232 i

20,115
20,115

90

18,319 {
j:

15,258
15,253

Night

...

1
|

Night ..I
5S

71

Elementary....... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ^ .

Fort Worth, Tex

20,321

..

73

4,631

SO Oklahoma Citv, Okla
83

26,549

88 Harrisbtirg, Pa
Elementary.... . . . . * . . . . . . .»

». . . . . . . . . . . . . .

10,4S0

1
I.
j;
!

16,546
22,283 !
j
16,371 j
li
175
» Exclusive of payments for expenses of general administration.

91 East St. Loufa,III




75
63
12

1

!
j

812
812
6S5
542
143

321
321

275
275

1,117
1,117
117
117
791
791

1,410
1,410

1

3,605
3,499
.1
106
* Exclusive of salaries of supervisors.
78

78

1,534
1,534
1,183
1,188

75
75

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

120
T a b l e IJXIV—Continued.

Total pay
ments for
expenses.1

Salaries for
instruction.

Textbooks
and
schoolroom
supplies.

Terre Haute, Ind.
Elementary...

$8,964

$7,026
7,026

S267

Charleston, S.C..
Elementary..

34,357

28,565
28,565

438
438

102 Covington, Ky..,
Elementary..
Secondary...

13,158

10,900
9,300
1,600

375
325
50

City
num
ber.

92

CITY, AND BIND 0 7 SCHOOL FOR COLORED PUPILS.

School
library.

$291
291

Other
expenses of
instruction.

$978
978

Expenses
for operation of
school
plant.

Expenses
for mainte
nance of
school
plant.

$1,423
1,423

$248
24S

2,354
2,354

1,731
1,731

1,692
1,692

126
126

65

Mobile, Ala
Elementary...
Little Rock, Ark..
Elementary...
Secondary....

11,522

9,593
9,593

87
87

539
539

1,303
1,303

26,779

20,174
13,752
6,422

951
856
95

3,909
2,745
1,164

1,373

Chattanooga, Tenn..
Elementary.....
Secondary
Night

27,361

21,732
19,461
2,140
131

798
785
13

2,376
2,376

2,405
2,4J-5

1,938

1,465
1,465

109
109

300
300

4,726

4,365
4,365

4,861

3,605
3,605

5,436

4,249
4,249

10,815

10,815
10,815

13,838

13,838
13,838

13,993

12,014
12,014

150
150

984
9S4

227
227

Galveston, Tex..
Elementary.,
Secondary.--

17,498

13,353
9,060
4,293

340
296
44

1,905
1,460
445

1,900
1,295
605

Knoxvllle, Tenn.
Elementary..

13,427

11,196
11,196

114
114

1,46S
1,468

649
049

Springfield, Mo..
Elementary.,
Secondary...

8,136

4,708
3,248
1,460

165
90

1,555
1,335
220

1,168

Roanoke, Va
Elementary..
Lexington, K y . .
Elementary.
Secondary...

11,068

9,096
9,096

324
324

1,017
1,017

563
563

21,084

16,711
14,311
2,400

952
576
376

2,178
I f M7
361

1,20S
995
213

Huntington. W. Va..
Elementary
Secondary

4,642

3,937
2,162
1,775

Charlotte, N. C ,
Elementary..

9,413

7,962
7,962

Portsmouth, Va..
Elementary..

7,425

5,614
5,614

Joplin,Mo
,
Elementary.,
Muskogee, Okla.,
Elementary.
Secondary...

2,828

2,000,
2,000

York, Pa
Elementary..
Tampa, Fla,
Ele:
-"'
ilementary..
El Paso, Tex
Elementary..
Wheeling, W.Va..
Elementary...
Augusta, Ga
Elementary..
Macon, Ga
,
Elementary.,
Montgomery, Ala.
Elementary...

20,665

317

227
227

110
110

101
101

967
967

188
188

211
211

800
800

176
176

8
8

8

8
8

8

1,103

65

705
705
<■>
150
150

1,065
1,065

159
159

701
704

172
172

350
350

393
393

85
85

17,391
11,553
5,838

349
311

1,992
1,246
746

622
476
146
180
120
170
170
1,246
1,246

Austin, Tex
Elementary.,
Secondary...

13,646

11,486 J
9,925!
1,561

110
110

Newport, K y .
Elemei
Elementary..

3,508

2,700
2,700

18
18

1,870
1,4S3
387
532
532

Lynchburg, Va...
Elementary..

10,991

7,734
7,734

300
300

1,2*6
1,286

» Exclusive of payments for expenses of general administration.

1,600

* Not reported.

* Included with expenses of elementary schools.

School expenses and interest on (he value of school prop
of schools for a given city or group of citios would,
erties.—In the commercial world it is a well recognized therefore, include in addition to the paymonts for ex
accounting practice to include interest on the capital penses shown in Table 36 an amount equal to the
invested in an enterprise, as well as all current ex interest upon the investment in school property. Such
penses, in computing current costs of the services additional data wero presented on pages 75 and 76 of
rendered* A complete statement of the current costs the report for 1910.




DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES,

121

In making use of Table 37 for the study of the com
parative
payments by the different cities for the ex
Payments for expenses of general administration of
penses
of
the business administration of their schools,
schools.—Table 37 presents a detailed exhibit of the
consideration
should be given to the fact that the
payments by the 193 cities having a population of over
schools
of
the
various cities fall into three different
30,000 in 1911 for the general administration of all
classes
according
to the method of administration, as
schools, including subsidiary educational activities and
extensions. Tho expenses of general administration follows: (1) Independent municipal organization or
are classified by object under the two headings, "Sal corporation, (2) department or division of the city
aries and wages" and "Other objects." They are also corporation, and (3) in part department of the city
classified by branch of administration, as "Business corporation and in part independent school district.
administration" and "Educational administration." The table presents for the cities whose schools are
The expenses of each branch of administration are of the •first class statistics of all their payments
further classified by office or item of account for which for the expenses of business administration. It is
incurred, tho expenses of the first branch being segre quite otherwise with the cities whose schools are of
gated under eight separate headings and those of the the other classes. Most, if not all, of the expenses
of these cities for purposes such as those shown in
second under four.
The total payments of the 193 cities covered by the table in the columns headed "Finance offices
the table for the expenses of general administration and accounts" and "General legal services" are
of schools amounted to §5,554,290, of which §2,344,882, treated not as school expenses, but as the expenses
or 42 per cent, was reported by the cities of Group I; of the offices of city treasurer, city auditor, or city
$723,376, or 13.1 per cent, by the cities of Group II; attorney. The same is true to a lesser extent of
$963,668, or 17.4 per cent, by the cities of Group III; most of the other classes of the expenses of busi
$808,692, or 14.6 per cent, by the cities of Group IV ness administration. Table LXV, which follows, pre
and §713,672, or 12.9 per cent, by the cities of Group sents a comparative summary of the payments for
V. The city of Now York paid for general administra expenses of business administration for the schools of
tive expenses §956,224, or 17.3 per cent of the total the first and second classes mentioned, showing the
for tho 193 cities; Chicago was next in order, with total amount of such payments and the amount per
100 pupils in regular attendance. For the cities of
5.2 per cent of the total.
the
first class the reported average payment for ex
Of tho total expenses of general administration,
penses
of business administration amounted to $115
$4,383,228, or 78.9 per cent, wore paid for salaries
per
100
pupils, while for cities of the second class the
and wages, and §1,171,062, or 21.1 per cent, for other
average
was only $68, or 59.1 per cent of the average
objects. The salaries and wages were those of tho
for
cities
of tho first class. The difference in the
board of education, where such officials received
figures
represents
no difference in the actual average
compensation, and of all others regularly employed
expenses
of
business
administration of the several
by tho school departments or districts in connection
cities,
but
reflects
the
fact
that nearly if not quite onewith the general administration of tho public school
half
of
these
expenses
for
the cities of the second
system. The column with the title "Other objects"
ifclass
are
charged
to
other
accounts
and not treated
includes all payments other than those for salaries
as
school
expenses.
and wages which were incidental to general adminis
tration only.
9 2 CITIES WITH
It 85 CRIES WITH Of SCHOOLS
Payments for expenses of business administration of T a b l o t X V
ADMIN
INDEPEDENT
ISTERED AS A CITY
SCHOOL DISTRICTS.
schools.—The payments for expenses of business ad
DEPARTMENT.
ministration are presented under eight separato head
orncE OB ACCOUNT roR WHICH
Per 100
Per 100
ings, tho first seven of which specifically describe sub
pupils in
pupils in
regular
regular
Total.
Total.
divisions of the business administration, while the last
attend
attend
ance.
ance.
covers such expenses of business administration as
can not be classified under any of the seven preceding
$115 $1,449,395
*877,375
Total.
headings. The expenses shown in these columns
Board of education and secretary's
426,898
20
264,577
office
■
include both salaries and miscellaneous payments,
91,962
4
52,493
School elections and school census.
121,189
6
186,348
and represent tho total cost, as nearly as could be Finance offices and accounts
.
9,101
22,998
General legal services
(*)
determined, of the board of education and the secre Operation and maintenance of office
78,887
4
44,070
building
162,017
346,931
tary's office, school elections and the school census, Offices
10
in charge of buildings
53,350
248 467
12
Offices in charge of supplies
finance offices and items of accounts, general legal All other
91,522
125,960
6
services, tho operation and maintenance of office
i Less than II,
buildings, offices in chaige of buildings, and offices in
Payments for expenses of educational administration
charge of supplies. The principal purposes of the
payments shown in the column headed "All other," of schools.—The payments for expenses of educational
under "'Business administration," were telephone administration are presented under four general head
service and the printing of reports.
ings. The expenses shown under the heading " Office of



TABLE 37.

122

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

superintendent of schools" include the salaries of the the purchase of land; and $26,454,114, or 68 per cent,
superintendent and the employees connected with his for the construction of new buildings. The payments
office, together with the other expenses of the office. In for outlays for equipment, amounting to $2,728,753,
like manner the expenses shown under the three other or 17.7 per cent, are tabulated in three columns; the
titles include both salaries and wages and other ex first including the payments for equipment of new
penses. The total expenses of educational administra- buildings; the second, the payments for equipment of
tionamounted to$2,783,677, of which$l,675,177, or 60.1 old buildings exclusive of replacements; and the third,
per cent, was for the superintendent's office; $596,381, the payments for special equipment, which comprise
or 21.5 per cent, for enforcement of compulsory educa payments for automobiles, carriages, and all other
tion and truancy laws; $449,667, or 16.2 per cent, for equipment for use outside of buildings.
general promotion of health; and $62,452, or 2.2 per
The following table shows for each group of cities
cent, for other expenses of educational administration. the percentage of the total payments for. outlays
Payments made for the promotion of health were for which were made respectively for land, for the con
the salaries of physicians and dentists employed to struction of new buildings, for the alteration of old
examine school children, determine the condition of buildings, and for equipment.
their health, and prescribe treatment for those found
PER CEXT OP TOTAL PAT1TENTS FOB SCHOOL
defective, and for the salaries of nurses. As a rule, Table liXVI
OUTLAYS MADE I O B —
both physicians and nurses were paid from health de
GBOUP OF CITIES.
Alteration Equip
partment appropriations, such payments being incor
New
Land.
of old
buildings. buildings. ment.
porated in the school statistics by methods already
explained on page 116. The principal purposes of the
14.1
1S4 cities.
10.9
7.0
payments for expenses of educational administration
Group I . . .
12.9
G3.8
15.3
8.0
reported under the title "All other" were to provide Group I I . .
20.7
6S.2
6.2
4.9
III.
13.3
70.6
10.1
5.9
lectures for teachers and to defray the expenses con Group
Group IV..
9.1
73.1
0.1
8.7
16.1
67.8
9.0
7.0
nected with meetings of educational associations, in Group V..,
7
cluding teachers institutes.
Payments for the construction of new buildings
Payments for expenses of general administration of
constituted
by far the most important class of pay
schools for colored pupils.—Eleven cities reported
ments
for
outlays,
forming more than two-thirds of
payments for administrative expenses of schools for
the
total
for
each
group,
with the exception of Group I.
colored pupils, as follows; Washington, D. C, $12,773;
Payments
for
land
ranked
next in relative amounts in
Kansas City, Mo., $4,504; Oklahoma City, Okla., $22;
every
group
except
Groups
I and V, in which pay
East St. Louis, HI., $131; Covington, Ky., $241;
ments
for
the
alteration
of
old buildings ranked
Mobile, Ala., $1,763; Little Rock, Ark., $4,391; Chat
second.
The
proportion
which
payments for land
tanooga, Tenn., $1,563; Lexington, Ky., S635; Mus
represented
of
the
total
outlays
shows
a progressive
kogee, Okla., $53; and Newport, Ky., $30.
increase from the group comprising the smallest cities
to that comprising the largest, except Group I. This
TABLE 38.
doubtless results mainly from the fact that urban
Payments for school outlays.—During the year 1911 land values tend to increase with population, while
the payments for outlays for the schools in 184 of the the costs of building construction do not.
193 cities of over 30,000 inhabitants amounted to
Payments for outlays classified by Icind of educational
$38,911,050. Nine cities reported no payments for activity.—Of the total amount paid for outlays, $43,551,
outlays. The payments for outlays per 100 inhabit or 0.1 per cent, was expended for general administrative
ants for the 184 cities for which the figures are shown outlays; S27,255,269, or 70 per cent, for elementary
in the table amounted to $139, the averages for the school outlays; $10,382,415, or 26.7 per cent, for sec
different groups being as follows: Group I, $111; Group ondary school outlays; and $1,229,815, or 3.2 per cent,
H, $197; Group III, $145; Group IV, $169; and Group for other school and educational outlays.
V, $124. The cities for Group I paid for outlays
Payments for outlays for miscellaneous schools and
$13,182,154, or 33.9 per cent of the total; those of educational activities.—The objects of the payments
Group II, $7,556,511, or 19.4 per cent; of Group III, reported in the column headed "All other schools and
$8,102,236, or 20.8 per cent; of Group IV, $6,516,242, educational activities" arc shown in the following table.
or 16.8 per cent; and of Group V, $3,553,907, or 9.1
The outlays tor normal schools amounted to 44.6
per cent.
per cent of the total outlays for all schools in cities
Payments for school outlays, classified ly object.—Ofreporting such schools; those for educational exten
the total payments for outlays by the 184 cities report sion, to 19.1 per cent; and those for night schools, to
ing such payments, $5,502,771, or 14.1 per cent, was for about one-third of 1 per cent.




DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
Table LXVII
City
num
ber.

KIND OF SCHOOL.
All
schools.

CITY.

Educa
tional
exten
sion.

Other.

• The following statement shows the educational ac
tivities for which outlay payments are tabulated in
the column headed "For educational extension," in
Table LXVIL

$1,229,815 $577,638 $3,282 1218,059 £420. KM

Total
1
3
4
5
6
7
9
12
13
14
15
17
20
21
22
25
"26
27
29
30
33
35
41
45
50
51
52
54
62
65
66
71
87
95
97
118
130
135
137
155
178

Normal. Night.

New York, N . Y
Philadelphia, P<*

.*<*.

Detroit, Mich
Milwaukee, Wis
Newark, K . J
Los Angeles, Cal
Seattle, Wash
Karore C i t y , M o - T -.
Rochester, N. Y

80,075 ]1 1*473
63,097 ' 63,097
956 j
956
95,773
73,560
79,913
68,272
166
166
10,061
81,765
325,006 > 310,256
70,615 | 19,129
504
2,951
41,757
39,536 1,209
1,897
11,016
317
25,628
5,564 : : : : : : : : : i : : : : : : : *
1,081
599
464
3,712
2,926
•
11,140
498
1,193
it 193
15,393
4,784
68
68
1,579 !
720
5,003 t
49,916 1
1,069 ;
116,512 !I
2,785
4,803
8,453 ;
1,799
43 ;
405
25,741
3,670 J
5,179
65,224

:::::::::l:":::::

Columbus, Ohio
Syracuse, N . Y
Spokapo. Wfish.
Hartford, C o n n . . . . . . . . . . .
Trenton, N . J
Tacoma, Wash
Yonkcrs,N.Y
Fort Worth, Tex
Fort Wayne, Intl
South Bend. Ind
Brockton, Mass.... . . . . .
McKccsport, Pa
Wheeling, W. Va
Kalamazoo, Mich
East Orange, N. J
Mount Vernon, X. Y

35

11,641

14,750
46,046
1,012
10,692
25,628
563
1,0S1
3,712
2,926

49,713
1,069
4,803
8,453
1,799
43
405
25,741
3,670
5,179
2,728

2,050
81,765
4,936
2,951
1,897
5,001
135
11,140
49S
15,393
4,784
859
5,003
203
116,512
2,785

62,496

The following statement shows in detail the kinds
of schools for which payments are tabulated in the
column headed "Other"'in Table LXYTI.
KIND O r SCHOOL, A N D CITY.

Total

,

Amount
$430,836
271,480

Trade
Boston, Mass
Yonkers. N. Y
Mount Vernon, N. Y
Milwaukee, Wis
Worcester, Mass
New Bedford, Mass
Bochester, N. Y
Agriculture
Milwaukee, Wis
Fort Worth, Tex
Truant
New York, N . Y
Cleveland, Ohio
Los Angeles, Cal
Kansas City, Mo
Parental

,

,

21,019
116,512
62,496
50,900
11,140
4,784
4,629
33,186
30,401
2,7S5
29,132
18,450
7,724
2,951

,

17,414

Spokane, Wash
Seattle, Wash
Tacoma, Wash
Vacation.

,

15,393
1,897
124
5,640

Newark, N . J
Syracuse, N . Y
Boston, Mass
For defectives

,

Cleveland. Ohio
Detroit, Mich
Milwaukee, Wis
Portland, Oreg
Tacoma, Wash
Open air
Hartford, Conn
Rochester, N. Y
Collegiate, New York, N. Y
Nautical, New York, N. Y
Industrial art, Trenton, N. J
Horace Mann, Boston, Mass




,

4,936
49S
206
6,645
3,917
2,050

m

135
79
1,231

.

372

<
,

Amount.

OBJECT AND CITY.

'

78,567

"*22,213
8,011

123

S7,8S7
2,230
5,003
9S8

Total.

$218,059

Libraries.,

83,233

Wheeling, W . V a . . .
Indianapolis, I n d . . .
Kansas City, Mo
South Bend, I n d . . .
Fort Wayne, I n d . . .
Columbus, Ohio
Kalamazoo, Mich...
Kansas City, Kans..

25,741
25,628
10,692
8,453
4,803
3,712
3,135
1,069

Playgrounds..

74,141

Newark, N . J
Cincinnati, Ohio
East Orange, N. J
Mount Vemon, N . Y .
Brockton, Mass
Denver, Colo
Washington, D. C . . . .
Rochester, N . Y
Kalamazoo, Mich
McKeesporL P a . . . . . .
Pueblo, Colo.

46,046
14,750
5,179
2,728
1,799
1,081

Stadium, Tacoma, Wash
Playgrounds and vacation schools, Detroit, Mich.
Playgrounds and athletics, Toledo, Ohio
Athletic field, New York, N . Y

49,713
8,011
2,926
35

1,012

563
535
405
43

Payments for outlays for schools for colored pupils.—
Table LXVIII gives by kind of school or educational
activity the payments for outlays for schools for col
ored pupils, reported by 23 cities.
T a b l e LXVIII
City
num
ber.

j

Total
4 St. Louis, Mo . . . .
7
17 Washington, D. C
21
24
34

8332,678 SU7,669

*iS9,600
.

37
39
46
51
56
65 Kansas City, Kans....
73
80 Oklahoma City, Okla.
83
91 East St. Louis. Ill
92
96 Charleston, S. C
102
107 Mobile Ala
157
182
193

KIND OF SCHOOL.

All
schools. ! Elemen- Second
Play
grounds.
ary.
j tary.

CITY.

119,017 1
138,933
23,664
25,346
27,562

1

28,409
629
92,525
22,889
25,346
27,562

1,252
1,252
73,507
73.507
1,000
1,000
2,095 '
2,095
9,364 !
1,738
4,814 j 4>164
3,408 > 2,054
3,562 1; 3,562
263
158
158 1:
159
159 !
7,657
7,657 !
4,387 !
1,219
4,976
9,095 !
27.2S9

4.387
1,219
4,976
101
27,289

90,603
244
7,155!
775

AU
other.

1327

»138,926

327

38,926

7,626
650
1,354
263

8,994

J

» Normal schools, $38,100; night schools, $826.

TABLE 39.

Average attendance at schools.—Table 39 shows the
average daily attendance at all schools and upon all
school activities of the cities covered by this report,
for which more or less complete reports of school at
tendance were obtained. The aggregate attendance
thus shown was 3,439,954, of which 3,380,737, or
9S.3 per cent, was reported for elementary day, sec
ondary day, normal, and night schools. Of the 193
cities shown in the table, all reported attendance for

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

124

one or more of the four kinds of schools mentioned
above, and 48 reported attendance for one or more
other kinds of schools or educational activities.
School attendance and population.—Table LXIX,
which follows, presents for the cities covered by this
report for which school attendance was reported the
average number of pupils in attendance at elementary
Table LXIX
Average
school
attend
ance
per 100
inhabit
ants.

City
num
ber.

PERCENTAGE 0 7 AGGREGATE ATTEND
ANCE AT ELEMENTARY DAY, SEC
ONDARY DAT, NORMAL, AND NIGHT
SCHOOLS.

Ele
Sec
mentary ondary Normal Night
schools. schools.
day
day
schools. schools.

Total..

11.8

87.2

8.2

0.2

4.3

Group I...
Group n*.
Group m .
Group IV..
Group V...

12.1
11.0
11.6
11.7
12.5

88.0
85.7
86.2
88.3
86.6

6.2
8.5
9.8
9.1
11.5

0.3
0.2
0.2
0.1

5.5
5.6
3.9
2.5
1.8

(0

60
61
62
63

Springfield, Mass
Lynn, Mass
Lawrence, Mass
Tacoma, Wash
Des Moines, Iowa

14.8
11.7
9.9
12.2
15.1

80.1
82.0
80.7
84.8
85.1

11.7
11.0
8.0
13.8
14.8

64
65
66
67
68

Wilmington, D e l . . .
Kansas City, Kans.
Yonkers,N.Y
Youngstown, Ohio.
Houston, Tex

9.4
12.9
14.0
10.6
11.2

8S.3
90.0
84.9
92.2
87.2

9.9
10.0
8.0
7.8
10.8

5.6

69
70
71
72
73

Norfolk, Va
Duluth,Minn
Fort Worth, T e x . . .
Somerville, Mass...
St. Joseph, Mo

12.9
14.1
10.6
14.8
11.4

93.8
91.6
89.0
81.2
8S.3

6.1
8.4
10.9
13.9
11.7

6.0
9.1
6.6
4.9
8.6

74
75
76
77
78

Utica,N.Y
Troy. N . Y
Elizabeth, N. J
Schenectady, N. Y .
Waterbury, Conn...

11.4
9.4
10.2
12.8
14.1

87.1
88.3
87.3
83.3
88.6

9.6
8.8
8.1
7.4
6.6

10.9
2.2

79
80
81
82
83

Akron, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okla..
Manchester. >•. H
Hoboken.N.J
E vansviue, Ind

13.1
12.3
7.4
11.5
9.6

86.4
92.0
81.5
91.2
90.4

11.8
8.0
11.1
4.1
9.6

0.2

84
85
86
87

Wilkes-Barre, Pa
Erie, Pa
Peoria, 111
Fort Wayne, Ind
Harrisburg, Pa

12.7
10.1
11.3
8.8
12.7

100.0
86.8
90.5
84.4
67.5

11.9
9.5
15.3
11.4

0.2

90
91
92
93

Savannah, Ga
Jacksonville, Fla..
East St. Louis, 111.
Terre Haute, Ind..
HoIyoke,Mass

9.6
8.4
9.4
12.5
11.4

9i.3
94.3
93.4
90.1
76.8

5.7
5.2
6.2
9.9
10.3

94
95
96
97

Portland, Me
South Bend, Ind..
Charleston, B . C .
Brockton, Mass....

13.5
9.9
7.6
17.3

88.0
90.0
92.7
81.5

12.0
10.0
7.3
10.0

98
99
100
101

Passaic, N . J . . .
Bayonne, N. J..
Johnstown. Pa.
Wichita, Kans..

11.9
13.6
10.3
12.8

87.8
87.2
90.5
90.4

6.4
5.6
9.5
9.5

102
103
104
105

Covington, K y . . .
Allentown, Pa...,
Pawtucket, R. I..
Springfield, HI....

8.5
12.9
12.2
11.8

92.6
100.0
83.7
84.2

7.4
6.6
11.7

3.1

106
107
108
109

Altoona, P a . . . .
Mobile, Ala
Canton, Ohio...
Saginaw, Mich.

12.8
9.2
12.6
12.4

88.8
89.1
87.5
84.8

10.9
10.9
12.5
14.9

0.3

5.1
6.4
5.7
7.5

0.3
0.3
0.4
0.2

6.6
5.4
3.6

Boston, Mass
Cleveland, Ohio.,
Baltimore, Md...
Pittsburgh, P a . .

14.6
11.2!
9.4
11.8

79.6
86.4
92.5
89.3

12.0
8.5
7.1
4.6

0.2
0.3
0.4
0.4

8.1
4.8

GROUP H.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OP 300,000 TO 500,000 IN 1911.

Newark, N . J
Los Angeles, Cal....
New Orleans,La...
Washington, D. C..
Minneapolis, Minn..

14.3
11.8 | 1
9.1 |
14.0 1
12.4

84.7
85.0
94.9
84.5
86.4 ;

4.0
12.8
4.4
10.4
13.5

0.1

0.4
0.7
0.7

4.3

<3ROUP IH.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OP 100,000 TO 300,000 IN 1911.
19 Jersey City, N. J
20 Seattle, wash
21 1 Kansas City, Mo.
22
23

j

24
25 Rochester, N. Y
26 Denver, Colo
27
28

11.8
10.6
10.6
11.4 1
12.5

89.8
78.9
85.6
86.7
83.7

5.4
14.4
14.3
11.9
8.5

10.0
10.9
12.9
9.7
10.8

86.1
76.9
85.4
88.7
85.2

0.5

4.3
67

0.2

1.2
7.8

10.7
8.2
12.4
11.3
10.7

0.3
0.2

29
14 6
22
41

29
30
31
32
33

CTftluT>»biM Ohfo, „ „ - - , . .
Toledo, Ohio
Atlanta. Ga.,. T _ TT
Oakland, Cal

11.3
11.8
10.5
10.8
13.7

85.8
89.5
91.8
85.9
81.3

12.9
8.4
6.6
12.6
10.2

0.5
0.3

0 9
17
1.6
15
84

34
35
36
37
38

Birmingham, Ala
Syracuse, N."Y

10.9
12.8
15.6
8.9
13.1

90.9
83.5
90.3
92.9
87.1

8.8
11.9
9.7
5.5
7.6

0.1
0.2

0 2
4.*4

41 1Omahfc,Nehr,...... r , . . .
42 Fall River. Mass
43 Dayton, Ohio....

10.7
13.7 j
12.2
11.9
10.5 1

91.6
89.2
88.9,
86.0
85.1

8.4
7.6
10.9;
6.0
11.5

44
45
46
47
48 Cambridge, Mass

12.3
12.1
11.7
10.6
14.4

81.4
85.2
93.3
76.4
84.0

10.2
14.0
6.7
9.7
9.6

12.6
11.1
9.7
14.1
10.1

92.9
85.3
92.3
83.8
84.4

5.3
5.0
6.7
9.7
9.9

j

■

Memphis, Tenn

39
40

49 Bridgeport, Conn
50
51
52
53 1Albany,N.Y




I

07
5.3

6.6

0.2
0.4
0.6

26
77
29
8.4
08
i3.9
64

0.3
1.0

GROUP IV.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 50,000 TO 100,000 IX 1911.

12.3
7.8
4.6

88.0
87.8
90.3
92.3

9.4
7.4
7.2
8.1
7.6

Sec
Ele
mentary ondary Normal Night
day
day
schools. schools.
schools. schools.

89.3
100.0
87.7
92.1
93.1

13.4 j
11.1
10.8
9.6

84.6
83.4
86.2
87.0
83.8

City
num*
ber.

PERCENTAGE OF AGGREGATE ATTEND
ANCE AT ELEMENTARY DAY, SEC
ONDARY DAY, NORMAL, AND NIGHT
SCHOOLS.

11.8
10.8
10.7
15.4
11.4

New York. N . Y .
Chicago, 111
Philadelphia, Pa.
St. Louis, Mo

9.8
11.5
8.8
10.2
9.6

Average
school
attend
ance
per 100
inhabit
ants.

Trenton, N. J.
Reading, Pa..
Dallas, Tex.
Salt Lake City, Utah.
Camden, N . J

GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OP 500,000 AND OYER IN 1911.

Detroit, Mich
Buffalo, N . Y
San Francisco, Cal..
Milwaukee, w i s . . . .
Cincinnati, Ohio...

day, secondary day, normal, and night schools per 100
inhabitants. The averages vary considerably as be
tween the individual cities, but to no great extent
as between the groups of cities, and the variations
shown should be considered in interpreting the aver
age expenses of schools as given in Table 40 and as
they are pointed out in detail.

1.5
8.8
1.0
65

,

6.7
0.2

0.6

0.2
0.4
0.2

0.4
0.3

0.1

0ROUP V.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 30,000 TO 50,000 IN 1911 •
110 Binghamton, N. Y
111
112 Atlantic City, N.J
113
114

115 Springfield, Ohio
116 Little Rock, Ark
117 Sacramento, Cal
118 Pueblo, Colo
6.41 63
119 Chattanooga, Tenn
1
Less than one-tenth of 1 per sent

12.8
13.8 1
12.7
14.5
11.0

88.7
87.2
86.4
84.6
91.4

11.2
12.8
7.9
15.5
5.8

6.7

12.8
10.0
10.4
13.9
10.fi 1

87.6
84.3
82.4
82.9

12.3
15.7
14.7
17.1
6.5

2.9

93.4

2.7

DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
Tatolo IiXIX—Contd.
Average
school
attend
ance
£er 100
habit
ants.

City
num
ber.

PERCENTAGE OF AGGREGATE ATTEND
ANCE AT ELEMENTARY DAY, SEC
ONDARY DAY, NORMAL, AND NIGHT
SCHOOLS.

Ele
♦Sec
mentary ondary Normal Night
day
day
schools. schools.
schools. schools.

GROUP V.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 30,000 TO 50,000 IN 1911-COntd.
120 B a y City, Mich
121 York, Ta
122 Maiden, Mass
123 N e w Britain. Conn.
124 Haverhill, M a s s . . . .

11.7
11.9
14.5
12.6
13.0

87.7
90.7
80.7
85.0
80.8

11.9
9.3
12.4
9.7
12.1

0.4 \
6.9
5.3
7.1

125
126
127
12S
129

Salem, Mass
Lincoln, Nebr
Berkeley, Cal
Davenport, I o w a .
Topeka, K a n s . . . .

9.8
14.6
13.1
12.8
13.9

83.9
86.1
77.8
88.8
83.3

12.8
13.9
22.2
11.2
15.9

130
131
132
133
134

McKeesport, P a . . .
Flint, Mich
Tampa, Fla
San Diego. C a l . . . .
E l Paso, T e x

14.6
9.8
8.5
12.1
9.5

89.1
88.7
93.6
84.4
93.4

7.9
11.0
6.4
15.5
6.6

135
136
137
138
139

Wheeling W.Va..
Racine, Wis
Kalamazoo, Mich..
Superior, Wis
Augusta, Ga

11.0
12.3
11.8
12.2
8.4

92.9
89.5
84.1
87.6
91.9

7.1
10.5
15.9
12.4
8.1

140
141
142
143
144

Macon, Ga
Newton, Mass
Butte, Mont
Woonsocket, R. I.
Chester, Pa

14.9
20.4
9.6
9.3
11.9

91.3
79.1
89.4
86.8
91.9

8.2
16.5
10.7
5.6
8.0

145
146
147
148
149

Montgomery, Ala.,
Fitchburg, Mass...
Dubuque, Iowa...
Galveston, Tex...,
Elmira,N.V

9.1
10.4
7.7
9.1
11.5

88.4
77.6
87.9

10. S
16.7
12.0

0.8
5.7

?«7

3.9

150
151
152
153
154

Newcastle, Pa
West Uobokon, N.J..
Knoxville, Tenn
Hamilton, Ohio
Springfield, Mo

15.1
13.7
14.4
11.2
17.0

89.9
92.7
8S.0
SS.1
85.9

8.8
2.8
12.0
11.9
14.1

1.4
4.4

155
15G

East O ranee, N. J
Quincy, HI

12. S
0.3

86.8
87.6

13.2
12.4

0)

79.3

(

3.3
0.7
0.5
0.4

2.5
0.1

0.5

4.4
7.6

125
PERCENTAGE OP AGGREGATE ATTEND
ANCE AT ELEMENTARY DAT, SEC
ONDARY DAY. NORMAL, AND NIGHT
SCHOOLS.

Average
school
attend
ance
per 100
inhabit
ants.

City
num
ber.

Ele
mentary
day
schools.

Sec
ondary Normal Night
day
schools. schools.
schools.

GROUP V.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 30,000 TO 50,000 IN 1911—COntd.

13.3
11.3
10.8

88.6
90.5
94.6

8.5
9.5
5.4

14.2
9.2
10.6
13.5
17.9

84.0
78.9
100.0
79.9
84.5

16.0
15.6
12.3
10.5

Portsmouth, Va
Pittsfield, Mass
Quincv, Mass
Cedar Rapids, Iowa.
Oshkosh/Wis

9.8
15.2
13.0
14.8
13.4

93.6
86.6
83.7
86.6
85.1

6.4
10.3
11.9
13.4
12.4

170 Perth Amboy, N. J.,
171 Lansing, Mich
172 Pasadena, Cal
173 Amsterdam, N . Y . . .
174 Jackson, Mich

15.1
11.3
13.8
9.3
11.2

92.1
86.8
84.0
80.1
89.0

7.9
13.2
16.0
10.3
11.0

175 Jamestown, N. Y
176 San Jose, Cal
177 Decatur, 111
178 Mount Vernon, N. Y .
179 Joplin, Mo

15.7
14.2
14.4
13.5
16.1

79.5
75.9
89.2
84.4
87.0

10.7
23.1
10.8
12.0
13.0

157
158
159

Roanoke, V a
Lexington, K y
Huntington, W . V a .

1G0 Joliet,Tll
161 Auburn, N . Y
162 Charlotte, N. C
163 Taunton, Mass
164 Everett, Mass
165
166
167
163
169

ISO
181
182
183
184

Williamsport, P a . . . .
Niagara Falls, N. Y .
Muskogee, Okla
Lima, Ohio
Chelsea, Mass

14.5
13.3
9.9
13.5
19.7

86.3
80.9
88.6
86.5
85.0

10.4
lt.O
11.4
13.1
6.8

185
186
187
188

Aurora, 111
New Rochelle, N. Y.
Austin, Tex
La Crosse, Wis
Newport, Ky.

10.9
13.9
11.7
11.6
9.2

8S.5
85.2
84.6
86.5
90.7

17.5
9.5
15.4
13.5
9.3

190
191
192
193

Orange, N . J
Lorain, Ohio
Council Bluffs, Iowa..
Lynchburg, Va

11.8
12.1
16.1
13.4

89.6
89.4
89.6
91.5

6.2
10.6
10.3
7.8

2.9

6.3

5.2
7.9
5.0
3.1
4.4
2.5

9.6
0.2

9.7
1.1
3.6
3.4
5.1

0.4

8.2
5.3

4.2

6.7

t Not reported separately.

Cities with highest and lowest average attendance.— schools when considered together, as shown in Table
The cities of the several groups with the highest and LXIX, were as follows:
lowest average school attendance per 100 inhabitants,
as shown in Table LXIX, were as follows:
Percent
Percent
Lowest city.
Highest city.
GROUP.
age.

GROUP.

I..;
II
Ill
IV
V

Highest city.

Boston, Mass....!
Newark, N. J . . .
New Haven. Conn....

Average
attend
ance.
14.6
14.3
15.6
17.3
20.4

Lowest city.

San Francisco, Cal

Average
attend
ance.
9.4
8.8
8.9
7.4
7.7

I
II
HI
IV

v

Minneapolis, Minn

12.2
13.5 Newark. N . J
14.3
15.7
23.1 West Hoboken, N. J . .

age.

5.0
4.4
5.5
4.1
2.8

Average attendance at elementary day schools.—The
reported average daily attendance at elementary day
Per cent distribution of school attendance, by hind oj schools was 2,949,548, or 85.7 per cent of the reported
school.—Table LXIX, in addition to giving the aver attendance at all the schools for which Table 39 con
age attendance per 100 inhabitants for the four kinds tains statistics. The percentage shown for elementary
of schools, gives the per cent distribution by kind of day schools in Table LXIX was 87.2, The correspond
school of the total attendance of the four kinds of ing percentages for the individual cities also given in
schools mentioned. The percentages vary considerably "Table LXIX show no great variations among the
as between the several groups, as well as between the several cities. Excluding 5 cities showing 100 per cent
individual cities. The significance of these variations because not reported separately, the two cities showing
and their influence upon the averages shown in Table the greatest variation are New Orleans, La., and
40 are fully set forth in the text of that table. The San Jose, Cal., reporting 94.9 and 75.9 per cent, re
cities of the several groups with the highest and lowest spectively. The causes of the variations shown in the
percentages of attendance of secondary and normal table are not in all cases apparent at the present time,
Newton,Mass...«... .




FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

126

but will be the subject of future investigations by the and was imperfectly reported for others, and hence the
statistics in the column showing the attendance at such
Bureau of the Census.
schools are less complete than those for elementary and
Average attendance at secondary day schools.—The re
Of the 51 cities for which
ported average daily attendance at secondary day secondary day schools.
%
Table
36
contains
normal
school statistics, data as to
schools in the 189 cities reporting such schools was
attendance
were
secured
for
46. The reported attend
277,614, or 8.1 per cent of the reported attendance at
ance
for
the
46
cities
for
which
Table 39 gives figures
all schools. The percentage given in Table LXIX for
was
6,955,
or
0.2
per
cent
of
the
total daily attendance
secondary schools was 8.2. As indicating the relative
at
all
schools.
Had
complete
reports
been secured for
importance of the secondary schools in the school
system proper, the percentage of Table LXIX is more all the 51 normal schools, this percentage could not have
significant than the one first given. The percentages been greater than 0.3.
Average attendance at other day schools.—The average
for secondary day schools of Table LXIX make an irreg
T
ular rising series from Group I to Group V, being nearly daily attendance at daj schools other than elementary,
twice as great in Group V as in Group I. From these secondary, and normal schools was secured for only 48
percentages it can be seen that the relative number of cities, although a somewhat larger number of cities
pupils in regular attendance upon secondary day maintained other schools and school activities.
The character of the other schools and educational
schools decreases in marked degree as the size of the
activities
for which Table 39 gives the average daily
city increases.
attendance is shown in Table LXX, which gives tho
Average attendance at normal scJiools.—As has been
previously mentioned, the average daity attendance at reported attendance for each kind of school or educa
normal schools was not reported for a number of cities tional activity.
Table L X X

1

CUT.

Par*
1 ental
and
truant.

g

1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
20
21
25
27
29

Total
New York, N. Y
Chicago, 111
Philadelphia, Pa
St. Louis, Mo
1
Boston,ifrass.... . . . .
Cleveland, Ohio
Detroit, Mich
Buffalo, N. Y
Cincinnati, Ohio
Newark, N . J
Los Angeles, Cal
Seattle, Wash
Rochester, N . Y
Portland, Oreg\

Indus
trial,
trade,
and
voca
tional.

For
deaf,
blind,
and
crip
pled.

1,488 13,451 1,951
302
348
443 7,933
224
404
262
2S1
120
33
45
45

82
49

238
177
107
270
131

292
123
112

43|

i?

327

|

66
8,535

8,544

21

45
48
SO

235
14
5

835

25

201

12

1

■

44
45
4S
50
52
53
54
59
62
66
70
72
76
$2

88
97
109
136
2,25S , 137
138
141
142
163
169
1S8

23

Indus
Par trial,
ental trade,
or
and
truant. voca
tional.

For
deaf,
blind,
and
crip
pled.

1 **

I
)
t
9 1
7,020 '

2,238

22
129
50

CITY.

S

265

121
923 3,198

273

•

356 17,SSS

1,130 22,953

158
594

30 J

33 Worcester, Mass
34
35 Syracuse, N.'Y

For
neg
lected, Vaca
delin
quent, tion
Open All
and and
other.
back i sumward mer.
chil
dren.

Grand Kapids. Mich

565

Albany, N.Y
Trenton, N.J

90
3«1

E!izabeth,N.J
Hoboken, N. J
Racine, wis
Butte, Mont
Oshkosh, Wis

20
!
J

64

681
1,293
II

46

3-5
9 1,750
13

25
51
16

Vaca
tion
and Open All
sum air. other.
mer.

3,670

63

21

New Bedford, Conn

Yonkers,N. Y
Duluth. Minn

For
neg
lected,
delin
quent,
and
back
ward
chil
dren.

!I

987
40
. .

*I5*•
21
4
6
11
8

40
14

223

19

535

15

|{

1

Average attendance at night schools.—Payments wereance at night schools than the number of cities report
reported as having been made for the expenses of night ing would indicate. The total average attendance as
schools by 137 cities, distributed in the five groups, as shown in this table was 146,620, which represented 4.2
follows: Group I, 8; Group II, 10; Group III, 35; per cent of the total reported attendance at all schools,
Group IV, 42; and Group V, 42. More or less complete and 4.3 per cent of the attendance at the four principal
data relating to average attendance at these schools kinds of schools. If complete reports from all cities
•were secured from 106 cities, distributed as follows: having night schools had been secured, this proportion
Group I, 6; Group II, 8; Group III, 29; Group IV, 29; would probably have been a little less than 5 per cent.
and Group V, 34. Reports of attendance were more
Number of school sittings.—The total school sittings
generally obtained from cities having a considerable reported numbered 4,061,841. Of this number, 3,661,attendance at night schools, such as those of Groups 503, or 90.1 per cent, were reported for elementary day
I and IT, than from those with a smaller attendance, schools, and 368,083, or 9.1 per cent, for secondary
and hence the total average attendance reported is a day schools. The sittings in elementary day schools
much closer approximation to the total actual attend exceeded the average attendance in those schools




DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.

127

by 711,955, or 24.1 per cent of the average number in
Number of rooms for night schools.—As night schools
attendance. In like manner the sittings in secondary- are always conducted in buildings used for day schools,
day schools exceeded the average daily attendance the rooms used for night schools are included with
in those schools by 90,469, or 33.2 per cent of the those reported in Table 39 as for day schools. The
average attendance in those schools. The sittings in reports as to the number of rooms used for night
normal schools exceeded the average daily attendance schools are not as complete as could have been desired,
in such schools by 109.9 per cent, while the sittings but Table LXXI, which follows, presents the informa
reported for schools other than elementary and tion that was secured.
secondary day schools and normal schools were mate
City T a b l e L X X I
Number
Number City
rially less than the average daily attendance. The num,_-,
CITY.
crrY
of rooms. num*
of rooms.
bcr.
j
bor.
specially large excess of sittings reported for normal
schools may include for some cities the seats pro
2 Chicago, Til
57
93 Holyolre, Mass.
055
8 Pittsburgh, Pa
2
106 Altoona/Pa
75
vided for the grade pupils in model schools as well as
6
130
40
24 Louisville, Ky
4
150
18
31 Atlanta, Ga.
for the normal pupils proper. The figures for the
166
14
10
32 Oakland, Cat.
169 Oshkosh, Wis...
28
7
52
number of sittings in other»schools can not properly be
170 San Jose, Cal
34
3
72
180
18
:
3
75 Troy, N. x
compared with the attendance at such schools, as
shown in the table, for the reason that many of them,
TABLE 40.
including all the night schools, are maintained in
Average payments for scliool expenses.—Table 40
buildings which are devoted primarily to elementary
or secondary day schools and whose sittings are there shows the average payments for the expenses of ele
mentary day, secondary day,, normal, and night
fore included in the figures for such schools.
Number of school buildings.—The total number of schools per 100 inhabitants and per 100 pupils in
school buildings reported in Table 39 is 7,874, of which regular attendance. In the first column are presented
2,327, or 29.5 per cent, were in cities of Group I; the average expenses per 100 inhabitants, and in
962, or 12.2 per cent, in cities of Group II; 1,741, or the other columns are shown the average payments
22..1 per cent, in cities of Group III; 1,481, or 18.9 per 100 pupils in regular attendance for all the
per cent, in cities of Group IV; and 1,363, or 17.3 per expenses of the four kinds of schools taken together
cent, in cities of Group V. The average number of and the average payments exclusive of those for
school sittings per building for all cities and for the general administrative expenses for each of the four
five groups of cities was 718, 532, 440, 409, and 371, kinds. In computing the expenses of general
respectively. From this it appears that the seating administration for the four kinds of schools, as shown
capacity of school buildings increases with the size of in the column headed "General administration," it
the city, being nearly 94 per cent greater in the cities has been assumed that these expenses formed the same
of Group I than-in those of Group V. The greater proportion of the total administrative expenses for
capacity of the school buildings in the larger cities as all schools and educational activities that the combined
compared with those of the smaller cities probably expenses of the four kinds of schools for instruction,
explains to some extent why the expenses other than operation, and maintenance of plant and miscel
those for instruction, as shown in Table 40, do not laneous objects formed of the corresponding totals
tend to increase as rapidly with the size of cities as for all schools and educational activities. The por
tion of the aggregate administrative expenses included
do the expenses for instruction.
in
the computation for the column mentioned is also
Of the school buildings reported in the table, 7,251,
used
in the computation of the first column—that
or 92.1 per cent, wero for elementary schools, and 466,
or 5.9 per cent, for secondary schools, the number of showing the average payments per 100 inhabitants.
For some cities it is impossible to secure data relat
sittings per building being 505 and 790, respectively.
Number of schoolrooms.—Under the heading " School ing to attendance at normal and night schools, so that
rooms," in Table 39, is shown the number of rooms averages for such cities could not be presented in
used for recitation, laboratories, shops, assembly pur Table 40. For these cities the average payments for
poses and gymnasiums. The rooms used for recita expenses of general administration were computed
tions, laboratories, and shops are all tabulated under on the basis of the figures for those classes of schools
the generic designation "Classrooms." Such rooms for which statistics of attendance were available.
Average payments per 100 inhabitants.—The average
constitute 97.7 per cent of all rooms reported. The
rooms reported under the designation "Assembly payment for all school expenses per 100 inhabitants for
rooms" constitute 1.6 per cent of the total, and those the 193 cities for whichfiguresare presented was §462.
The average for the cities of Group I, $503, was con
classed as "Gymnasiums" 0.7 per cent of the total.
Of the total number of rooms reported, 83,812, or siderably larger than the averages for the cities of
86 per cent, were used for elementary schools; 12,539, Groups II, HI, IV, and V, which show comparatively
or 12.9 per cent, for secondary schools; 500, or 0.5 per little variation, being $465, $431, $413, and $423,
cent, for normal schools; and 643, or 0.6 per cent, for respectively. The highest and lowest averages in the
different groups were as follows:
other schools.




FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

128
GROUP.

I
II
Ill
IV

v

Highest city.

Average.
$667
646
582
709
878

Lowest city.

Average.
$344
292
242
155
154

City
num
ber.
4
6
13
15
20
27
29
30
43
45
62
65
73
79
80
85

crrr.

St. Louis* M o . . . . . . . . T
Seattle, Wash

1 Per cent City
num
of
ber.
excess.
0.8
1.2
0.2
8.7
0.9
1.2
0.2
0.6
1.3
0.2
5.8
4.9
2.4
0.2
9.8 I
;
0)

CITY.

86 Peoria, 111
91 East St. Louis, 111...
105 Springfield, 111
103
115
116 Little Rock, Ark
117
126
137
153
154
174
179
182
1S5
192 Council BluOs, Iowa...

Per cent
of
excess.
2.2
1.1
2.9
0.5
1.6
4.8
5.6
4.6
3.9
1.4
1.9
2.3
1.1
6.7
5.5
2.1

The foregoing averages measure approximately the
Toledo, Ohio
relative payments by the several cities and groups of
cities for expenses that are met from school revenues
Kansas City. Kans.
and school appropriations. They are not, however,
Oklahoma City, Okla.
measures of the costs of maintaining what are ordi
Erie, Pa
narily referred to as the "public schools," since the
> Less than one-tenth of 1 per cent.
figures upon which they have been based include, in
the case of some cities, payments for the maintenance
Average payments for schools for colored pupils.—The
and operation of libraries, the delivery of lectures, and following table shows for the 51 cities which reported
the maintenance of social centers for the general separate schools for colored pupils the average pay
public, and also the payments for orphan asylums and ments per 100 pupils for expenses of elementary and
playgrounds, which in other cities are made from secondary day schools:
appropriations other than those for schools, and hence
are not included in these tables. As measures of the
ELEMENT AH Y DAY
SECONDARY DAT
Table LXXII
1
SCHOOLS.
I
SCHOOLS.
comparative cost of maintaining the "public schools," City
crrr.
these averages are less comparable than those based ber. ■j
\ All
Infrac Ail
Total. jlnstroc
tion. other. | Total. tion. other.
upon school attendance.
Inaccurate averages per 100 inhabitants.—The aver
4
3,281
8,602 5,463
745 14,070
4,026
ages of school expenses per 100 inhabitants in Table
7 1 Baltimore, Md
7,786
337
2,150
2,4S7
6,697 1,089
16
236
1,640 i li 404
40 and the per capita school expenses given in Table 13
577 io,ns
17
3,122
3,699
994
6,isi 2,119
21
837
2,109
2,946
6,791
8,910
are based upon comparable data for the great majority
24 j Louisville,l£y
351
2,430
2,079
643
5,761
6,424
31
48
775
727
of cities, including all cities in which schools are
34
2,332
319
1,288
969
i,899
433
37
6,815
305
2,012
1,707
1,402
5,413
administered by the city corporation proper, and also
39
3,374
247
1,858
1,611
340
3,034
46 | Nashville, fonn
2,572
262
1,634
1,372
2,325
247
all cities with independent school districts which have
51
3,783
474
3,107
2,633
3,783
56 Dallas, T A T . . . . . . . . . . . . x 1.765
4,537
177
1.5S5
3,674
863
the same territorial area as the city corporation. In
58 Camden, N.J
0)
8,501
65 Kansas City, Kans
2,283
4?7
1,796
6,614
1,947
the case of independent school districts with territory
68
1,644
221
1,423
2.811
2,446
365
1,010
69 Norfolk, Va
144
866
extending beyond the boundary of the city corpora
71 Fort Worth, Tex
1,25S
177
2,373
1,0*1
433
i,940
73 St. Joseph, Mo
4,544 1 3,323 1,221
9.040
7,600 1.440
tion, and thus having a population exceeding that of
80 OklahomaCity.Okla....
646
546
100
83
2.949
492 \u%
2,437
<">
the city corporation, the averages of the two tables
88
0)
12,917
89
56
1%>
mentioned are larger than they should be. Data are
90
155
S07
962
91
640
2,i6i
2,317
i,346
815
2,957
wanting for computing more accurate averages. The
92
524
2,256
2,810
Charleston, S. C
199
I
96
1,465
1,663
names of the cities with averages per 100 inhabitants
618
102 Covington, Ky
4,635
3,274
4,635
3,892
107 1 Mobile.Ala
134
703
837
and per capita that are thus exaggerated by the Census
116
277
9S2
4,377
3,572
805
1,259
119
2S7
2,592
2,592
1.500
1,213
tables are shown in the following statement, which
121 York, P a . . . .
632
132
%,
%\
gives for each city the percentage by which the
134
1,700
2,230
530
135
Wheeling,
W.Va
3,141
3,828
687
assessed valuation of the property subject to district
ft ft 0)
139
1,066
1,066
140
574
574
school taxes exceeds the assessed valuation of the
145
969
1,113
143 Galveston, Tex
property subject to taxation for city corporation
152
ft <*)
&o\
%\ ftv
A.
154 Springfield, Mo
1.276
purposes. The percentage of the excess of the school
0)
602
<
>
157
ft
1,263
614
180
158 Lexington. Ky
3,89i
660
3,231
1,4*3
1,083
district population is not greatly variant from that
236
159 Huntington. W.Va
4,671 | 4,671
1,333
1,247
328
162 Charlotte, N.C
871
1,005
of the assessed valuation, and if it differs therefrom it
120
165
804
751
203
179
2,313
691
is somewhat greater. By allowing for such variation
392
182
9,008 1,394
1,270
1,926
162 ii,002
187
972
1,442
4,365
the percentages of the statement show approximately
3,393
1,117
199
189
2,«06
1,243
562
193
1,029
for the several cities mentioned the percentage of
2,244
275
754
variation of the averages referred to in Tables 13 and
I3 Number of puplb In regular attendance not reported.
Number of pupils in regular attendance not separately reported.
40. In the case of Pueblo, Colo., the total school
expenditures included in Tables 11 and 13 have been
Average payments for normal and night schools for
reduced and placed on the same basis as that of other
colored
pupils.—Of the 51 cities included in the above
city expenditures, and hence the per capita of Table 13
table,
7
reported expenses for normal or night schools
for that city are not subject to the factor of error of
for
colored
pupils. For 3 of these citios the average
which mention has been made*
payments for the expenses of such schools per 100




,&J

DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
pupils in regular attendance are given in the following
table:
Table L X X H I
City
num
ber.

N O S V A L SCHOOLS.

NIGHT SCHOOLS.

129

janitors, clerks, and such other employees as were not
engaged in administration, supervision, or instruction*
TABLE 42.

Teachers9 pensions.—Pensions and gratuities are
paid to the teachers and former teachers of the public
schools by two methods: (1) from or through the
I
7
$13,041 I $13,041
11,607 ! 11,504
$3
17 Washington, D. C
agency of public trust funds established for that pur
21
$
9,060
8,430
630 $1,823 $1,509
24
pose
and (2) directly from the school district or city
46
50
corporation
treasury. Table 42 presents for cities
(
V
)
119
0)
having public trust funds for teachers' pensions a sum
i Number of pupils in regular attendance nottreported.
mary of the receipts and payments of such funds,
together with the cash balances at the beginning and
TABLE 41.
close of the year, and the total assets at the close of
School employees.—In Table 41 are presented sta the year. For cities paying teachers' pensions and
tistics of school employees classified according to the gratuities, but not having permanent pension funds
character of the service performed and the kind of for teachers, the table shows the amounts of payments
school in which employed. Table LXXIV, which fol made for the specified purpose, balanced by receipts to
lows, shows for the 165 cities for which statistics of a like amount in the column headed "From city," in
school employees were secured and for the five groups dicating that the pensions and gratuities paid were
of cities the percentage which each of the principal from the general appropriation of the city corporation
classes of school employees constituted of the total.
or from the general fund of the school district. Fiftythree cities reported the payment of teachers' pensions
Table UOC1V
and gratuities. Of that number 33 had permanent
Super
Adminis
Other
GROUT.
trative visors and ,employees.
pension
trust funds, and 20 did not. The total pen
officers.
teachers.
sions and gratuities paid in 1911 by the 53 cities
165 cities.
89.0
10.3
0.7
amounted to $1,488,437, of which $1,421,447, or 95.5
Group I
0.5
SS.8
10.7
per
cent, was paid by the 33 cities maintaining teach
Group II
0.5
89.6
9.9
Group III
0.9
89.1
10.0
ers'
retirement funds with investments, and $66,990,
Group IV
0.8
89.0
10.2
Group V
1.2
88.6
10.2
or 4.5 per cent, was paid by the other 20 cities.
Cities without permanent teachers9 pension funds.—
School administrative officers.—The percentage of perThe cities paying pensions but maintaining no perma
sons employed as administrative officers increases from nent retirement funds with investments were Newark,
Group I to Group V, being nearly three times as great Paterson, Trenton, Camden, Elizabeth, Hoboken,
in the latter as in tho former group. The largest actual Bayonne, East Orange, and Berth Amboy, N. J., Lynn
and relative number of administrative officers reported and Pittefield, Mass., Charleston, S. C, Harrisburg,
for any individual city was for Pittsburgh, Pa., in Pa., Youngstown, Ohio, Peoria, HI., Denver, Colo.,
which there were 101 such officers, which constitutes Atlanta and Macon, Ga., Mobile, Ala., and Lynch
10.5 per cent of the total number of school employees burg, Va. It will be noted that this list includes all
reported for all cities. This large number was due to the cities of New Jersey in which payments for teach
the numerous independent school districts which ers' pension funds were reported. A number of the
existed in that city in 1910 to which thefiguresof the cities mentioned, notably Atlanta and Macon, Ga.,
city relate, no report having been obtained for 1911. Lynn, Mass., and Peoria, HI., reported only small pay
For a few cities no report as to administrative officers ments, indicating that the pension system was not
fully established in those cities, and that the only pay
was secured.
Supervisors, teachers, and other school employees.—Thements made by them were special ones in the shape of
supervisors and teachers reported for the 165 cities grants to particular individuals or in exceptional cases.
Cities with permanent teachers9 pension funds.—The
numbered 115,278, of whom 44,868, or 38.9 per cent,
were in the cities of Group I; 15,778, or 13.7 per cent, 33 cities having permanent funds with investments for
in the cities of Group II; 22,932, or 19.9 per cent, in the payment of teachers' retirement pensions reported
the cities of Group III; 17,170, or 14.9 per cent, in the assets in those funds at the close of 1911 amounting to
cities of Group IV; and 14,530, or 12.6 per cent, in the $3,916,675. These funds paid out $1,421,447 in pen
cities of Group V. Of the total number, 89,806, or sions, $9,514 for expenses of fund management, and
77.9 per cent, were employed in elementary schools; $1,684,087 for investments purchased. They received
12,830, or 11.1 per cent, in secondary schools; 637, or during the year an aggregate of $3,274,047, of which
0.6 pe* cent, in normal schools; 3,021, or 2.6 per cent, amount $859,663 was revenue or fund income. Of
in other day schools; and 8,984, or 7.8 per cent, in night this latter amount $136,762, or 15.9 per cent, was de
schools. The 13,359 "Other employees" include the rived from the income of investments; $826, or 0.1 per
CITY.

Total.

Instruc AU
tion. other.

AU
Total. Instruc
tion. other.

1

6127°—13




9

130

FINANCIAL STA1?ISTICS OF CITIES.

cent, from gifts; and $722,075, or 84 per cent, from Pensions were paid by 14 of the 35 cities of Group m ,
teachers' contributions to pension funds; while by 15 of the 55 cities of Group IV, and by only 10 of
$1,175,806, or 59.7 per cent of the total receipts other the 85 cities of Group V, the amounts so paid represent
than from the sale of investments, was contributed ing 5.2,2.8, and 0.7 per cent, respectively, of the aggre
from the general funds of the school district or appro gate payments for pensions and gratuities reported.
priated by the city corporation from the general fund. The payment of pensions as well as the establishment
School pensions in cities, classified according to popuof teachers1 retirement funds has been adopted as a
lation.—Of the 8 cities of Group 1,6 reported the pay policy by the larger cities to a much greater extent
ment of pensions, the amount paid by them consti than by the smaller. Of the total payments for pen
tuting 80.6 per cent of that paid by all. Of the 10 sions, $886,397, or 59.5 per cent, was paid by New
cities of the second group, 6 reported the payment of York City alone, which city also reported 31.5 per cent
pensions amounting to only 10.6 per cent of the total. of the assets of ^pension funds.







GENERAL TABLES

(131)




GENERAL TABLES.

133

TABLE 1.—DATE OF INCORPORATION, POPULATION, AND AREA OP CITIES HAVING AN ESTIMATED POPULATION
OP OVER 30,000 ON JULY 1, 1911.
[For a list of the cities arranged alphabetically b y states, w i t h the number assigned to each, see page 20. For a text discussion of this table, see page 49.]

City
num«
ber.

DATE OF
INCORPORATION
AS A CITY.

POPULATION.

First Latest

Decennial census.
Estimated
as of
July 1,1911. Apr. 15,1910. June 1,1900.1

Grand total.
Group
Group
Group
Group
Group

I...
II..
III.
IV.,
V..

ABBA. (ACBE8) ANNEXED B2TWKEH
JUNK 1, 1900, AND JULY 1, 191L

AEEA (ACBE3) JULY 1, 1911.

Total.

Land.

Water.

Total.

Land.

Water,

28,559,142

27,576,464

20,378,844

* 2,856,920.9

2,596,189.5

260,731.4

399,988.5

375,375.5

24,613.0

11,859,549
3,833,341
5,599,045
4,051,061
3,215,540

11,511,841
3,682,060
5,400,418
3,886,734
3,0*5,411

8,907,841
2,709,179
3,777,968
2,724,015
2,259,841

* 533,721.6
516,532.1
671,257.4
536,622.5
* 598,787.3

522,185.4
409,326.5
603 116.3
502,413.0
559,148.3

11,536.2
107,205.6
68,141.1
34,209.5
39,639.0

15,541.0
66,558.7
171,803.7
95,010.8
51,074.3

15,541.0
65,863.3
153,510.0
92,212.5
48,248.7

095.4
18,293.7
2,798.3
2,825.6

G R O U P I . - C I T I E S H A V I N G A P O P U L A T I O N O F 500,000 A N D O V E R I N 1911.

1
2
3
4

1653
1837
1701
1822

1901
1875
18S7
1876

4,956,865
2,245,404
1,580,248
700,707

4,766,883
2,185,283
1,549,008
687,029

5
6
7
8 Pittsburgh, Pa

1822
1836
1796
1816

1854
1891
1898
1901

688,912
5S0,398
564,545
542,470

670,585
560,663
558,485
533,905

3,437,202
1,698,575
1,293,697
575,238
560,892 |
381,768 !
508,957
»451,512

1

<*>

122,448.3
84,933.0
39,276.8
27,364.0
29,378.8 1
20,255.0
26,510.7

1

183,555.0
118,233.1
83,340.0
39,099.8

4,215.2
1,693.0
177.0

440.0

24,743.0
29,208.8
19,290.0
24,715.7

< 2,621.0
170.0
, 965.0
1,795.0

64.0
6,630.1 j

64.0
6,630.1

8,4063 |

8,406.9

7,958.6 1
101.0

7,958.6
101.0

440.6

GROUP II.-CITIE8 HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000 IN 1911.
Detroit, Mich
Buffalo, N . Y
San Francisco, Cal
Milwaukee, Wis...
Cincinnati, Ohio...

1824
1832
1850
1846
1819

1SS3
1891
1910
1674
1908

493,039
435,315
425,982
395,832
378,155

465,766
423,715
416,912
373,857
363,591

285,704
352,3S7
342,782
285,315
325,902

26,572.6
26,981.0
81,2S0.0
15,588.5
39,101.1

26,102.6
24,892.0
29,760.0
15,264.5
39,084.0

470.0
2,089.0
51,520.0
324.0
17.1

Newarlc,N.J
Los Angeles, Cal..
New Orleans, La..
Washington, D.C.
Minneapolis, Minn

1836
1851
1805
1802
1867

1836
1911
1896
1878
1SS1

363,377
347,550
345,433
337,476
311,182

347,469
319,198
339,075
331,069
301,403

246,070
102,479
287,104
278,718
202,718

14,976.0
64,473.0
169,323.0
44,316.9
33,920.0

• 14,826.0
63,480.0
125,440.0
38,408.4
32,069.0

150.0
993.0
43,883.0
6,903.5
1,851.0

2,*205.4
16,533.4

2,205.4
16,533.4

2,984.0 i
36,776.3

2,964.0
36,080.9

695.4

GROUP in.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000 IN 1911.
19 Jersey City, N . J
20 Seattle, Wash
21
22
23

1827
1869
1853
1831
1832

1889
1889
1903
1905
1866

276,474
259,615
258,009
240,530
230,693

267,779
237,194
248,381
233,650!
224,326 |

206,433
80,671
163,752
169,164
175,597

12,288.0
60,466.0
38,193.0
21,451.9 |
11,700.2

1
|
3,968.0 j
8,320.0
22,985.0
33,405.6
37,481.0
750.0 1 20,700.0
37,443.0
3,273.9
21,131.9 1
320.0
11,352.2
348.0
'2.9

24
25
26
27
28

Louisville, K y .
Rochester, N . Y
Portland. O r e ? . . . . . . . . . . .
St. Paul, Minn

1824
1834
1859
1851
1854

1893
1908
1904
1903
1910

227,445
227,103
222,611
222,442
219,136

223,928
218,149
213,381
207,214
214,744

204,731
162,608
133,So9
90,426
163,065

15,871.0 1
13,351.5
37,600.0
32,442.0
35,480.0

13,317.7
12,876.3
37,028.0
30,975.0
33,388.0

2,553.3
475.2
672.0
1,467.0
2,092.0

■586.2
1,680.5
•5,440.0
8,204.0

29
30
31
32
33

Columbus. Ohio
Toledo, Ohio
....
Atlanta. Ga
Oakland, Cal
Worcester Mass •

1816
1837
1647
1854
1843

1834
1837
1874
1911
1894

187,674
172,984
161,515
159,601
150,336

181,511
168,497
154,839
150,174
145,986

125,560 i
131,822
89,872
66,960
118,421

13,171.2
18,265.6
16,428.0
38,561.0
24,586.0

13,017.8
16,025.6
16,422.0
31,591.0
23,683.0

153.4
2,240.0
6.0
6,970.0
903.0

2,800.1

2,800.1

9,548.6
27,328.0

9,548.6
23,488.0

84
35

36
37 Memphis T e n n . . . . ••
38 Scranton, P a . . . . . . . . .

Syracuse, N . Y

1871
1843
1784
1849
1866

1871
1901
1899
1891
1901

142,295
142,124
136,735
' 133,281
1
133,165

132,685
137,249
133,605
131,105
129,867

38,415
108,374
108,027
102,320 j
102,026

30,912.0
11,583.6
14,340.0
12,352.0
12,508.9

30,881.2
11,083.6
11,460.0
12,352.0
12,361.7

30.8
500.0
2,880.0
367.0
147.2

26,768.0
240.6

26,737.2
240.6

1,988.6
175.6

1,988.0
175.6

39 R i c h m o n d , V a
40
41
42 Fall River. Mass
43

1782
1851
1857
1854
1841

1867
1871
1905
1903
1903

1

129,721
129,087
126,731
122,593
118,649

127,628
125,600
124,096
119,295
116,577

85,050 |
105,171
102,555
104,863!
85,333

7,028.0 1
5,357.0
15,6S0.0
26,156.0
10,637.0

6,388.0
5,157.0
15,400.0
21,723.0
10,061.0

640.0
200.0
280.0
4,433.0
576.0

3,504.4 j

3,404.4

100.0

140.6
3,590.0 i

640.0
159.0

44
47 L o w e l l , M a s s . . . . . .
48 Camhrfrire MAS*

1850
1883
1806
1836
1846 i

1905
1910
18S3 !
1836 j
1891

116,037 i
113,661
111,666
109,009
106,643

112,571
104,402
110,364
106,294
104,839

87,565
30,848
80,865
94,969
91,886

11,040.0
25,120.0
11,417.0
9,098.0
4,180.8

10,731.0
24,819.0 !
11,177.0
8,308.0
4,014.3

309.0
301.0
240.0
790.0
166.5

49
50
51
52 Hartford Cotin
53 Albany, N . Y

IS95
1836
1847
1847
1837 ; 1903 !
1784
1880
1686
1908

105,854
102,099
101,911
101,247
100,960

102,054
96,652
96,614
98,915
100,253

70,996
62,442
53,321
79,850
94,151

8,576.0
20,873.0
23,040.0
11,065.6
10,070.1

7,906.0
12,406.0 1
22,905.0
10,155.6
9,774.4

670.0
8,467.0
135.0
910.0
295.7

45
46

Nashville, Tenn

•

i

* Includes population of cities as enumerated, e x c e p t a s stated in footnotes.
* Includes land area of cities for w h i c h total area w a s n o t reported.
* N o t reported.
' Water area contains 1,546 acres of land submerged at high tide.
§ Includes population of territory annoxed since 1900.




780.0
3,749.0

20,020.0
20,700.0
3,273.9
*2.9
•586.2
1,625.3
•5,400.0
8,204.0

12,160.0
5,113.0
1,138.0

i2,i59.6
5,083.0
1,138.0

ii'6

18.6

3,206.3

13,385.0

55.2
40.0

3,840.0
30.8

i.6
30.0

3,193.6 |

'
• Includes 4,147 acres of meadow land.
»Detached.
• 725.8 acres annexed a n d 139.6 acres detached.
5,760 acres annexed a n d 320 acres detached.

12.7

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

134

TABLE 1.—DATE OF INCORPORATION, POPULATION, AND AREA OF CITIES HAVING AN ESTIMATED POPULATION
OF OVER 30,000 ON JULY 1, 1911—Continued.
[For a list of the cities arranged alphabetically by states, with the number assigned to each, see page 20. For a text discussion of this table, see page 49.]
GROUP IV.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 60,000 TO 100,000 IN 1911?
DATE or
INCORPORATION

First. Latest.

87

vi
92
~~

AREA (ACHES) ANNEXED BETWEEN
JUKE 1, 1900, AND JULY 1, 1911.

ABEA (ACRES) JULY 1, 1911.

AS i c m r .

City
num
ber.

Decennial census.
Estimated
as of
July 1,199V Apr. 15,1910. June 1,1«W

Total.

Land.

Tola!.

Water.

Land.

Water.

Trenton, N . J
Reading, Pa
Dallas. Tex
Salt Lake City, Utah.
Camden, N. J.

1792
1847
1859
1851

1874
1847
1907
1888
1899

99,946
98,164
98,075
97,331
97,308

96,815
96,071
92,104
92,777
94,538

73,307
78,961
42,638
53,531
75,935

4,903.0
4,022.0
10,608.7
31,24L0
5,029.5

4,490.0
4,022.0
10,493.5
30,541.0
4,474.5

115.2
700.0
555.0

Springfield, Mass..
Lynn, Mass
Lawrence^Mass...
Tacoma, w a s h . . . .
Des Moines, Iowa..

1852
1850
1853
1875
1857

1852
1850
1853
1909
1907

92,675
92,332
89,753
89,392
88,821

89,336
85,892
83,743

62,059
68,513
62,559
37,714
62,139

24,661.0
7,248.0
4,577.0
27,92a 0
35,309.2

23,861.0
6,943.0
4,185.0
25,168.0
34,549.2

800.0
305.0
392.0
2,752.0
760.0

Wilmington, D e l . . .
Kansas City, Kans.
Yon3cers,N.Y
Youngstown, Ohio.
Houston, Tex

1832
1886
1872
1868
1839

1832
1886
1895
1868
1905

88,745
* 85,679
84,361
83,165
82,913

87,411
82,331
79,803
79,066
'78,800

76,508
51,418
47,931
44rSS5
44,633

6,515.0
10,364.0
13,44a 0
6,756.8
10,171.5

4,026.0
9,774.0
12,700.0
6,606.8
10,031.4

•2,489.0
590.0
74a 0
15a o
14a i

Norfolk, Va
Duluth, Minn
Fort worth, Tex...
Somerville, Mass...
St. Joseph, Mo

1845
1870
1872
1871
1853

1906
1900
1907
1899
18S5

81,935
81,818
79,394
79,177
•78,927

67,452
78,466
73,312
77,236
77,403

46,624
52,969
26,688
61,643
102,979

5,966.6
43,116.8
10,540.0
2,700.0

4,773.8
37,715.2
10,494.0
2,600.0
8,4Sa0

1,192.8
5,401.6
46.0
100.0
400.0

2,305.8

1,837.6

468.2

4,280.0
1,056.0
2,56a0

4,274.0
1,056.0
2,560.0

""6.6

Utica,N.Y
Troy.N.Y
Elizabeth, N . J
Schenectady, N. Y .
Waterbury, Conn...

1832
1816
1855
1798
1853

1908
1911
1863
1909
1896

77,088
76,947
76,558
76,447
75,833

74,419
76,813
73,409
72,826
73,141

56,383
»75,057
52,130
31,682
'51,139

5,955.0
6,308.0
6,230.0
5,075.0
18,048.0

5,905.0
6,140.0
6,191.0

50,0
.163.0
39.0
75.0
67.0

964.0
2,637.0
3S0.0
2,135.7
14,433.0

964.0
2,547.0
38a0
2,121.7
14,433.0

Akron, Ohio
■
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Manchester, N. H
Hoboken. N. J
E vansvflle, Ind..... -..

1836
1891
1846
1855
1847

1865
1891
1846
1855
1905

72,290
72,253
71,663
71,528
70,723

69,067
64,205
70,063
70,324
69,647

42,728
10,037
56,987
59,364
59,007

7,468.8
11,268.6

22.0
9,172.8

22.0
9,152.8
• 275.0

1898
1874
1892
1904
1860

68,987
68,212
67,828
66,098
65,710

67,105
66,525
66,950
63,933
64,186

51,721
52,733
56,100
45,115
50,167

1,220.0
5,440.0
3,433.0
4,960.6
6,020.0
6,109.0
5,540.7

• 275.0

1871
1851
1845
1839
1860

3,233.0
4,780.6
6,020.0
5,9SS.O
3,448.8

12 L0
2,091.9

41.0
2,912.0
700.0
577.8

2,912.0
700.0
577.8

1789
1822
1865
1833
1873

1789
1887
1888
1905
1897

65,592
63,346
61,693
59,700

65,064
57,699
58,547
58,157
57,730

54,244
28,429
29,655
36,673
45,712

4,300.0
7,020.0
7,850.0
5,4S6.0
14,585.0

4,053.0
5,920.0
7,823.0
5,026.0
13,423.0

247.0
2,000.0
22.0
46a 0
1,162.0

1,056.0

1,056.0

4,737.0
1,733.0
3,712.0

4,737.0
1,738.0
3,712.0

1832
1865
1783
1881

1863
1901
1783
1831

59,380
59,203
59,092

58,571
53,684
58,833
56,878

50,145
35,999
55,807
40,063

14,825.1
9,318.4
3,276.8
13,798.4

13,790.7
9,117.8
2,406.4
13,793.4

1,034.4
200.6
870.4

•6,275.6

•6,205.0

Wukes-Barre, Pa
Erie, Pa
Peoria,
■rcwva* HI.
ui.........
Fort Wayne, Ind..
Harrisburg,Pa....
Savannah. Ga
Jacksonville, Fla..
i East St. Louis, HI.
TerreHaute, Ind..
Holyoke, Mass

94 Portland, Me
95 South Bend, Ind.
96 Charleston, B . C . .
97 Brockton, Mass...

8,8sao

2i,:oao

5,ooao
17,981.0
7,380.8
11,229.6
20,119.5
830.0

5,40U0

413.0

57.0
5,159.0

39.0
1,580.5
390.0
40.0
200.0
180.0

9S
99
100
101

Passaic, N . J . . .
Bayonne, N. J..
Johnstown, Pa.
Wichita, Kans..

1873
1869
1889
1871

1873
1872
1889
1886

58,971
58,837
57,766
« 55,583

54,773
55,545
55,482
52,450

27,777
32,722
35,936
24,671

2,087.7
3,938.0
3,197.3
12,640.0

1,993.7
2,577.0
2.997.3
12,3Sa0

89.0
1,361.0
200.0
260.0

102
103
104
105

Covington, K y . . ,
Allentown, Pa....
Pawtucket, R. I..
Springfield, HI....

1834
1867
1886
1840

1894
1889
1886
1882

54,024
53,765
53,664
53,484

53,270
51,913
51,622
51,678

42,938
35,416
39,231
34,159

3,093.0
3,155.3
&725.0
5,504.0

3,bS3.0
3,095.3
5,493.0
5,504.0

60.0
227.0

108
107
108
109

Altoona, P a —
Mobile, Ala
Canton, Ohio...
Saginaw, Mich..

1814
1854
1S89

1868
1901
1854
1908

53,398
62,684
52,287
51,811

52,127
51,521
50,217
50,510

38,973
38,469
30,667
42,345

2,114.6
11,200.0
5.964.0
7,897.1

2,114.6
8,640.0
5,929.0
7,657.1

•1,714.0

57.0
5,159.0
•1,558.6

6,003.0

6,003.0

3,990.0

3,7oao

'616.6
5,403.0

• 616.6
5,403.0

15.0

15.0
"555.5
19a 0

1,286.5
1,144.1

1,286.5
1,144.1

1,350.6

1,35a 0

423.4
6,69a 0
1,600.0
5.9

423.4
5.005.0
1,600.0
5.9

120.1

120.1

975.0

975.6

100.0 j
1,344.0
3S0.0
" 1,014.0

1.344.0
"1,014.0

2,560.0
35.0
24a 0

290.0

00.0

**4.*6
20.0

41.0

W555.5
190.0

iao

155.4

69.7

1,685.0

GROUP V.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 30,000 TO 50,000 IN 1911.
110
111
112
113
114

Bhlghamton, N. Y
Sioux City. Iowa
Atlantic City, ~*
N . J~ .
Rockford,Hl
Lancaster, Pa

115
116
117
118
119

Springfield, Ohio...
Little Rock, Ark...
Sacramento, Cal....
Pueblo, Colo
Chattanooga, Tenn.

120
121
122
123
124

Bay City, Mich
York, Pa.
Maiden, Mas3
New Britain, Conn.
Haverhill, Mass

1867
1857
1854
"

1907 |I
1886

1852
1818

1902
1880
1818

49,763 1
49,398
48,271
48,068
47,933

48,443 1
47,828
46,150
45.401
47,227

39,617
33,111
27,838
31,051
41,450

6,400.0
28,645.0
3,060.0
6,159.0
2,560.0

5,913.6
28,020-0
2,760.0
5.957.0
2.530.0

1850
1831
1863
1873
1851

1903
1875
1903
1911
1901

47,822
47,456
46,581
46,354
46,100

46,921
45,941
44,606
44.395
44,604

38,253
38,307
29.282
28,157
30,154

7,104.0
6,820.0
2,890.8
7.280.0
3,200.0

7,004.0
5,440.0
2.890.8
7,190.0
3,200.0

46,096
45,166
7 40,747
46,091
44,750
33,708
45,956
44,404
33,664
45,839
43,916
25,993
45.646 1
44,115|
37,175
1 1870 1 1870 II
i Includes population of cities as enumerated, except as stated in footnotes.
• 1,714 acres of land and water annexed, and 3,163.5 acres detached.
• Includes 1,460 acres of marsh land.
• State census, March, 1911.
• 618.6 acres annexed, and 2 acres detached.
• Based on the census of 1890-1910, on account of the defective work of the
enumerator in 1900.




1865
1887
1882
1871

1907
1887
1882
1905

7,071.8
2,200.0
3,072.0
8.438.5
22,000.0

6,316.8
2,165.0
3,0*0.0
8.428.5
20,500.0

486.4
625.0
300.0 '
192.0 !
30.0;

00.0 |

1
755.0 j
35.0
12.0
10.0
1.500.0 I

124.0 1
832.0

1*24.6
832.0

2,995.2 !
795.4

2,617.6
795.4

5,520.6

5,520.6

I Includes population of territory annexed since 1900.
• 289 acres annexed, and 14 acres detached.
»6,208.6 acres annexed, and 2.7 acres detached.
*• 595 acres annexed, and 39.5 acre3 detached,
ii Detached.

377.0

GENERAL TABLES.

135

TABLE 1.—DATE OF INCORPORATION^ POPULATION, AND AREA OF CITIES HAVING AN ESTIMATED POPULATION
OF OVER 30,000 ON JULY 1, 1911—Continued.
[For a list of the cities arranged alphabetically b y states, with the number assigned to each, see page 20. For a text discussion of this table, see page 49.]
G R O U P V . - C I T I E S H A V I N G A P O P U L A T I O N O F 30,000 TO 60,000 I N 1911-Continued.
DATE or
INCORPORATION
AS A CITY.

City
num
ber.

First.

Latest.

POPULATION.
Decennial census.
Estimated
as of
July 1,1911. Apr. 15,1910. June 1,1900.»

125
126
127
128
129

Salem, Mass
Lincoln, Nebr....
Berkeley, Cal
Davenport, Iowa.
Topeka, Kans

1836
1871
1S78
1851
1857

1836
1887
1909
1857
1907

45,176
44,488
43,785
43,764
'43,684

130
131
132
133
134

McKeesport, F a . .
Flint, Mich
TamjM, Fla
San Diego. Cal...
El Paso, Tex

1891
1855
1SS7
1850
1S73

1891
1909
1887
1909
1907

135
136
137
133
139

Wheeling, W . V a . .
Racine, W i s . . . . . . .
Kalamazoo, Mich..
Superior, Wis
Augusta, Ga

1S36
1848
1SS4
1SS9
1798

140
141
142
143
144

Macon, Ga
Newton, Mass
Butte, Mont
Woonsocket, R. I .
Chester, Pa.

145
146
147
148
149

AREA (ACRES) ANNEXED BETWEEN
JULT 1, 1900, AND JULY 1, 1911.

AREA (ACRES) JULY 1, 1911.

Total.

Land.

Water.

43,697
43,973
40,434 !
43,028
43,684

35,956
40,169
13,214
35,254
33,608

5,440.0
4,891.2
10,720.0
5,280.0
5,632.0

4,827.0
4,888.6
5,280.0
5,280.0
5,312.0

613.0
2.6
5,440.0

43,635
43,417
43,119
42,255
42,215

42,694
38,550
37,782
39,578
39,279

34,227
13,103
15,839
17,700
15,906

2,240.0
8,346.0
7,6S0.0
47,323.8
5,836.8

2,236.8
8,306.0
5,760.0
47,323.8
5,724.3

1907
1905
1907
1891
1798

41,978
41,917
41,423
41,334
41,236

41,641
38,002
39,437
40,384
41,040

38,878
29,102
24,404
31,091
39,441

2,050.0
3,840.0
5,307.0
27,000.0
3,042.0

1,345.0
3,750.0
5,216.0
23,400.0
2,858.0

705.0
90.0
91.0
3,600.0
184.0

1832
1873
1879
1SS8
1S66

1693
1902
1888
1888
1859

41,018
40,531
39,917
39,594
39)093

40,665
39,806
39,165
33,125
38,537

23,272
33,587
30,470
28,204

5,310.0
11,406.0
3,300.0
6,632.0
3,000.0

5,260.0 ]
11,106.0
3,300.0
5,532.0
2,985.0

Montgomery, Ala..,
Fitchburg,Mass...
Dubuque, Iowa...,
Galveston, Tex
Elmira,N.Y

1837
1872
1840'
1S39
1S64

1905
1872
1840
1903
1906

39,032
38,997
* 38 494
37,930
37,535

38,136
37,826
38,494
36,981
37,176

30,346
31,531
36,297
37,789
35,672

4,211.2
18,163.0
8.320.0

A
4,747.0

4,211.2
17,963.0
8,290.0
4,989.2
4,546.0 !

150
151
152
153
154

Newcastle, Pa
West Hoboken, N.
KnoxVllle,Tenn...
Hamilton, Ohio...
Springfield, Mo

1S69
18SS
1S15
1854
1855

37,224
1907
1854
1885

36,799
36,669
36,661

36,280
35,403
36,346
35,279
35,201

23,094
32,637
23,914
23,267

5,915.0
546.0
2,551.0
3,460.0
4,998.4

5,815.0
546.0
2,541.0
3,320.0
4,998.4

155
156
157
158
159

1S39
1SS4
1832
1872

1909
1895
1892
1894
1909

36,650
36,628
36,510
36,167
35,347

34,371
36,587
34,874
35,099
31,161

21,506
36,252
21,495
26,369
11,923

2,480.0
5,141.0
3,462.4
3,200.0
7,920.0

2,480.0
3,715.0
3,394.5
3,200.0
7,892,0

160
161
162
163
164

East Orange, N . J .
Ouincy, III
oanoke,Va.
Lexington, Ky
Huntington, W. Va.
Joliet,m
Auburn, N. Y . .
Charlotte, N . C .
Taunton, Mass..
Everett, Mass...

1852
1848
1816
1864
1892

1876
1906
1851
1910
1892

35,320
35,199
35,144
35 061
34,550

34,670
34,668
34,014
34,259
33,484

29,353
30,345
18,091
31,036
24,336

2,520.0
5,440.0
8,192.0
31,264.0
2,176.0

2,430.0
5,390.0
8,167.0
28,32a 0
1,988.0

165
166
167
168
169

Portsmouth. Va
Pittsfleld, Mass
Quincy. Mass
Cedar Rapids, Iowa.
Oshkosh,wis

1S5S
1891
1SS9
1850
1853

1889
1908
1911

34,434
33,856
33,755
33,736
33,678

33,190
32,121
32,642
32,811
33,062

17,427
21,766
23,899
25,656
28,284

1,680.0
22,900.0
17,186.0
8,397.0
5,446.4

1,545.0
21,925.0
10,736.0
7,909.0
5,036.8

135.0
975.0
6,450.0
488.0
409.6

1345.8
464.0
1.0
4945.5

3.2
40.0
1,920.0

136.9
441.6
3,992.0

136.9
441.6
3,992.0

112.5

1,404.0

1,404.0

880.0

850.0

2,617.4
M.0
2,000.0

2,617.4
•4.0
2,000.0

1,280.0

i,2sao

234.0

234.0

1,668.0
1,318.4

1,648.0
1,318.4

1,426.0
67.9

131.0

131.0

28.0

2,27a 0

2,27a 6

90.0
50.0
25.0
2,944.0
188.0

6,777.6

6,777.6

650.0

65ao

320.0

50.0
300.0

100.0
15.0
200.0
30.0

Water.

2,240.0

30.0

201.0
100.0
10.0
140.0

170
171
172
173
174

Perth Amboy, N. J..
Lansing, Mich
Pasadena, Cal
Amsterdam, N. Y . .
Jackson, Mich

1871
1S5S
1886
1885
1843

1871
1858
1909
1SS5
1905

33,664
33,4S1
33,332
33,116
32,694

32,121
31,229
30,291
31,267
31,433

17,699
16,485
9,117
20,929
25,180

3,804.0
4,800.0
7,170.8
3,787.0
5,760.0

2,844.0
4,500.0
7,170.8
3,542.0
5,628.0

175
176
177
178
179

Jamestown, N. Y
San Jose, Cal
Decatur, III
Mount Vernon, N . Y .
Jop!in,Mo

18S6
1S50
1856
1892
1873

1907
1906
1881
1911
1900

32,608
32,607
32,551
32,403
32,296

31,297
28,946
31,140
30,919
32,073

22,892
21,500
20,754
21,228
26,023

5,410.4
3,965.0
2,846.8
2,694.4
9,600.0

5,351.4
3,965.0
2,846.8
2,644.4
9,600.0

59.0

180
181
182
183
184

Witliaxnsport,Pa....
Niagara Falls, N . Y .
Muskogee. Okla
Lima, Ohio
Chelsea, Mass...

1SG6
1892
1898
1871
1857

1892
1911
1871
1894

32,239
31,440
31,433
31,390
31,275

31,860
30,445
25,278
30,508
32,452

28,757
19,457
4254
21,723
34,072

4,544.0
6,970.0
5,278.7
4,360.0
1,440.0

4,485.0
5,900.0
5,278.7
4,280.0
1,270.0

59.0
1,070.0

185
186
187
188
189

Aurora, III
NewRochelle,N.Y.
Austin, Tex
La Crosse, Wis
Newport, Ky

1857
1899
1839
1856
1850

1SS7
1910
1909
1869
1894

31,249
30,968
30,824
30,748
30,554

29,807
28,867
29,860
30,417
30,309

24,147
14,720
22,258
28,895
28,301

4,420.0
6,345.0
10,561.0
5,866.6
843.0

4,245.0
6,325.0
8,2S2.0
5,330.9
729.0

17a o
175.0
20.0
2,279.0
535.6
114.0

190
191
192
193

Orange, N . J
Lorain, Ohio
Council Bluffs, Iowa..
Lynchburg, V a

1872
1894
1853
1805

1872
1S94
1853
1896

30,503
30,455
30,218
30,165

29,630
28,883
29,292
29,494

24,141
16,028
25,802
18,891

1,400.0
6,810.0
12,627.2
3,000.0

1,400.0
6,690.0
11,616.0
2,800.0

12a o
1,011.2
200.0




Land.

*345.8
2,704.0
1.0
4 945.5.

960.0
300.0

* Includes population of cities as enumerated, except as stated i n footnotes.
* 315.8 acres annexed and 644.1 acres detached.
» C e m u i Apr. 15,1910.
4 962.5 acres annexed and 17 acres detached.

TotaL

245.0
132.0

50,0

80.0

aao

20.0

3,638.0
33ao

3,638.0
322.0

419.0
598.3

419.0

3,84a0

3,840.0

1,712.0
689.2

1,712.0
689.2

220.0

22ao

"V76.*5

"*"76.*5

1,500.0

1,350.0

» Detached.
• N o t reported.
1
7 6 . 5 acres annexed and 1,795.5 acres detached.

2ao

8.0

15a 0

136

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.
TABLE 2.-SUMMARY OF RECEIPTS, PAYMENTS, AND CASH BALANCES: 1911.
[For a list of the cities arranged alphabetically by states, with tho number assigned to each, see page 20. For a text discussion of this table, see page 50.]
RECEIPTS.

{Cash balances]
at beginning
of year.

City
num<
ber.

Total.

Revenue.
(Table 3.)

Grand total,
Group I.
Group II.
Group HL
Group IV
Group V

1235,498,365 |$1,676,S23,121
112,054,072
44,372,034
38,619,496
23,420,387
17,032,276

897,212,432
245,403,476
262,689,595
156,599,095
114,918,473

Aggregate of
receipts and of
cash
balances
Nonrevenue. at beginning
of year.*
(Table 19.)

Total.

(Table 3.)

$S05,720,133 $571,102,OSS [$1,912,321,386 }$1,647,707,3SO
406,410,156
114,556,889
139,415,053
82,127,742
63,210,293

490,802,326
130,846,587
123,274,542
74,471,353
51,703,180

1,009,266,554
289,775,510
301,309,091
180,019,482
131,950,749

Nongovern
Govern
mental cost. mental cost.
(Table 19.)

$023,335,39$ 1719,371,082
461,996,554
123,496,000
167,943,321
99,507,257
70,357,266

882,649,467
240,321,667
25S,092,3S2
154,124,735
112,519,129

Cash
balances
at close of
year.

1264,614,006

420,652,913
111,825,667
90,144,061
54,617,478
42,131,863

126,617,037
49,453,843
43,216,709
25,894,747
19,431,620

GROUP I.-CIT1ES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER IN 1911.
New York, N . Y ,
Chicago, 111
PhiladelDhia, Pa.
St. Louis, Mo...,
Boston, Mass....
Cleveland, Ohio..
Baltimore, Md...
Pittsburgh, Pa...

$22,118,136
23,522,720
14,830,146
14,861,142

$531,883,895
133,422,046
69,639,724
25,285,192

$198,963,893
66,177,314
39,373,126
20,237,211

$332,920,002
67,244,732
30,261,593
5,047,931

$554,002,031
156,944,766
84,469,870
40,146,334

$526,312,685
132,413,362
62,554,899
27,83S,311

$251,629,309
62,374,378
44,077,$53
22,595,123

$274,683,376
70,043,934
13,476,946
5,243,183

$27,689,346
24,526,404
21,914,971
12,308,023

9,748,567
14,199,832
1,881,963
10,891566

55,374,654
36,732,854
17,897,180
26,976,937

34,352,470
14,933,821
13,843,058
18,524,263

21,022,184
21,799,033
4,054,122
8,452,674

65,123,221
s 50,932,686
19,779,143
37,863,503

52,506,024
35,617,467
17,903,783
27,497,936

29,902,211
16,512,506
15,22S,541
19,676,533

22,603,813
19,104,961
2,675,242
7,821,403

12,617,197
15,315,219
1,875,360
10,370,567

GROUP XL-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000 IN 1911.
Detroit, Mich
,
Buffalo, N . Y
,
San Francisco, Cal.
Milwaukee, W i s . . .
Cincinnati, Ohio..,

$2,409,663
2,117,339
10,745,640
1,127,022
12,357,470

$17,840,941
29,666,635
19,954,685
17,579,789
31,618,645

$12,079,688
11,832,761
12,520,600
9,324,290
13,343,765

$5,761,253
17,783,874
7,434,085
8,255,499
18,274,880

$20,250,604
31,783,974
30,700,325
18,706,811
43,976,115

$17,941,591
29,446,283
22,742,652
17,159,037
33,469,753

$12,343,824
* 13,084,220
17,444,202
9,459,677
15,842,593

$5,597,767
16,362,063
5,293,450
7,699,360
17,627,155

$2,309,013
2,337,686
7,957,073
1,547,774
10,506,362

Newark, N . J
Los Angeles, Cal..,
New Orleans, La...
Washington, D. C.
Minneapolis, Minn.

4,312,299
7,635,201
2,354,045
512,925
800,430

34,270,114
30,967,286
24,450,122
18,944,112
20,111,147

12,112,540
13,067,632
8,106,938
13,441,394
8,677,231

22,157,574
17,899,654
16,343,134
5,502,718
11,433,916

38,5S2,413
38,602,437
26,804,167
19,457,037
20,911,577

35,013,130
28,145,542
18,262,982
19,000,372
19,140,320

13,085,822
16,710,763

8,290,169
12,291,507
9,943,213

21,927,308
11,434,774
9,972,813
6,703,865
9,197,107

3,569,233
10,450,945
8,541,185
456,665
1,771,257

GROUP IH.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000 IN 1911.
19 Jersey City, N. J..
Seattle, Wash
Kansas City, Mo..
Indianapolis, Ind.
Providence, R. I..

$1,112,597
4,566,133
1,101,619
990,905
902,703

$19,324,254
23,691,505
11,710,683
6,103,638
8,373,030

$6,945,666
13,373,049
7,505,002
4,677,126
5,761,132

$12,378,588
10,318,456
4,205,631
1,426,512
2,611,893

$20,436,851
28,257,643
12,812,302
7,094,543
9,275,738

$18,925,572
23,376,199
10,477,609
6,067,145
8,271,657

$13,393,803
17,042,119
7,610,563
4,956,152
5,158,206

$5,526,764
6,334,080
2,867,046
1,110,993
3,113,451

$1,611,279
4,asi,444
2,334,693
1,027,398
1,004,081

3,271,033
7,665,171
4,764,714
2,817805
2,641,332

2,232,583
2,777,112
1,066,367
4,5S2,674
1,028,297

24
25
26
27
28

Louisville, K y . . .
Rochester, N. Y .
Denver, Colo
Portland, Oreg...
St. Paul, Minn...

1,750,538
2,279,354
809,285
2,210,833
1,263,386

9,833,073
15,499,576
11,632 969
20,061,999
7,030,053

6,062,313
5,696,4S3
6,574,059
9,019,240
4,511,913

3,770,760
9,803,068
5,103,910
11,042,759
2,518,140

11,583,611
17,778,930
12,492,254
22,272,832
8,293,439

9,351,023
15,001,813
11,425,837
17,690,153

7,265,142

6,079,990
7,336,647
6,661,173
14,872,353
4,623,810

29
30
31
32
33

Columbus. Ohio..
Toledo, Ohio
Atlanta. Ga
Oakland, Cal
Worcester, Mass.,

1,544,940
2,396,916
1,220,078
2,233,387
353,512

9,072,035
6,827,769
4,903,287
4,754,016
7,453,099

4,395,941
3,733,037
3,272,527
4,317,738
3,763,219

4,676,094
3,089,6S2
1,630,760
436,278
3,6S4,880

10,616,975
9,224,685
6,123,365
6,992,403
7,806,611

9,180,245
6,733,016
5,273,975
5,765,075
7,105,727

4,963,387
4,002,015
4,323,753
5,246,266
4,223,734

4,216,858
2,731,001
945 222
518,809
2,881,993

2,491,669
849,290

34
35
36
37
38

Birmingham, Ala..
Syracuse, N . Y
New Haven, Conn.
Memphis, Tenn....
Scranton,Pa.

616,806
1,031,534
149,184
1,128,034
630,533

6,279,796
7,382,156
4,479,825
5,038,739
2,164,385

2,003,332
3,415,550
2,537,368
2,959,793
1,712,963

4,276,464
3,966,606
1,942,457
2,078,946
451,422

6,896,602
8,413,690
4,629,009
6,166,773
2,794,913

6,391,932
7,216,191
4,437,756
5,417,414
2,313,374

3,139,814
3,591,979
. 2,481,739
4,324,884
1,843,041

3,252,118
3,624,212
1,956,017
1,092,530
470,333

501,670
1,197,499
191,253
749,359
431,544

40
41
42
43

Richmond, Va
Paterson.N.J
Omaha, Nebr
Fall River, Mass...
Dayton, Ohio

1,116,806
329,587
1,525,933
669,706
785,471

5,011,021
5,231 542
6,693,435
4.347,119
3,727,608

3,354,467
1,993,966
2,996,439
2,315,410
2,423,946

1,656,554
3,237,576
3,696,996
2,031,709
1,293,662

6,127,827
5,561,129
8,219,468
5,016,825
4,513,079

5,583,117
5,343,222
6,631,551
4,341,420
3,627,316

3,735,137
1,959,871
3,831,714
2,315,344
2,466,727

1,847,980
3,338,351
2,749,837
2,026,076
1,160,589

544,710
212,907
1,587,917
675,405
885,763

44
45
46
47
48

Grand Rapids. Mich.
Spokane, Wash
Nashville, Tenn
Lowell, Mass
i, Mass

829,521
525,203
941,810
210,774
402,657

4,358,827
11,022,953
2,693,538
4,202,215
6,309,961

2,454,718
3,860,779
1,952,700
2,043,212
3,208,276

1,904,109
7,162,174
740,833
2,154,003
3,101,635

5,183,348
11,548,156
3,635,343
4,412,989
6,712,618

4,446,616
9,901,804
2,637,727
4,243,060
6,322,185

3,005,476
5,917,608
2,306,489
2,163,639
2,685,313

1,441,140
3,984,196
33i;23S
2,079,371
3,636,872

741,732
1,646,352
997,621
169,929

200,097
346,226
971,765
699,857
766,746

1,872,423
5,477 668
1,576,619
4,189,610
4,309,119

1,715,786
2,457,820
1,406,009
2,711,951
2,262,018

156,637
3,019,843
170,610
1,477,659
2,047,101

2,072,520
5,823,894
2,543,384
4,880,467
5,075,865

1,936,367
5,413,16^
1,857,833
4,370,224
3,744,855

1,685,336
3,274,823
1,419,456
2,960,785
2,276,120

251,031
2,133,342
433,377
1,400,439
1,463,735

136,153
410,729
690,551
519,243
1,331,010

49 Bridgeport, Conn.
40 New Bedford, Mass.,
San Antonio, Tex...
m Hartford,
Conn
52 Albany, N . Y
53




i Also the aggregate of payments and of cash balances at the close of the year.

1,436,730
1,227,323
700,884

GENERAL TABLES.

137

TABLIS 2.-SUMMARY OF RECEIPTS, PAYMENTS, AND CASH BALANCES: 1911—Continued.
(For a list of the cities arranged alphabetically by states, with the number assigned to each, see page 20. For a text discussion of this table, see page 50.1*
GROUP IV.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 50,000 TO 180,000 IN 1911.
RECEIPTS.

City
pnm-l

ber.

crrr.

|Cash balances]
at beginning
of year.

Total.

Revenue.
(Table 3.)

Aggregate oi
receipts and of
cash*
balances
Nonrevenue. at beginning
of year.*
(Table 19.)

Total.

Govern
Nongovern
mental cost. mental cost.
(Tables.)

Cash
balances
at close of
year.

(Table 19.)

Trenton, N . J
Reading, Pa
Dallas, Tex
Salt Lake City, Utah.,
Camden, N . J .

1674,054
514,849
903,715
466,782

$4,053,723
1,628.115
3,396,341
4,160,113
3,220,539

11,771,732
1.300.4S6
2,088,874
2,789,327
1,431,335

12,281,991
327,629
1,307,467
1,370,786
1,789,204

$4,727,787
2,142,964
4,300,056
4,626,895
3,656,808

$3,954,061
1,618,644
2,966,536
3,987,111
3,184,649

$2,026,174
1,227,446
2,485,396
3,140,985
1,547,501

$1,927,887
391,198
481,140
846,126
1,637,148

Springfield, Mass......
Lynn, Mass
Lawrence, Mass
Tacozna, Wash........
Des Moines, Iowa

1,643,347
214,215
161,181
1,161,457
822,644

4,135,972
5,542,6S6
3,343,342
9,432,816
2,872,807

2,851,358
2,067,079
1,564,706
4,200,746
2,122,811

1,284,614
3,475,607
1,778,636
5,232,070
749,996

5,779,319
5,756,901
3,504,523
10,594,273
3,695,451

4,557,528
5,515,252
3,421,744
8,338,257
2,851,325

3,373,214
2,068,332
1,676,650
6,602,076
2,566,220

1,184,314
3,446,920
1,745094
1,736,181
285,105

1,221,791
241,649
82,779

Wilmington, Dei
Kansas City, Kans....
Yonkers.N.Y
Youngstown, Ohio.. •.
Houston, Tex

129,882
965,127
101,563
711,364
5S7,468

2,914,804
3,061,072
6,006,308
3,059,097
2,7J8,65S

1,153,636
1,824,644
2,317,779
1,671,466
1,551,799

1,761,163
1,236,428
3,688,529
1,387,631
1,186,859

3,044,686
4,026,199
6,107,871
3,770.461
3,326,126

2,728,085
3,488,739
5,896,469
3,042,844
3,234,296

1,326,427
2,677,260
3,180,660
2,063,668
2,307,065

1,401,658
811,479
2,715,809
979,176
927,231

316,601
537,460
211,402
727,617
91,830

Norfolk, Va
Duluth, Minn
Fort Worth, Tex
Somervilie, Mass
St. Joseph, Mo

260,068
278,829
135,532
107,7*9
417,853

3,801,247
3,069,489
4,693,490
2,899,531
1,947,414

1,523,691
2,512,275
2,079,735
1,760,364
1,530,022

2,277,556
557,214
2,613,755
1,139,167
417,392

4,061,315
3,348,318
4,829,022
3,007,320
2,365,267

3,829,253
2,921,954
3,804,830
2,896,8S6
2,022,174

2,336,496
2,628,406
2,986,656
1,722,586
1,476,433

1,492,757
293,543
818,174
1,174,300
545,741

232,060
426,364
1,024,192
110,434
343,093

Utica,N.Y
Troy.N.Y
Elisabeth, N . J
Schenectady, N . Y . . . .
Waterbury, Conn

244,865
355,866
374,857
391,287
163,471

2,517,931
4,026,352
3,224,742
3,056,254
2,752,947

1,266,964
1,627,909
1,182,771
1,709,750
1,363,194

1,250,967
2,398,443
1,041,971
1,346,504
1,389,753

2,762,796
4,385,218
2,599,599
3,447,541
2,916,418

2,661,459
3,674,403
2,248,165
3,076,868
2,442,046

1,518,151
1,701,835
1,162,811
1,759,895
1,759,769

1,143,308
1,972,568
1,085,354
1,316,973
68L,277

101,337
710,815
351,434
370,673
474,372

Akron, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Manchester, N. H
Hoboken.N.J
Evansville, Ind

620,577
589,103
313,528
172,914
473,576

3,184,147
4,986,903
1,906,667
3,730,219
1,581,361

1,168,53*
1,419,506
1,133,315
1,510,485
1,241,082

2,015,615
3,567,397
773,352
2,'-19,734
340,279

3,804,724
5,576,006
2,220,195
3,903,133
2,054,937

3,092,735
4,881,170
1,741.514
3,626,957
1,678,321

1,618,152
4,038,033
1,115,875
1,499,518
1,216,930

1,474,5S3
843,137
615,639

2,027,439
461,391

711,989
694,836
478,681
376,176
376,616

Wilkes-Barre, Pa
Erie, Pa
Peoria. Ill
Fort Waynejfnd
Barrisburg, Pa.

401,471
201,346
328,806
731,147
703,467

1,094,561
1,534,732
1,773,850
1,615,679
1,477,475

877,569
1,170,268
1,289,271
1,284,096
1,131,355

126,992
364,464
484,579
331,5S3
346,120

1,406,032
1,736,078
2,102,656
2,346,826
2,180,942

1,094,399
1,492,751
1,916,547
1,661,925
1,651,372

1,049,908
1,248,373
1,461,323
1,292,601
1,309,908

44,491
244,378
455,224
369,324
341,464

311,633
243,327
186,109
684,901
529,570

90
91
92
93

Savannah. Ga
Jacksonville, Fla
East St. Louis, III
Terre Haute, Ind
Holyoke, Mass

33,731
351,927
915,720
4S6,1S6
380,578

1,489,803
2,117,197
1,435,774
949,813
3,249,073

1,297,418
1,589,915
951,854
830,613
1,640,6S0

192,385
527,282
483,920
119,200
1,608,393

1,523,534
2,469,124
2,351,494
1,435,999
3,629,651

1,514,777
1,688,725
1,990,712
843,578
3,182,557

1,236,652
1,599,001
1,742,639
774,911
1,687,245

278,125
89,724
248,073
68,667
1,495,312

8,757
780,399
360,782
592,421
447,094

94
95
96
97

Portland. Me
South Bend, Ind
Charleston, S. C . . . . . . .
Brockton, Mass

326,605
230,424
253,292
217,719

6,220,526
1,311,6S4
1,164.363
3,991,878

1,761,983
898,176
969.085
1,423,072

4,458,543
413,508
195,278
2,568,806

6,547,131
1,542,108
1,417,655
4,209,597

6,001,884
1,274,618
1,347,503
3,953,236

2,561,242

545,247
267,490
70,152
256,361

9S
99
100
101

Passaic, N . J
Bayonne. N. J
Johnstown, Pa
Wichita, Kans

162,513
462,545
278,034
447,638

2,335,393
3,555,571
705,997
2,419,655

575,430
1,262,750
581,252
1,497,637

1,759,963
2,292,821
124,745
922,018

2,497,906
4,018,116
9S4,031
2,867,293

2,420,545
3,500,183
801,6S7
2,781,739

907,627
1,703,034
677,337
2,443,421

3,440,642
£76,887
142,805
2,476,028
1,512,918
1,797,149
124,350
338,318

102
103
104
105

Covington, Ky
Allentown, Pa
Pawtucket, R. I
Springfield, III

233,950
89,417
329,340
100,647

1,562,650
98S,940
2,406,701
1,551,059

797,157
677,646
1,189,991
1,147; 586

765,493
311,294

1,216,710
403,473

1,796.600
1,078,357
2,736,041
1,651,708

1,491,530
859,191
2,458,808
1,418,501

789,425
678,581
1,315,620
842,683

702,105
180,610
1,143,188
575,818

305,070
219,166
277,233
233,205

105
107
108
109

Altoona, Pa
Mobile, Ala
Canton, Ohio..
Saginaw, Mich

442,002
287,512
462,667
164,661

1,219,705
1,135,946
1,614,505
1,821,478

789,622
842,668
839,579
1,073,696

430,083
293,278
774,926
747,782

1,661,707
1,423,458
2, OH, 172
1,986,139

1,060,348
1,195,435
1,4S2,159
1,755,750

i93,123
970,547
998,229
933,570

267,225
224,888
483,930
822,180

601,359
228,023
595,013

997,731
1,204,693
1,477,208

$773,726
524,320
1,333,520
639,784
472,159

2,256,016
844,126

77,361
517,933
182,344
85,554

GROUP V.-£ITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 30,000 TO 50,000 IN 1911.
110
111
112
113
114

Binghamton. N. Y.
Sioux City, Iowa...
Atlantic City, N. J.
Rockford,III
Lancaster, Pa

$259,233
121,495
907,943
39,250
77,400

11,231,873
970,427
4,674,4S5 !
1,452,846
699,342

$790,456
859.6SS
1,938,803
768,077
575,001

$441,417 !
110,739
2,735,682
6S4,769 !
124,341

$1,491,106]
1,091,922
5,582,428
1,492,096
776,742

$1,223,150 1
1,033,373 j
4,328.703 !
1,405,152
652,177

$750,885
892,948
2,513,913
1,014,165
594,725

$472,265
140,425
1,814,790
390,987
57,452

$267,956
58,549
1,253,725
86,944
124,565

115
116
117
118
119

Springfield, Ohio...
Little Rock, Ark...
Sacramento, Gal...
Pueblo, Colo
Chattanooga, Tenn.

246,118
52,506
549,326
87,502
414,212

1,614,863
1,297,760
1,618,250
2,197,592
1,049,563

963,406
739,994
1,526,352
1,025,488
704,195

651,457
557,766 I
91,893
1,172,104
345,368

1,860,981
1,350,266 |
2,167,576
2,285,094 j
1,463,775 j

1,565,176 i
990,897 j
1,595,097
2,191,527
1,217,706

917,679
748,607
1,418,527
939,778
956,239

647,497
.242,290
176,570
1,251,749
261,467

295,805
359,369
572,479
93,567
246,069

120 Bay Citv, Mich....
121 York, Pa
122 Maiden, Mass
123 New Britain, Conn,
124 Haverhill, Mass....

205,073
107,775
68,923
48,128
123,402

626,526
605,618
953,877
1,017,031
1,004,367

550,989
117,007
1,089,933
389,050
919,833 1

208,922




1,177,515
1,386,437 j
393,445
787,919
1,181,364
967,270
722,625
154,193
705,302
859,495
2,108,039
2,043,810
1,024,739
1,014,377
2,039,116
1,495,663
1,406,081
631,976
815,559
1,447,535
1 996 435
1,924,200
926,035|
946,998
1,873,033 j 1
t Also the aggregate of payments and of cash balances at the close of the year.

244,645
64,229
89,582
72,235

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

138

TABLE 2.-^5UMMARY OF RECEIPTS, PAYMENTS, AND CASH BALANCES: 1911—Continued.
^For a list of the cities arranged alphabetically by states, with the number assigned to each, see page 20. For a text discussion of this table, see page fiO.J
GROUP V.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 30,000 TO 50,000 IN 1911—Continued.
PAYMENTS.

RECEIPTS.

[Cash balances!
at beginning
of year.

City
num-|
ber.

Total.

Revenue.
(Table 3.)

Aggregatoor
receipts and of
cash balances
Nonrevenuc. at beginning
of year.
(Table 19.)

Total.

Govern
Nongovern
mental cost. mental cost.
(Table 19.)
(Table 3.)

Cash
balances
at close
of year.

125
126
127
128
129

Salem, Mass
Lincoln, Nebr.....
Berkeley, Cal
Davenport, Iowa...
Topeka, Xans.

$97,601
307,059
192,341
317,344
221,077

$1,389,311
1,097,121
1,054,766
1,199,670
1,276,540

$780,160
903,686
946.599
973,570
1,034,427

$609,151
18S.435
108.167
226.100
242,113

$1,486,912
1,404,180
1,247,107
1,517,014
1,497,617

$1,431,863
1,056,856
1,063,378
1,171,039
1,211,406

$804,592
801,850
968,444
912,659
958,268

$627,271
254,976
94,934
258.380
253,138

$55,049
347,324
183,729
345.975
286,211

130
131
132
133
134

McKeesport, Pa...
nt,Mich
Flint,
Tampa, Fla.
San Diego, Cal.
£1 Paso, Tex...

345,271
223,793
152,070
349,701
482,134

1,059,563
1258,951
923,245
2,983,285

730,207
596,778
637,164
1,851,713
762,936

329,356
662,173
286.081
1,131.572
1,605,637

1,404,834
1,4S2,744
1,075,315
3,332,986
2,850,757

1,057,123
1,094,572
892,394
2,329,569
2,478,765

684,268
842,532
612,264
2,156,038
2,111,520

372.855
252.040
280,130
173,531
367,245

347,711
388,172
182,921
1,003.417
371,992

135
136
137
138
139

Wheeling, W.Va..
Racine, Wis
Kalamazoo, Mich..
Superior, w i s
Augusta, Ga

649,515
109,826
78,428
344.361
27,412

897,015
918,491
1,186.318
1,362,609
1,125,529

745,630
687.802
652,859
775,786
885,167

151,385
230,689
533,459
5S6,S23
240,362

1,546.530
1,028.317
1,264,746
1,706,970
1,152 941

1,091,976
916,019
1,072,659
1,430,419
1,136,793

90S, 072
722.6SS
597.401
896.815
963 9S1

183,904
193,331
475.258
533.604
172,812

454.554
112,298
192, (W7
276,551
16,148

140
141
142
143
144

Macon, Ga
Newton, Mass
Butte, Mont
Woonsocket, B . I .
Chester, Pa

167,215
160,346
244,539
135,328
57,628

1,492,731
4,001,747
1,373,290
2,417,112
878,891

705.489
1,723,480
807,292
611,213
414,839

787,242
2,278.267
565,998
1,805,899
464,052

1,659.946
4.162,093
1,617,829
2,552,940
936,519

1,562,723
4,026.619
1,447,651
2,337,198
529,286

1,423,826
1,467,959
824,429
555.219
371,445

138,897
2,558,660
623,222
1,781,979
157,841

97,223
135.474
170,178
215.742
407,233

145
146
147
148
149

Montgomery. Ala..
Fitchburg, Mass...
Dubuque, Iowa....
Galveston, T e x . . . .
Elmira,N.Y

160,852
83,276
104,756
327,233
96,689

1,548,785
2,073,894
751,970
1,360,580
854,246

751,933
864,071
643.066
840.316
552,062

796.852
1,209.823
IDS 904
525.264
302,184

1.709,637
2,162.170
856,726
1,687.813
950,035

1,576,795
2,099,232
652,729
1,435,369
900,801

1,071,140
910.193
576,218
1,109,853
594.0S7

505,655
1,189,039
76,511
325,516
306,774

132,842
62.93S
203.997
252.444
50,074

150
151
152
153
154

New Castle. Pa
West Hoboken, N. J .
Knoxville, Tenn
Hamilton, Ohio
Springfield, Mo.

142.134
163,372
117,370
504,165
74,849

643,455
910,373
1,331.873
1,072,110
626,552

458,741
495 918
805,569
734,740
561,367

184,714
414.455
526,304
337,370
65,185

785,589
1,073,745
1,449,243
1,576,275
701,401

582,123
944,563
1,279,295
1,314,932
599,419

474.487
527,044
•716,074
968.600
513,323

107,636
417,519
563.221
346,242
81,096

203,466
129,182
169.948
261,343
101,982

155
156
157
158
159

range,
Quincy,HL..
Roanoke, Va.
Lexington, Ky.
Huntington, W. Va..,

106,793
177,565
543,989
125,566
25,427

3,722,080
' 738,625
1,235,403
1,102,090
820,919

1,023.873
566.416
589,669
656.940
306,249

2,698,207
172,209
645,734
445,150
514,670

3,823,873
916 190
1,779,392
1,227,656
846,346

3,293,638
723,773
1,244,119
1,057,401
548,110

1,227,414
462.409
9S4.7S9
612,352
476,170

2,071,224
266,364
259,330
445,049
71,940

530.235
187,417
535,273
170,255
293,236

joifet,nL

566,139
635,473
373,144
775,150

243.713
448,907
45,074
1,014.599

918,586
1,258,414
4S1,298
1,843,624
1,837,140

833,684
1,165,177
3S4,155
1,754,709
1,710,998

577,731
677,842
339,089
732,586
731,097

255,953
437,335
45,066
1,022,123
979,901

84,902
93,237
97,143
88,915
126,142

349,540
686,600
911,397
934,339
612,430

460,648
1,122,190
939,056
294,123
309,411

873.265
1,842,553
1,953,091
1,398.254
1,023,539

733,984
1,720,740
1,820,023
1,176,043
960,638

505.291
1,109,142
1,046,932
1,009,850
500,201

228,693
611,598
773,091
166,198
460,437

139,281
121,813
138,063
222,296
67,901

675,895
648,504

566.514
730,812
1,192,486
405,933
526,449

969,067
491,574
161,787
269,962
122,055

1,721,366
1,251,535
1,680,838
711,920
607,270

1,512,971
1,179,946
1,299,311
693,735
663 556

719,448
738.826
1,098.337
384,001
636,391

793,523
441,120
200,974
309,734
127,195

381,527
18,1S5
33,684

1,057,754
768,310
775,746
2,167,050
488,763

755,756
551,289
874,281
430,358

459,155
12,554
224,457
1,292,769
58,405

1,190,788
877,152

690,222
713.530
763. S70
1,093,075
455,435

393,308

2,554.069
638,956

1,083,530
771,841
913.221
2,102,572
549,511

94,076

107,258
105,311
131,093
451,497
89,445

515,528
1,757,410
1,233,643
835,090
3,947,172

414,525
972,846
582,590
543,047
881,531

101,003
784,564
651,053
292.043
3,065,641

569,856
2,629,748
1,705,837
996,438
3,972,784

486.538
1,716.423
1,210,848
829,064
3,919,243

324,200
1,332,654
902.951
448,172
970,299

162,338
383,769
307,897
380,892
2,948,944

83,318
913,325
494,9S9
167,374
53,541

650,218
2,189,524
729,160
818,878
699,527

519,664
935,872
628,747
531,250
361,890

130,554
1,253,652
100,413
287,628
337,637

733,4S4
2,694,009
833,466
1,090,160
801,980

697,963
2,092,738
696,847
£07,559
699,545

600,169
1,442,187
643,977
620,743
337,687

97,799
650,551

52,870
286,816
361,858

35,516
601,271
136,619
282,601
102,435

2,358,815
1,033,928
564,554
1,253,682

628,904
505,319
471,527
730,576

1,729,911
528,609
93.027
523,106

2,563,097
1,377,309
731,179

2,249.436
1,039,871
552.9S5
1,411.828

679,282
645,395
458.066
885,160

1,570,154
394.476
94,919
526,668

313,661
337,438
178,194
35,484

iw
164
165
166
167
168
169

Auburn, N . Y . .
Charlotte, N. C.
Mass..
i Taunton,
lauutvuidioN!
Everett,Mass..
Portsmouth, Va
Pittsfield, Mass
Quincy, Mass
Cedar Rapids, Iowa..
Oshkosh,Wis

108.734
174,034
63,080
53,875
187,298

809 852
1,084,380
418,218
1,789,749
1,649,842

63,077
33,763
107,638
169,792
106,693

170
171
172
173
174

Perth Amboy, N. J.,
Lansing, Mich
Pasadena, CaL
Amsterdam, N. Y...
Jackson, Mich

185,785
29,149
326,565
36,025
48,766

810,188
1,808,790
1,850,453
1,228,462
921,841
1,535,581
1,222,386

175
176
177
178
179

Jamestown, N. J
San Jose, CaL
Decatur.Ill
Mount vernon, N. Y..
Joplin,Mo

133,034
108,842
387,019
150,193

180
181
182
183
184

Wniiamsport, P a . . . ,
Niagara Falls, N.Y..
Muskogee. Okla
,
Lima, Ohio
,

54,328
872,338
472,194
161,348

185
186
187
188
189

Aurora, 111
NewRochelle,N.Y.
Austin, Tex.
La Crosse, Wis
Newport, Ky

25,612
83,266
504,485
104,306
271,282
102,453

190
191
192
193

Orange, N. J
Lorain. Ohio
Council Bluffs, Iowa.
Lynchburg, Va

204,282
343,381
166,625
193,630

160
161
162
163

Chelsea, Mass




1,354,273

780,974

1,044,314

1,447,312

* Also the aggregate of payments and of cash balances at the close of the year.

53,311

149,351
1,009,497

208,395
71,589




%

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

140

TABLE 3.—SUMMARY OF R E V E N U E RECEIPTS A N D

GOVERNMENTAL

(For a list of the cities arranged alphabetically by states, with the number

BEVENUE RECEIPTS.

From taxes.
City
num
ber.

OTY, AND DIVISION Of CUT'S
GOVERNMENT.
Total

From spe
cial assess* F r o m
From
From sub
From
mcntsand
fines,
ventions donations] pension
from
forfeits,
and
and
Non
and
special
grants.
gifts.
ments.
business chargesfor escheats.
license*
outlays.

General
property.

Special
property.

(Table 6.)

(Table 6.) (Table 6.)| (Table 6.) (Table6.)| (Table 6.) (TableO.) (Table 7.) (Table 7.) (Table 7.)

PolL

Business.

[$805,720,133 $485,065,780 $11,380,435 |$1,552,S45|[150,974,591 $3,824,919 $68,509,773 $4,110,891 |$32,S44,465'$3,030,5C3J$lt490t2j7|

Grand total.

406,410,156 259,435,582
66,542,293
114,556,889
76,405,772
139,415,053
45,638,725
82,127,742
63,210,293 37,043,408

Group I . . . .
Group I I . . .
Group m . .
Group I V . .
Group V . . .

7,416,642
299,603
1,914,632
972,533
777,0251

19S.020I 23,729,4751 2,142,886 22,996,209 1,540,103 6.SJ4.1S' 1,859,093
363,732
578, 648 10,731,311!
130,073 8,803,509
520,750 8,672,370
190,535
806.971 6,SS9,933
426,09fl 8,706,790] 595,120 21,547,556
336,126
330,236 9,194,042
570,246] 4,677,941
S07,90S 5,530,869
235,927 6,099,536
301,077
614,923 3,721,093
290,747 4,203,949

923.76a
287,218
194,069]
57,769
27,418

G R O U P L - C I T I E S H A V I N G A P O P U L A T I O N O F 500,000 A N D O V E R I N 1911.

3

School district...

.-.

..

Sanitary district

..........

Philadelphia, Pa
Poor districts

4

».

City c o r p o r a t i o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
School district
,

215,714

5,631,731

37,352,592
5,637,855
14,042,158
5,450,814
3,693,895

11,719,565
4,465,054
12,885,405
5,066,803
2,964,241

8,313,768

895,439
42,020

5,524,501 _ 6 4 0 , 9 2 5
15,239
1,606
107,140
657

558,457

_._

3,330

99,!si|

381,820

4,433

i 16,533

39,378,126 | 22,011,770

$76,722

2,165,106

115,711

765,022

76,029

2,639,803

8,839

81,317]

21,929,308
82,462

76,722

2,165,106

115,711

765,022

76,029

2,639,803

8,839

♦81,347)

350,103

39,287,326
90,800

15,845,113
4,392,098

16,073,331
2,450,932

1,963,979

177,943

1,967,146

60,680

1,963,979

177,943

1,967,146

71,716
8,964

1,024,383

36,395

271,755

101,649

950

1,423,467

36,546

1,161,450

28,642

*950

1,423,416
51

27,871
8,675

1,008,605
172,845

5,458
22,459
625

277,757

2,505,229

us

14,933,821

County

$516,946]

7,763

937,459

5

Pittsburgh, Pa.

$17,490

381,820

8,313,768

34,352,470

7

$600,592 $1,850,439

1 37,101,068

5

8

$723,902 $12,278,772

66,177,314

20,237,211 [ 11,812,788

St. Louis, Mo

\_

$6,768,906

$198,963,893 $136,551,248 $4,749,204

New York, N . Y

III 111

x
2

121,298

1,236,300

161,259

10,836,472
1,535,439

350,103
24,912
277,757

27,466

64,093

14,262

642,925

833,566 • 87,464

836,300

79,992

756,428

80,108
7,356

835,837
463

68,873
11,119

364,022
392,406

769,627
63,939

110,792

14,176|

110,792

14,176

1,645,396

52,049

61,663

26,699j

753

7,059

60,910

i9,640]
16,837

7,150
7,150

:"•••:::::

GROUP IL-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000 IN 1911.
Detroit, Mich.
City corporation.
County
Buffalo, N . Y . ,

10

$810,652

$42,530)

$876,734

$33,844

$872,789

$6,385

$20,366)

435,282
375,3701

39,631
2,899

866,25'
10, AT

24,38d
9,464

856.385
16,404

6,385

20,366

315,081

3,463

32,040)

3,463

32,040|

7,658,618

184,770)

702,914

40,324

669,707

28,260)

6,679,583
979,035

171,658
13,112

702,914

40,324

669,7071

20,184
8,076]

San Francisco, Cal...

12,520,60a

8,231,944

9,324,290,'i

6,079,051

8,024,194
1,300,0961

5,016,7221
1,062,329]

City corporation.
County
School district...
Newark, N . J .
City corporation.
County
Los Angeles, Cal
City corporation
County
School district
New Orleans, La

I

6,754,3371,
549,337]

11,882,761

Cincinnati, Ohio.

15

$7,303,674

10,623,224
l,259,537j

City corporation.
County

14

10,933,466!
1,146,222,'

City corporation.,
County

Milwaukee, Wis

13

$12,079,688

13,34% 765
9,265,825
1,518,271,
2,559,6691

7,433,002
3,924,4291
1,213,249]
2,295,324

1,265,203

48,894

1,415,667]

32,925]

737,03d

3,145

33,157]

808,517j

65,168

824,3301

47,497]

300,8561

200

30,505

808,517]

63,27<H
1,892

824,33«

47,231
2661

306,856]

200)

30,505]

172,059)

77,779

36,257]

3,697|

62,471
15,308

22,392
6771

1,115,065

76,965

481,331

36,52]

6771

1,078,828
36,237]

70,448
6,520]

481,331

18,302
18,219]

168,362

11,568]
2-1,689

$78,078

674,113

23,917]

978,721

24,876

1,417,487]

712

16,2061

78,078)

674,113

23,91}

973,518
6,203

17,778
7,098

1,300,519
116,963

070
36

16,206]

7,673,132

721,435

112,931

1,773,0561

188,999

795,30fl

6,107

17,770

4,517,658
1,179,80d
1,975,674

712,441
8,994

104,166)
8,765

1,773,056

160,6771
28,322

1,70W
4,407]

17,77rf

12,112,540

6,671,136

10,493,061
1,619,479|

6,376,654
1,294,482

13,067,632
8,777,243
1,500,078
2,790,311
8,106,988

5,469,024

Washington, D. C

13,441,394

4,770,174

Minneapolis, Minn

8,677,231

6,262,638

7,978,034
699,147

4,715,832
546,706)

City corporation.
County

22,392

150,391

2,79a
2,792

61,995|

21,636]
1,323, Old

SO, 004
8,C00j

191,204

40,841

15,910]

5,689.401

15,595

14,033]

46,711

234,089

209,605

70,950

41,804
4,007

231,301
2,788

209,503
^

70, (

47,593

75,295]

444,849]

487,355

13,090)

1,208,075

487,248
107

5,183
7,90fl

l,193,01d
15,0651

5.964
789,343

91,422

1 For explanation of differences i n amounts reported i n this column and total p a y m e n t s for outlays reported i n Table 18, see t e x t discussion for Table 18, page 90.




GENERAL TABLES.

141

COST PAYMENTS, BY DIVISIONS OP CITY GOVERNMENT: 1911.
assigned to each, see page 20.

REVENUE

From
From
earnings
highway
of
priv
general
ileges.
depart
ments.

For a t e x t discussion of this table, see page 50.]

RECEIPTS—continued.

From
rents.

For expenses and interest.

From
earnings
of public
service
enter
prises.

From
interest

EXCESS OF REVENUE
RECEIPTS OVER—

GOVERNMENTAL COST PAYMENTS.

Expenses Expenses
of general of public
Interest.
depart
service
ments. [enterprises.!

TotaL
TotaL

(TabloS.)] (Table 9.) (Table 9.) Table 9.) (Table 10.)]

For
outlays.*

Excess of
govern
mental
cost
payments
over
revenue
receipts.

City
Govern P a y m e n t s n u m 
mental
for
ber.
cost
pay
and
ments.
interest.

(Table 11.) (TablelS.) (Table 17.) ( T a b l e l S . )

|$17^70^78'Slllp29^67j $5,062,807 |S23,536,OS7;iS5,410,575J '1928,335,398 $012,250,009! $471,657,66d$36,106,194 $101,492,215; |$316,079,329 $136^369^5081 j$13,754,243 $193,464,064
7,552,59fl 6,081,5211 4,072,77! 16,092,42G 44,944,80$; 401,990,554, 323,029,947
4,212,9701 1,349,646 1,(18,3461 2,293,4S5 8,347,93G!| 125.490,000, 84,493,1201
109.560 2,SS0,S54 14,059,S42| 107,948,321! 96,790,118
2,836,155 1,851,147
20,950 l,249,8SGi 11,076,341
1,364,407
593,769
99,507,257' 61,123,607
35,172 1,014,442 6,987,648j 70.387,266
1,304,449
553,481
46,814,277

243,760,143 17,836,413 61,433,391, 138,966,007! 63,839,593 8,253,195 83,380,209
70,806,314 3,516,060 10,175,746 43,907,880! 15,088,998 1,149,887 30,058,769
76,559,612 5,992,700 14,237,806 71,158,203 29,779,397, 1,246,129 42,624,935
46,715,150} 5,352,186
36,816,441 3,408,835

9,056,271
6,589,001

38,383.050 18,185,670
23,572,989} 9,475,850

806,155 21,004,135
2,29S,877| 16,396,016

G R O U P I . - C I T 1 E S H A V I N G A P O P U L A T I O N O F 500,000 A N D O V E R I N 1911.
1
-I!
!
8193,735 89,551,873822.341.903 8251,029,309 8163.205.183 $115,154,040 $7,642,765 $40,403,378] $8S,424,126f $52,665,416

j 1,910,732 3,259,432

593,393;

736,540

6,529,437 |

691,096 3,259,432
.930,143
25,702
207,518
0,213

49,006;
55$
493,705

5,872,149

62,374,378

I

I

40,011,845,

39,226,935

3,036,466

3,748,444]

35,115,792! . 25,504,506' 1 20,679,288
5,903,725
5,667,046:
5,315,924
1 13,450,457 .10,165,401
10,141,760
5,108,374
3,043,491
2,591,154
2,796,030]
657,288
1,631,401
498,809

2,729,333

16,362,533!

IfiCl

81,292,483^1.526.400

307,133

2,095,885
351,122
23,641
452,337
825,459

1 1,65S,623

620,924 3,068,024

1,310,771

4,773,435

44,077,953]

35,378,710]

29,062,112

2,469,622

3,846,976]

1,650,098
7,925

026,924 3,068,024

1,310,358
413

4,773,435

43,994,601
83,352

35,295,358
83,352

28,979,559
82,553

2,469,622

3,846,177
799

8,699,243]

22,595,123

14,603,472

12,359,494

1,149,151

1,094,827]

7,991,65l|

9,133,532
3,225,962

1,095,236
53,915

1,094,827 I

6,862,680
1,128,971

18,559,676

1,265,667

5,791,667

4,285,201

429,169

2,281,537

43,023
72,528

365,552
63,617

2,227,318
18,186,275
54,219 j 4,408,848

762,881

106,837

16,059

1,938,557

698,494

6,016

30,550

506,087

1,562,965 j 16,512,506

444,706
224,379
29,409

5,544
472

30,336
214

351,626
78,147
77,214

1,557,288

213,328

539,258

40,391

896,503

1,479,546

15,228,541

1 520,356

177,007

15,076

722,026

2,116,9S7

19,676,533

173,186
347,170

157,672
19,335

8,428
6,648

657,219
64,807

2,114,737 j 15,467,205*
2,911,323
2,250
1,293,005,

j

J 29,902,211

3,858,998

[

10

9,287,035
2,885,035'
4,340,430

5,677

9,045,269

12,507,570
2,105,403
858,805

8 8 SSS

115,551

OS****.

437,647
437,647

00

495,700
480,974
14,726

S3

1

!U

50,064

384,050
134.841
132,894
OS,666
16,0S9

9,743,288
1,712,487
598,618

|

644,408 ! 1,755,330 j

5,067,499'

643,343 ! 1,331,105
261,745
1,065
162,480

2,497,700
1,471,376!
1,098,423

1
2

1 ...'

"

4,699,827]

3,999,416

3

2,357,912]

5,633,739

4

8,735,460

5

3,488,814

6

4,450,259
1,578,685

3,931,599

1,385,483

2,546,116

7

955,577 1 2,461,808 |

4,204,755]

1,152,270

3,052,485

8

939,096
16,481

2,959,635'
805,920!
439,200]

$264,136

$3,454,869

9

1,201,459|

2,387,63^

10

4,923,602

2,503,027

U

135,387]

2,150,262

12

4,950,666 j 2,493,833

2,451,833

13

973,282

2,856,876

14

8,998,709 j 3,643,136

5,355,573

15

1,943,470

16

672,757
[

$35,758,710
$3,802,936 20,165,469

2,325,961

1,825,186
376,435
260,187

1

O R O U P I L - C I T I E S H A V I N G A P O P U L A T I O N O F 300,000 T O 500,000 I N 1911.
j $741,125

$132,107

$360

669,601
171,524

132,107

360

738,799

174,392

13,163

244,655

1,076,575

13,084,220 [

649,643
89,156

174,392

12,377^

225,676
18,979

1,076,575

11,573,372!
1,510,848

502,174

51,282

121,071

3,545

17,444,202

10,017,573

j

|

786

1

1

J

$272,502

266,658

34,273

71,071
195,587

34,273

74,655
468

468

262,123
10,379

$218,971

7,100,108
792,479

218,971

457,143'
56,118

3,389,715
329,290:

9,495,124

7,841,878

574,524 . 1,078,722]

3,589,096

8,302,937
1,192,187

6,700,945
1,140,933

574,524

1,027,46SJ
51,254

3,270,435
318,661

9,264,987

6,840

745,746j

7,426,629

966,252

7,776,222
843,597

11,165,937
1 1,177,887

63,379

774,996

9,459,677

7,174,02^

6,463,640

290,003

420,385]

2,235,649]

45,749
17,630

774 996'

B

*"* r v i Q
l',246,638

6,217,36}
956,664

5,521,540
942,100

290,003

405,821
14,564

1,995,675
289,974

15,842,598 |

10,891,932

2,363,58^

398,892

322,478 1,274,786

706,888

1,211,065

253,219
127,610
18,063

322,478 1,262,790
1,500
10,496

565,981
98,172
42,735

1,210,286 1 11,475,096
1,682,230
779
2,685,272

7,634,179
1,335,596
1,922,157 I

313,092

211,796

412,253

1,287,361 j 13,065,822 [

179,816
133,276

211,730
66

352,695
59,558

1,287,361

322,180

84,372

44,516

144,325

1,183,493

16,710,768

100,657
219,146
2,377

82,042
2,330

21,599

101,975
42,350

1,183,493

11,018,851
2,955,942
2,735,975

292,106

202,376

10,216

89,766

789,077

340,831

91,288

182

2,726

582,582

1 297,113

45,282

240,920

472,990j

9,943,213

229,413

45^282

195,553
45,367

472,990

9,266,740
676,473

1

1

67,700

22,917




$513,261 j $3,719,005

$966,252 | $12,343,824 j $8,624,819 j $7,892,587

10,902,829*
2,182,993

1

7,975,278

553,067

4,904,835
1,245,519
1,824,924

547,642 2,181,702
84,652
5,425 1
97,233

3,840,917
346,634
763,115

9,255,664 !

7,321,524

400,678

1,533,462 |

3,830,158

"^865,210 !
1,390,454

6,249,023
1,072,501

400,678

1,215,509
317,953

3,037,619
792,539

7,712,059

6,343,002

292,481

1,076,576 j

4,227,666 !
1,322,376
2,162,017 1

2,976,721
1,289,520
2,076,761

292,481

958,464
32,856
85,256

6,791,185
1,633,566
573,958'

8,290,169

6,163,518

4,282,285

524,855

1,356,378

2,126,651]

12,291,507

9,191,075

8,364,346

428,086

398,643

3,100,432

5,972,328 j

5,056,787

226,555

688,986

3,970,885 |

5,472,025

4,637,287
419,500

226,555

608,183
80,803 |

3,794,715
176,170

1

500,303 |

183,181

1,265,982

$1,149,887 ] 4,250,319

17

2,704,903

18

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

142

TABLE 3.—SUMMARY OF R E V E N U E RECEIPTS A N D GOVERNMENTAL

[For a list of the cities arranged alphabetically by states, with the number
GBOUP III.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OP 100,000 TO 300.000 IN 1911.

R E V E N U E RECEIPTS.

From taxes.
City
num
ber.

From spe
cial assess From From sub-1 From
From
ments and| fines,
donations] pension
forfeit*, ventions
from
and
Non
and
assess
and
special I
grants.
gifts.
Business. business charges
ments.
for escheats.
license.
outlays. !

CITT, AND DIVISION OP CITY'S
GOVERNMENT.

Total.

General
property.

Special
property.

(Table 6.)

(Table 6.) (TableG.)! (Table 6.) (Table 6.)| (TableG.) (TableG.) (Table 7.) (Table7.) (Table 7.)

Poll.

$fl,922j $1,030,258)

Jersey City, N . J .

$6,945,666

$3,485,3561

$525,721

$16,394

$199,710

Seattle, W a s h —

13,373,0491

4,580,2221

427,574

17,461

5,525,262

64,662

11,511,448
1,861,601

3,633,74fl
946,475

427,574}

17,461

5,525,2621

64,662

7,505,0021

3,566,560J

532,810]

78,6SSI 1,661,069

74,270]

5,798,591
1,706,411

2,042,974
1,523,5S6|

532,810]

78,6SS| 1,661,069

74,270.

4,677,12611

2,817,90S

15,200

344,900]

76,51S|

882,471

15,041]

3,272,083
1,405,043

1,745,149

15,200

344,900

76,518

882,471]

15,041

City corporation..
School district....
Kansas City, Mo.
City corporation..
School district....
Indianapolis, Ihd.
City coi
School

,tion..
itrict™

Providence, R. I.,

5,761,13a|
6,062,313

Rochester, N . Y . .

5,696,488]

•J, 0 9 I , Bool

5,567,936
128,552

3,289,481
103,407)

21,703

143,937

4,664]

5,329

4,0641

276,590!

22,097

17,145]

276,59a

639.
21,45S|

7,663
9,482

143,937

300,706j

13,759

71,52S

8,333]

32,483

58

512,734

45,963

563,724

27,010J

2S0,39Sj

12,7561

6,882

$116,S22J

238,208]

10,533

11,441

86,090,

3,369

24,971

96,779,
20,043'

238,208

10,533

11,441

86,090

3,369

24,971

3,733,844
3,607,355]

6,574,059]

4,387,2271

409,314

26,11S| 1,084,033

23,4971

9,019,240

3,631,566

642,990

72,060) 3,179,059

43,156]

367,72ft

6,458,401
1,9*3,30^
587,532]

1,580,928
1,600,341
450,297

642,99(X

72,0G0] 3,179,059

47,3GR
78Si

367,7261

St. Paul, Minn

4,511,913

2,681,951

432,820

6,4671

455,54S

24,850

143,398.

Columbus, Ohio

4,395,941

2,507,028

222,795

33,512!

484,082

14,390!

86,915

3,248,956
1,146,985

1,485,288
1,021,740

222,795

33,512

4S|,0S2

14,340.

3,738,087

2,186,834

326,358

5,572

526,654

"I

2,820,26?
917,820

1,397,373
789,461

320,358]

5,572

526,654

2,796J
2,221

30 Toledo, Ohio..
City corporation.,
" " o i district....
School

29,780.

575

Atlanta, Ga..

3,272,5271]

1,690,704

Oakland, Cal.

4,317,738

2,318,846

3,058,916
1,257,731
1,091

1,690,148
627,607]
1,091

Worcester, Mass

3,768,219

2,158,286

Birmingham, A l a . . . . .

2,003,332

640,959

Syracuse,N.Y

3,415,550

2,181,335

3,349,139
66,411'

2,131,642
49,693

2,537,368

2,002,975

55,0171

2,503,281
24,824
9,263|

1,971,722
22,383
8,870

55,017]

Memphis, Tenn

2,959,793

1,647,036

Scranton, Pa

1,712,963

1,064,750

1,010,721
702,242

489,078;
575,672;

Richmond, Va..

3,354,467]

1,995,458

12,165

183,528

Paterson, N. J.

1,993,U~,

1,225,8961

7,000

192,855

City corporation...
School district
Sanitary district..

City corporation
County supervisors' funds.
New Haven, Conn
City corporation
Westvilfe school district
Borough of Fairhaven, East..

City corporation..,
School district

Omaha, Nebr..
City corporation..
School district....
Fall River, Mass.

10,934]

5,329

Portland, Oreg..

City coi ration
School district...

$8,414|

10,934]

Denver, Colo....

City corporation..
School district..,
Navigation district..

$260|

877,311
877,3111

1,072,7591

Louisville, K y . . .

City corporation
County supervisors' funds..

$€03

15,655

314,555

I

476,578]

259,645

29,873]

906,141

259,645!

29,873

906,147

87,239
74,716}
74,716!

,.L
346,492]

86,244;

86,915

23,122

63,2461

4,827)

1,770

3,741

1.77IM

3,741

1,134

4,873

77W
779
8,788

82,870

10,8741

82,870.

l,21tt
9,664]

96,039

35,850

635,526'

872

3,2ia

7,000
628,526

872

3,218]

200

173,074

4,672

125,379

I0,04frj

14,163]

350,275

25,565

509,932

61,274

229,650]

51,411

175,974

7,609

462,743

6«a49}

62,67

4,297]

12,564

34,693
16,718]

175,974

7,699

462,743

6,249J

62,676

4,297

12,564

27,497,

176,124

15,321

46,451

20,713

71,78Dj

2,841

11,0SSJ

27,497;

176,124]

15,321

46,451

20,713

70,2611
I,—

2,84l|

U,08S|

89,485

6,354

341,46SJ

20,750

301,129]

36,000

263,478

7,155

201,145

13,923

104,656

18,000
18,000.

263,478

7,155

201,145

13,623

4,288
100,368

8,055

77,872

24,965

73,300

12,335

66,567

S.4S6

354,306

7,451
235]

2,996,489

1,790,629.

281,475[

7,909

529,598!

22,144

77,609

11,656

2,197,208
799,281

1,355,0011.
435,568'

1,103
280,372*.

7,909j

529,598:

14,230'
7,914,

37,477
40,131

11,650]

2,315,410.1

1,530,649;

145,289]

7,854
3,057|
4,215
4,215

53,624.
150,181!
l,307i
11,055'
12,847!
5,529]
1 For explanation of differences in amounts reported in this column and total payments for outlays reported in Table 18, see text discussion for Table 18, pogo 90.




GENERAL TABLES.

143

COST PAYMENTS, BY DIVISIONS OP CITY GOVERNMENT: 1911—Continued,
assigned to each, see page 20. For a text discussion of this table, see page £0.]
GROUP III.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000 I N 1911.
1

REVENUE BECEIFTS—continued.

I From
1 earnings From
highway
of
priv
I general
1 depart- ileges.
1 ments.

From
rents.

From
Interest.

For expenses and interest

From j
earnings
of public
Bcrvico
enter
prises.

$49,768 $118,693

J

|

|

|

Expenses Expenses
of general of public
Interest
departservice
ments. enterprises.

Total.
Total.

(Table 8.) (Table 9.) (Table 9.) Table 9.) (Table 10.)

J

EXCESS OF BEVENUE
RECEIPTS OVEB—

GOVERNMENTAL COST PAYMENTS.

For
outlays.1

Excess of
govern
mental
cost
payments
over
revenue
receipts.

City
Govern- IPayments num
ber.
mental
for
expenses
cost
pay
and
ments. interest

(Table 11.) (Table 15.) (Table 17.) (Table 18.)

$240,460 $1,263,107 $13,398,808

$5,081,132

$3,311,949

$8,317,676 $6,453,142

$1,864,534-

19

134,485

102,223

$4,667

94,062

1,534,186

17,042,119,

6,528,326]

4,284,070]

591,660 1,652,596] 10,513,793] 3,669,070

6,844,723;

20

117,259
17,226

102,223

4,667

94,062

1,513,597 .15,062,419|
20,589
1,979,700,

4,887,393)
1,640,933'

2,819,18a
1,464,882!

570,043
21,617

83,305

229,968

1,171

71,300

1,051,931

7,610,563;

5,134,511]

4,2S4,100J

491,008

10,175,026J
338,767]
359,403] 2,476,052]

105,56l|

2,370,491

21

68,920
14,3S5

229,968

647
524

47,321
23,979

1,051,931

5,945,084!
1,665,479

3,S57,490;
1,277,021

3,126,9161
1,157,184

491.008

279,026]

1,388,656

22

$602,926 1,306,292

23

$808,058

$961,125

1,498,162
154,434

i

239,566]
119,837]

2,087,594
388,458

47,412

102,652

555

30,819

27,818 |

4,956,152

3,2S8,470J

3,091,335

21,210

175,925]

l,667,6S2j

33,677
13,735

102,652

555

19,800
11,019

27,818

3,523,1071
1,433,045

2,127,687.
1,160,783

1,977,704
1,113,631

21.210

128,773
47,152

1,395,420
272,262

146,777

222,183

22,227

339,458

824,951

5,158,206

4,454,840

3,546,636]

•199,225

708,979

703,366

77,934

9,623

500

109,390

808,244

6,079,990

3,985,531

3,255,156

220,017

510,358

2,094,459

17,6ffl

2,076,782

24

51,763

89,033

103,957

679,914 |

7,336,647

4,492,522

3,613,628

318,182

560,712]

2,844,125]

1,640,159]

1,203,966

25

51,763

89,033

103,865
102

679,914

7,190,256'
146,391

4,346,131
146,391

3,467,237
146,391

318,182

560,712

2,844,125

173,600

123,227

55,559

101,047

36,112

6,661,173

4,45S,767

4,061,604

61,36S

335,795

2,202,406

87,114

2,115,232

26

48,222

38,568

in

112,347

872,864 j 14,872,353 j

4,031,229 [

2,826,523

312,933

891,773 | 10,841,124

5,853,113

4, OSS, 011

27

10,482!
4 452
33,288

38.56S

171

107,412

773,852

181,791

4,935

99,6i2

2,632,432 1 1,620,923
1,076,436
1,050,745
322,361
154,855

i2$y"i42

826,718
25,691
39,364

12,915,236*
1,609,80$
347,309.

i

10,282,804
533,372
24,948

110,635

128.317

733

30,971

460,430

4,623,810

3,470,948 !

2,761,075

182,452

527,421

1,152,862

111,897

1,040,965

28

J 233,304!

44.S59

2,660

182,260

574,409 j

4,963,387

3,629,138 j

2,715,960

306,9S2

606,196 j

1,334,249 1

567,446

766,803

29

1 221,4251
11,939

44.050

2,207
453

165,160
17,100

574,409

3,759,020'
1,204,367

2,656,206
972,932

1,787,744
928,216

306,982

561,480
44,716

1,102,814
231,435
263,928

1,199,230

30

1,056,226

1,019,020

31

928,528

1,836,268

32

J

47,482

10.079

7,999

177,812

350,863 1

4,002,015

2,538,857 j

1,860,352

211,250

467,255 j

1,463,158 [

1

38,748!
8,734

10.O7O

7,640
359

151,000!
26,152

350. «n

3,029,138
972,877

1,744,632
794,225

1,115,972
744,380

211,250

417,410
49,845

1,284,506
178,652

42.764

1

30,674]

13,490

24,497

1

29,5941,080

13.400

23,979
518

sir

118,743

14,761

.

....
379,639
20,234
20,234

j

4,328,753

2,253,507 !

1,863,458

203.00S

187,041

2,075,246

5,246,266 |

2,481,470 | " 2,304,013]

4,024

173,433 1

2,764,796 j

4,097,41S
1,130,195
18,653!

1,538,452
934,920
8,098

1,423.1S5J
877,310
3,518

4.024

'

111,243
57,610
4,580

2,558,966
195,275
10,555

16,369

624

188,234

432,312

4,223,734

3,194,701 I

2,685,795

108,406

400,500

1,029,033

455,515

573,518

33

34,514

541

22,278

27,172

3,139,814

1,832,034

1,401,297

28,384

402,353

1,307,780

1,136,482

171,298

34

6,810

39,507

366,465 |

3,591,979 j

2,686,664

2,142,864

134,038

409,762 j

905,315 j

176,429

728,886

35

39,507

366,465

3,521,671
7t>,30S

2,616,356
70,308 j

134,038

409,762

905,315

2,049

143,953 j

330,367

3S5.996

36

2,049 ,

142,929
993
31

306,865
23,502

444,559

1,979,228

1

37,820

6,810

|_

60,655

6,272

1

59,349
913
393

6,272

59,980

7,478

520
520

37,877

2,228 j

2,4S1,739 |

2,151,372 (

2,072,556
70,308
2,005,370

2,111,547
31,657
S,16S |

1,966,569
30,664
8,137

37,877

2,228

2,418,412
55,159
8,168

43,351

442,762

221,087

4,324,884

2,345,656 j

1,680,010

|

5,883

2,728

13,245

1,843,041 j

1,379,286 1

1,254,505

124,781 1

1

3,322
2,561

2,728

7,604
5,641

964,530
878,511

708,266
671,020

644,032
610,473

64,234
60,547

256,264
207,491

4,034

133,809

3,735,137

2,190,721

1,370,335

363,116

457,270

1,544,416

810

204,703

416,119

12,905
35,100

100,314
55,835

1

47,536

|

40,856
6,680

175,377

1

46,188

12,257

175,377

322
2,277
777
1,500
4




31,777
45,304
22,403
22,901
102,410

712,531

463,755 j

195

1,959,871

1,543,752

1,338,209

761 j

3,881,714 1

2,271,685 j

1,895,731

1,235

374,719 j

1,610,029

2,728,702
1,153,012

1,592,445 2 1.263,587
632,144
679,240 f

1,235

327,623
47,096

1,136,257
473,772

2,315,344 1

1,827,012 1

761
244,070.I

1,444,946

91,042

291,024 1

488,332

55,629

1,365,091
j

130,078

380,670
i

34,095 '

885,225

il

6C '

614,137

37

333,677

38

1,163,746

39

450,214

40

724,804

41

488,39*$1

42

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

144

TABLE 3.—SUMMARY OF REVENUE RECEIPTS AND GOVERNMENTAL
[For a list of the cities arranged alphabetically by states, with the number
GROUP HI.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000 IN 1911—Continued.
BEYEXUE RECEIPTS.

From taxes.
City
num
ber.

crrr, AHD DIVISION OP CITY'S
GOVEBNVENT.

Total.

Special
General
property. property.

Poll.

From spe
cial assess* From From sub From
From
meats andj fines,
[donations I pension
from
forfeits, ventions
and
Non
and
assess
special
and
grants.
Business. business charges for] escheats.
gifts.
ments.
license. outlays.

(Table 6.) (Table 6.) (Table6.)| (Table 6.) (Table 6.)| (Table 0.) (TableG.) (Table 7.) (Table 7.) (Table 7.)
Dayton, Ohio.
it ion.

City_
School

Grand Rapids, Mich.
City corporation.
School district...
Spokane, Wash
City-.
School

oration,
strict...

59,342

50

1,915
7,352

244,205

1,520

6,894

8,4351
215,770

20
1,500

9,2S3 1,061,148

30,056

413,742

9,283 1,061,148

30,056

$12,577

$313,328

$6,114

235,414

12,577

313,32S

6,114

2,454,718

1,334,517

65,581

7,374

417,447

852,259
482,258

65,5811

7,374

417,447

3,860,779

1,437,110

233,077

3,093,048
767,731

1,092,525

233,077

54,131]

3,627

33,134

18,533

1,725,170
729,548

Lowell, Mass

2,048,212

Cambridge, Mass

3,208,276

Bridgeport, Conn....

1,715,786

New Bedford, Mass..

2,457,820!

San Antonio, Tex....

1,406,009

City corporation.
School district...

1,011,346
394,663
2,711,951
2,313,293
2,262,018]

Albany, N.Y.

$9,207

$235,414

911,348
581,260

1,952,700

City corporation.
" * Krt district...
School

$136

$1,492,608

1,764,110

Nashville, Tenn

Hartford, Conn.

$59,342

32,428,946

344,585|
1,054,951
1,329,743]
1,993,354
1,301,924
1,453,0521

4,054
4,054

413,742
358,017

2,0001

$161,024

$38,000

112,853

1,649

42,874

9,956j

4,587

1,096

215,807

37,7081

3,539

1,267

50,511

3,865

4,914

4,604

15,381

4,500

141,022

7,591

99,375

14,726

53,2761

327,435

43,437

89,089]

1,8781

46,161

5,040

16,067
121,044

876

121,044

755
121

1,149,795
879,975
269,820

13,184

37,595

10,353

10,240

14,645

13,184

37,695

10,353

10,240

14,645

1,643

1,680,913

361,797

13,577

71,595

4,4011

47,533

10,613

50,689

2,060

737

1,341,914
338,999
1,346,537

361,797

13,577

71,595

4,401

47,533

10,613

1,934
48,755

2,080

737

135,315

5,93CJ

155,241

1,803

43,451

$7,709

$279,893

88,377

7,257

GROUP IV^-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 50,000 TO 100,000 IN 1911.
Trenton, N. J.,

Sl,771,732j|

$790,535

$10,000]

$120,970

$7,221

Reading, Pa..,

1,300,486

769,533

34,000|

76,978]

5,008

62,0321

1,286]

547,733
221,800]

17,000
17,000i

76,9781

5,0031

62,032j

1,283

1,939]

3

79,699

53,196

107,680
265,670J

City corporation.
School district...

980,692
319,794'

$155,757

Dallas, Tex

2,088,874

1,317,4761

43,597]

1,190

265,521

Salt Lake City, Utah.

2,789,3271

1,402,633

12,248]

338,977

16,977

386,150

1,961,7651

853,341
549,292

12,248

338,977

16,977

386,1561

4,689
4,689

7,270

139,465

9,904

51,401

4,127

City corporation.
School district...

827,562|

Camden, N . J

1,431,335

Springfield, Mass

2,851,358]]

Lynn, Mass

2,067,079

Lawrence, Mass

1,564,706

Tacoma, Wash
Men.
Schoolc
Metropolitan Park Board.
Des Moines, Iowa.
City corporation.
" * ol district...
School

4,200,7461
3,310,494
781,164
109,068
2,122,811
707,30o
1,153,6361

Kansas City, Kans.

1,824,644

Yonkers,N.Y

,

Youngstown, Ohio.,
City corporation...

2,317,779
1,671,466]!

201,813

665

46,322

114,47a

2,500]

54,188

11,229]

4,448]

106,933

48,240|

6,477]

l,24o[

42,429]

9,663

3,775

957,399

163,263

18,41(H

134,0661

1,1791

53,178j

7,403

11,795

1,772)

133,053

6,170

1,160,319

14,619

379,995

3,1071

133,053

6,170

1,160,319

14,599
20

379,995

3,107

861,34?
386,1561
106,394
1,467,618

112,727

8,312]

480,664

19,546]

732,163

112,7271

8,312

480,664

19,646

831

1,127,252,

1,297,528
627,116]'

5,530|

265,670)

$198,053

734,391

City corporation.
School district...

5,530]

1,791,933

1,355,897

1,570,163
929,573

24,2291

24,229

1,142

1,143

947
195

1,143

1,413

7,6061

61,600]

8,302

33,825

4

12,387

274,743

13,803]

11,713

5,000]

12,387

274,743

13,893
11,713

20,339

115
3,009

58,032!

615,2801
511,972|

HH

7,603

1,360,938

675,455

Wilmington, Del..

$300

81,638]

1,872]

5,000

99,591

7,694

107,994

1,367

41,616]

165,305

9,286]

160,739

249

274,697

11,842

36,027]

2,8021

178

1,219.347
625,331
160,739
249
274,697
2,750
11,817
452,1191'
52!
404,2*21
36,0271
25l
* For explanation of differences in amounts reported in this column and total payments for outlays reported in Table 18, see text discussion for Table 18, page 90.




m

GENERAL TABLES.

145

COST PAYMENTS, BY DIVISIONS OF CITY GOVERNMENT: 19U--Continued.
assigned to each, see page 20. For a text discussion of this table, see page 50.)
GROUP I I L - C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000 I N 1911-ContInued.
XXVENUE AECETPTS—continued.

I From
From
learnings highway
of general priv
1 depart- ileges.
1 ments.

For expenses and Interest.

From
earnings
of public
service
enter
prises.

From
interest

From
rents.

Expenses Expenses
of general '■of public;
Interest.
depart
service
ments. enterprises.

Total.
Total.

(Table 8.) (Table 9.) (Table 9.) Table 9.) (TablelO.)
816,167

814,509

11,720

836,727

$201,037

82,466,727

14,509

1,720

24,811
11,916

201,037

1,872,904
593,823

88

37,493

252,263

3,005,476 1

1,622,331]

252,263

88

32,902
4,591

2,221,109
784,367

1,050,603 |
571,728

J

1

81,828,537
1,243,820 I
784,717

81,489,247

8117,623

8221,6671

8638,190]

923,552
565,695

117,623

202,645
19,022

629,084
9,106

1,368,981

94,486

158,8&i|

1,383,145

820,8G8
548,113

94,486

135,249
23,615

1,170,506
212,639

85,972

1,364

80,631
5,341

1,361

132,071

17,578

222

15,424

507,014

5,917,608 1

2,385,380

1,734,608

144,409

506,363

3,532,228

122,667
9,404

17,578

222

15,424

507,014

4,991,505
926,103

144,409

427,220
79,143

3,358,381
173,847

29,836

62,853

31,326

304,2S6i

2,306,489

47,615

6,467

61,903

230,545'

2,163,689

336,312

12,086

136,190

407,831

2,685,313

35,728

9,590

30,665

85

1,685,336

56,796

9,639

98,058

311,16S

3,274,823

32,950

1,057

1,831

12,439 J

1,419,456

S1III1I
'STiTI!!

|

For
outlays.*

30,672
2,278

1,057

12,439 |
|

1,052,571 1
366,885

693,486 1
315,235

51,281

23,236

431
1,400
53,622

339,874 J 2,969,785 1

43,333
7,951

23,236

50,660
2,953

339,874

9,155

1,763

86,672

379,832

238

Excess of 1
govern- |
mental
City
cost
payments 1 Govern Payments num
ber.
mental
for
over
expenses
revenue 1 cost
pay
and
receipts.
ments. Interest.

(Table 11.) (Table 15.) (Tablel7.) (Table 18.)

'""41,251
4,916
1

EXCESS Or BEVENUE
RECEIPTS OVEE—

GOVEBN1CENTAL COST PAYMENTS.

837,781]

8600,409

43

550,758

832,387

44

2,056,829

1,475,399

45

105,757

245,503

787,436

353,789

433,647

46

156,144

182,801

312,770

115,477

197,293

47

101,495

523,966

435,538

$522,963

958,501

48

1,881

82,698

358,711

30,450

389,161

49

106,488

317,529

1,337,924

817,003

520,921

50

14,393

141,566 |

410,735 J

13,447

397,288

51

548,133
304,629

14,393

130,960
10,606

359,085
51,650

2,038,589 1

1,663,975 J

104,793

269,821 J

931,196 J

673,362

52

2,401,632
568,153

1,559,344
479,245

1,263,221
400;754

104,793

191,330
78,491

2,276,120

1,771,158

1,392,109

163,657

215,392

842,288
88,908
504,962

490,860

53

[

257,834

|

14,102

GROUP I V . - C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 50,000 TO 100,000 I N 1911.
827,628
1

858,057

167,917

8240,835

82,026,174

31,435,900

81,0S0,240

892,343

3263,317

8590,274

7,602

17,990

244,519j

1,227,446]

924,134]

742,493

79,829

101,812]

303,312]

6,439
1,063

17,761
229

214,510

924,760
302,677

621,45?
302,677

456,420
2S6,073

79,829

85,208
16,6041

303,312

8254,442
873,040

8335,832

54

376,352]

85

23,823

9,531

8440

47,020

211,791

2,485,396

1,353,058

991,896

200,416

160,746

1,132,338

396,522

735,816

56

| _ 23,165

2,600

2,635

5,222

322,822|

3,140,985]

1,777,659]

1,353,752

127,811

296,096

1,363,326]

351,658]

1,011,668

57

1

21,317
1,848

2,600

2,638

322,822

2,072,532
1,068,453

1,077,184

707,436
646,316

127,811

241,937 !
54,159

5,222

700,475

995,348
367,978

1,054,752

76,082

208,525

208,142

116,166

91,976

58

1,820,556

240,193

245,358

1,067,107

521,856

545,251

59

1,165,980

188,322

235,9871

478,043

1,253

476,790

60

1 1,202,818

97,743

125,030

251,059

111,944

139,115

61

1,371,027

487,218

510,095

4,233,736 [ 2,401,330

1,832,406

62

852,910
473,571
44,546

487,21S

463,704
4,038,961
180,119
42,968
14,656
3,423 L
720,246

63

172,791

142,598

64

852,616

555,689

65

862,881

181,053

66

392,202

585,746

67

13,032

27,067

831

35,037

254,518

1,547,501

88,721

13,702

1,065

57,272

467,332

3,373,214

81,552

6,227

237

55,836

338,523

2,068,332

37,934

3,029

11,874

163,404

1,676,650

13,612

27,206

2,360

65,000

1,037,570

6,602,076

7,949
5,203
460

26,972

2,360

58,317
6,6S3

1,037,570 i

5,842,793
696,65s
62,625

2,368,340
1,803,832
516,539
47,969

|_

14,788

15,267

898

21,246

15,231

2,5(56,220

1,402,565

1,277,583

24,734

100,248 |

1,163,655 J

f

11,952
2,836

15,267

824
74

16,730
4,516

15,331

1,565,324
1,000,896

718,756
683,809

637,935
639,648

24,734

56,087
44,161

846,568
317,087

100

6,588

245,291

1,326,427

1,011,038

771,143

90,054

149,841

315,389

262,572

2,677,260 |

1,268,955 J

809,843

109,054

350,058 1

1,408,305

854,345
414,610

437,286
372,557

109,054 I
I

308,005
42,053

1,352,024
56,281

2,136,726

1,630,204

173,642

332,880

1,043,934

J

234

18,600

33,314

L _ 13,706

25,797

819

I

H»444
2,262

25,797

819

17,561
1,169

262,572

2,206,369
470,891

10,815

15,247

380

25,896

242,086

3,180,660

18,730

1,339,359
2,306,107
1,590,289
1,425,591

[

39,167

6,450

198

32,626

176,918 J

2,063,668 1

1,085,720 |

887,194

85,069

113,437 |

977,948 |

1

38/840
527

6,450

198

21,380
11,2*6

176,918

1,337,586
726,082 1

732,802
352,91811

549,239
337,955

85,089
1

98,474
14,963 I

604,784
373,164

6127°—13




10

1

443,409

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

146

TABLE 3.—SIJMMARY OF REVENUE RECEIPTS AND GOVERNMENTAL
[For a list of the cities arranged alphabetically b y states, w i t h the number
G R O U P IV.—CITIES H A V I N G A P O P U L A T I O N O F 50,000 T.O 100,000 I N 1911—Continued.

R E V E N U E RECEITT3.

From taxes.
City
num
ber.

CITY, A N D DIVISION OF CITY'S
GOVERNMENT.

Total.

General
property.

Special
property.

(Table G.)

(Table 6.) (Table 6.)| (Table 6.) (TableG.)] (Table 6.) (Table 6.) ( T a b l e ? . ) (Table7.) (Table7.)

$1,064,209.

Houston, T e x . .

81,551,799

69

Norfolk, V a . . . .

1,523,691

864,723

70

D u l u t h , Minn..

2,512,275

1,306,412

1,818,871
693,404

694,291
612,121

City corporation.
School d i s t r i c t . . .

From spe
cial assess From
From sub From , From
ments and] fines,
ventions donations] pension
from
forfeits,
and
and
assess
Non
and
special
gifts.
grants.
ments.
business chargesfor| escheats.
license.
outlays.

Poll.

Business.

$10,597

$31,690

2,230

319,985

15,090,
3,122,

$115,796

$350

2,4S2

42,155

2,22ol

$314,9361

23,666]

67,704

1,469

6,277|.

202,861

818,212

$17,793,'

$5,002

15,3S1

314,9361

22,666]
1,000)

67,704

31,0001

6,281

637,« 65

18,717

S8,057

285
15,000]

Forth Worth, T e x .

2,079,735

985,580

72

Somerviile, M a s s . . .

1,760,364

1,147,662

2,024

1,023

2,336]

3,950

73

S t Joseph, Mo

1,530,022

900,766],

148,570

9,678

337,956

13,10?

83,937

1,048,443

507,937
392,829

143,5701

9,678]

337,956

13,102

City corporation.
School d i s t r i c t . . .

57,422|

83,937

481,579
74

Utica,N.Y..

75

Troy,N.Y..

38,081

Elizabeth, N. J

1,182,771

Schenectady, N . Y .
Waterbury, Conn

.»..

City corporation.
School district...
Akron, Ohio.
City corporation.
School district...
Oklahoma Cty, Okla..
City corporation.
" '
district...
School

84

148,420

3,351

33,570

322

3,053

3,8661

38,41*

2S5

35,352

625

6,735

1,078,323
56,891
31,132

26,69fl
102
6,866]

103,517

3,866]

33,419

202

26,514
8,838

625

6,735

835,060
25,593

Fort Wayne, Ind.
City corporation.
School district...
Harrisburg, Pa...
City corporation.
School
**-"" "district...

105,327]

2,845|

209,8001

3,7»|

301,779

3,679|

35,377

1,373

61,221

9,756]

44,546

11,515

4,3SS|

61,221

9,756!

44,546

11,515
88

11,518]

21,585

91,475

11,5181

21,585

91,475

856,245

90,004

8,423

135,557

10,644

31,544

90,004

8,423

135,557

10,419
225

31,514
24,887

804
3,006]

498

18,967

9,907

494,285

53,363]

18,967

9,907

494,235

53,363]

32,790)

150,519

6,191

1,133

1,112]

854,321

719

125,290

4,622]

8,637

2,055

252,576

150

1,241,082

646,494

7,547

122,651

13,281

132,059

i,r«8

112,791

237

1,501

914,221
326,861

445.063
201,431|

5,031
2,5161

122,651

13,281

132,059

1,778;

237

1,501

877,569

619,443

37,216

.9,661

5,988

61,864

4,204

50,884

1,751

544,238
333,331

362,825
256,618]

18,608
18,608

79,661

6,988

61,864

4,204

3,703 !
47,181'

1,751

1,170,268

565,673

10,5061

60,200]

3,551

168,352

3,095

56,969

352,733
212,940!

60,200]

3,551

168,352

10,5061

3,095

1,557
55,412

199,939

10,269

192,838

11,843

0,429

199,939

10,269

192,838

11,843

1,419,506!

621,674

Evansvflle, Ind...

City corporation
School district
Pleasure, driveway, and park dis
trict.

2,343]

109,532

474,854
381,391

1,510,485

Peoria, III..

146,7961

746,976
421,556

Hoboken, N. J...,

City corporation.
School district...

19,713.

1,168,532

647,792

Wflkes-Barre, Pa.

83
10,0001

627,731
1,032,422

261,394

85 Erie, Pa,

1

3,132

1,133,315]

City corporation.,
"■" ol district...
School

87

106,039

Manchester, N. H,

tion.

8161

103,517

1,131,571
287,935

City
School

816]

61,330]

1,709,7501
1,363,194
1,337.601
25,593

m
209

33,965

867,210|
1,627,909
1,521,388
68,440

2,044

1,166,346

1,266,964
City corporation
Lansingburgh school district.
County supervisors' fund

2,044

l,46tH

197,771
5,093

71

79,165

«,W4

284,880

24,8S7|
47,697

1,289,271

3,046

112,791

6,150

3,365]

1,431

3,018

1,431

776,463
427,780
85,023

315,584
390,231
83,06}

1,284,096

583,259

27,478

59,911

2,521

263,915

2,767

949,562
334,534

358,235
225,024

19,984
7,494

59,911

2,521

263,915

2,767

1,131,355

691.814

5,432

47,258

1,963

93,835

2,939

53.925

250

787,067
344,288

412,625
279,189

47,258

1,963

98,835

2,939

1,802
52,123

250

157,523

15

9,429
"""350
91,170]
91,170

5,432

Savannah, Ga,

1,297,418

631,914

180,897

2,067

100,983;

25,127

City
School

1,139,855
157,563)

631,914

180,897

2,067

100,983

25,127].

250]

1,302

250

1,302

15
157,5231.
For explanation of differences i n amounts reported i n this column and total payments for outlays reported in Table 18, see text discussion for Table 18, page 90.




GENERAL TABLES.

147

COST PAYMENTS, BY DIVISIONS OF CITY GOVERNMENT: 1911—Continued,
assigned to each, see page 20. For a text discussion of this table, see page 60.)
GROUP IV.-CITIE8 HAVING A POPULATION OF 60,000 TO 100,000 IN 1911-Continued.
1

EEVENUE RECEIPTS—continued.

I From
From
learnings highway
[of general priv
depart ileges.
ments.

From
rents.

From
! interest.

For expenses and interest.

From
earnings
ofpabuc
service 1
enter
prises.

$ S!-

35,374

12,115

Total.

(Table 11.) (Table 15.) (Table 17.) (Table 18.)

*4,848

6236,516

82,307,065

81,290,677

1913,148

884,900

1292,629

81,016,388

$755,266

8261,122

68

41,849

188,031

2,336,496

1,375,051

923,710

100,569

350,772

961,445

812,805

148,640

69

1,086,911

301,275

304,117] 1

936,103]

116,13l|

819,972

70

665,489
421,422

301,275

248.317

633,439
302,664

711,164

312,854

1,244,942

60,087

892,579

3,460

512,175
380,404

3,460

935

7,658

629,553 J 2,623,406^ 1 1,602,303

20,076
1,365

935

6,*03
955

529,553

1,848,520
779,886,

1

31,215

779

45,159

234,897

2,986,656

159,471

10,022

3,974

238,417

1,722,586

1

12,564

625

309

16,285

5,205, |

1

10,074
2,490

625

309

13,962
2,323

5,205

17,335

21,528

1,674

1,518,151

12,600

13,878

212,321

1,701,835

12,007
593

I2,1G2
1,716

212,321

i,52S,23d
120,811
62,794]

1

1,476,433

piMT

I

1

Excess of
govern
mental
City
cost
paymentsl Govern-1 Payments num
For
ber.
mental
for
over
outlays.* 1
expenses
cost
revenue
and
pay
receipts.
ments. interest.

1

Expenses Expenses
of general of public
Interest
depart
service
ments. enterprises.

Total.

(Tables.) (Table 9.) (Table 9.) Table 9.) (Table 10.)
114,435

EXCESS OF SEVEN UE
BEGEtPTS OVER—

GOVERNMENTAL COST PAYMENTS.

983,885 |
492,54fl

|
|

!

566,90l|
435,67S
1,051,033
1,389,977]
1^271,740 !
66,443
62,794

55,800

I

1,749,085

213,553
200,895
106,640
51,266
93,558

1,116,151

72,368

1,004,134
59,223
52,794

72,368

201,458
195,238
6,220

842,164

71

837,778

254,440

72

473,854]

53,589

527,443]

73

416,984
56,870

55,274

957,475

467,118

251,187

215,931

74

311,858]

73,926

237,932|

75

256,490
55,368

22,855

34,591

50

18,412

1,217

1,162,811

831,174

695,709

862

134,603

331,637

9,582

3,503

366

30,991

154,628!

1,769,895

1,183,916

926,217

69,710

187,989

575,979

12,601

90

29,894

203,952

1,759,769 J 1,063,132 1

923,708

32,133

107,291 j

696,637 j

12,601

90

29,894

203,952

1.689,846
69,923

1,015,209 1
47,923

882,547
41,161

32,133

100,529
6,762

674,637
22,000

3S9

25,043

3,951

1,618,152 J

866,936

768,550

2,893

95,493 j

751,216 1

1.645
4,501

389

21,148
3,895

3,951

1,135,020 1 ~570,a)6j
483,132
296,130

491,795
276,755

2,893

76,118
19,375

564,214
1871002

4,038,033 J 1,301,945]

64,314

4,478

1,294

126,335

63,270
1,044

4,478

684
610

126,335

mi

1 Mtf
1

12,549

30,491

184,804

28,450

65

7,629

217,895

| _ 12,299

15,188

198

10,948

164,110

15,188

198

7,202
3,746

164,110 |

11,480

1,058

1,049,908

3,758
7,722

1^058

679,997
469,911

JJL

0,141
8,077

1

2,569
1,451

J

871,53^
345,392

449,620

301,596

79

117,561

80

346,833 |

2,736,088 1 2,618,527

293,783
53,050

2,156,678
579,410

841,165

706,244

64,582

70,339

274,710

17,440

292,150

61

1,290,497

967,384

214,655

108,458

209,021

10,967

219,988

82

756,968]

601,871

63,138

91,959 |

459,962

24,152

484,114

83

480,372
276,696

328,509
273,362

63,138

88,725
3,234

891,166
68,796

677,026

601,079

2,395

73,552 1

372,882

172,339

200,543

84

391,140
285,886

345,998
255,081

2,395

42,747
30,805

188,857
184,025
78,105

468,888

85

172,052

307,841

86

8,505

496,580

87

178,553

284,925

88

313,991

89

27,115

250,S68j

1,248,373

701,380

568,912

82,188

50,280 1

546,993 j

50

23,002
4,113

250,868

846,534
401,839

435,251
266,129

319,443
249,469

82,188

33,620
16,660

411,283
135,710

| _ 60,481

2,762

3,560

10,571

3,898

1,461,323 J

981,430 1

922,660

5,176

53,594 j

479,893 j

1

28,338'
20,907
1,236

2,762

3,898

942,729
452,047
66,647

569,044
353,956
58,430

519,357 1
352,572
50,731

5,176

3,560

6,548
3,653
370

44,511
1,384
7,699

373,685
98,091
8,117

9,625

3,143

100

16,446

222,209

1,292,601 |

787,516 |

599,603

145,332

42,581 j

505,085 j

2,431
7,194

3,143

222,209

903,298
389,303

607,308
280,208

338,963 1
260,640

145,332

23,013
19,568

395,990
109,095

1,803

18,992

23,791

184,353

1,309,908 1

882
921

18,992

17,168
6,623

184,353

717,645
592,263

665,271

67,000 [

114,159 |

463,478 j

496^379
350,051

354* 627
310,644

67,000

74,752
39,407

221,266
242,212

$46,430 J

|_

16,465

9,631

6,312

166,484 J 1,236,652

983,427 j

762,637

87,140 ]

133,650

253,225

1

16,425
40

9,631

6,312

160,484 1 1,082,288
1
154,364 1

835,298
148,129

617,O60|

87,14o!

131,098

246,990
2,635




78

66,987

50

12,794
3,652

300,062

66,987

10,374

100

77

396,575

521,376
366,749

10,374

[_

76

525,834

19,960

888,125

1

|

351,597

50,145

882,14ti
419,799

|_ 13,615j
llp606l
1,909

906,921

216,662

1

j

j

60,766 j

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

148

TABLE 3.—SUMMARY OF REVENUE RECEIPTS AND GOVERNMENTAL
[For a list of the cities arranged alphabetically by states, with the number
GROUP IV.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 50,000 TO 100,000 IN 1911-Cantinued.
EIVENUE BECEOTS.

From taxes.
City
num
ber.

CITY, AND DIVISION OP CUT'S
GOVERNMENT.
. Total.

$1,589,915

90

J

1,458,695
131,220

91
School d i s t r i c t . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Park district

92

1

From spe
cial assess From
From sub From
From 1
ments and fines,
ventions donations pension 1
forfeits,
from
and
and
assess|
Non
and
special
gifts.
ments. 1
business charges for escheats, 1 grants.
license.
outlays.

General
property.

Special
property.

(Table 6.)

(Table 6.) (Table 6.) (Table 6.) (Table 6.) (Table 6.) (Table6.) (Table 7.) (Table 7.) (Table7.)

Poll.

Business.

$488,050

$144,553

$8,661

$65,370

$35,432;

488,050

144,553

8,661

65,370

35,4S2

951,854 [

512,173

201,549

13,324

203,281

1,665

639,501
288,755
23,598

206,460
282,115
23,598

201,549

13,324

203,281

1,665

830,613

458,032

79,543

7,625

3,702

2,006

2,237

79,543

6,823
802

3,702

2,00$

$2,237

368,932
90,000

496,602
334,011

$131,137

$10
10

131,137
5,523
6,523
234,412

23

234, « 2

1

93

1,640,680

757,618

15,901

75,313

679

12,909

4,232

1,336

1,812

94

1,761,983

974,750

23,545

53,090

6S7

46,246

2,675

150,510

7,449

1,365,501
24,383
372,099

952,062
22,688

23,545

53,090

687

46,246

2,675

150,510

7,449

898,176

519,651

5,205

88,616

14,680

100,040

1,699

596,553
301,623

307,112
212,539

2,644
2,561

66,116
22,500

14,680

100,940

1,699

Water district

95
City c o r p o r a t i o n . . . . . .

96
City corporation...
School district

97 Brockton, Mass
98

PftflSftifl, N . J . r -

99 Bayonne, N . J
100 J o h n s t o w n , P * » . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

* ....

City corporation
School district

102 Covington, K y

62,105

2,652

1,098|

2,652

1,099

62,105

534,648

120,689

1,831

48,146

163,198

11,058

2,324|

837,993
131,092

486,196
48,452

120,689

1,831

45,146

92,235
70,913

331
10,727

2,324]

1,423,072

852,387

575,430

293,369

1,262,750

546,269

1

329,864
251,388

101

1,6021

969,085

581,252

City corporation
- School district

$118,020

$1,502]

91,494

32,556

2,522

799

62,109

11,037

4,587

75,000

1,100

65,424

5,024

24,941

4,757

138,623

1,492

322

54,200

9,219

132,447

2,139

213,793

699

595]

407,777

13,247

63,337

11,402

18,803

34,89$

205,049
202,728

6,624
6,623

63,337

11,402

18,664
139

1,453
33,445
11,125

1,497,637 |

686,975

15,018

10,683

735,205

9,323

1,272,737
224,900

477,285
209,690

15,018

10VCS3

735,205

9,328

797,157

460,623

61,226

6,423

24,842

1,116

85,257

395,025

22,000

42,191

1,503

63,889

2,117

39,670

453,043
224,603

224,638
170,387

11,000
11,000

42,191

1,503

63,889

2,117

1,355
38,315

104 Pawtucket, R . I

1,189,991

698,570

4,629

55,023

2,933

19,913

4,389

11,12$

2,320]

105

1,147,586 |

700,048

129,922

4,171

131,249

8,801

8,794

780|

705,141 [
354,520
87,925

270,737
343,684
85,627

129,922

4,171

131,249

8,804

103

677,646
City corporation

School district
Pleasure, driveway, and park dis
trict.

106

:

107

1

108

109
School district

1

11,125

7801
8,794

789,622 J

448,842

37,167

4,847

103,625

6,835

42,325

546,503
243,119

249,231
199,611

37,167

4,847

108,625

5,835

1,429
40,896
100,146

350

842,668

231,372

151,079

4,515

93,380

16,609 1

742,062
100,606

281,372

151,079

4,515

93,380

16,609
100,146

350

839,579 J

506,463

76,863

2,080

108,349

1,663

27,284

77

576,732
262,847

275,052
231,411

76,863

2,080

103,349

1.563
100

27,284

1,073,696 J

577,410

44,192

1,561

164,363

,1,927

122,080

1,000

762,056
311,640

389,518
187,892

44,192

1,561

164,363

1,927

8,962
113,118

1,000

77

1 For explanation of differences in amounts reported In this column and total payments for outlays reported In Table 18, see text discussion for Table 18, page 90.




GENERAL TABLES.

149

COST PAYMENTS, BY DIVISIONS OP CITY GOVERNMENT: 1911—Continued,
assigned to each, see page 20. For a text discussion of this table, see page 60.)
GROUP IV.-C1T1ES HAVING A POPULATION OP 50,000 TO 100,000 IN 1911-Continned.
I

REVENUE EECEIPTS—continued.

Prom
From
earnings highway
of general privdepart- lieges.
I menta.

From
rents.

From
Interest.

For expenses and Interest.

From
earnings
of public
service
enter
prises.

$23,866 |

120,721

113,058

3659,027

23,783
83

20,791

13,038

659,027

Total

$1,599,001 J $1,077,907 1
1,443,272
155,729

6,763

7,500

76 1 1,742,639 J

\

5,«6
1,117

7,500

76

1

1

J

677
677

22,855

5,289

45,385

1,375

824

10,456

24 1

7,075*
3,381

20,098 |

774,911 |

20.098

446,936
€27,975

3708,699

$270,816

$98,392

$521,094|

606,192
102,507

270,816

95,260
3,132

47VJ04
50,090

743,83S J

633,573

536

109,729 1

998,801

492,109
238,094
13,635

7oi,8ii J
219,511
12,251

536

89,762
18,583
1,384

914,449
4,760;
79,592

683,413 1

639,601 |

12,950

30,862 1

91,498

416,739 i
266,674

382,727 1
256,874

12,950

21,062
9,800

30,197
61,301

$9,086

$512,008

90

790,785

208,016
--~"*~^~—"!

91

147,200

92

$55,702)

50,152

£65.564

1,687,245

1,280,093

804,397

334,591

141,102

407,152

46,565

360,587

93

9,339

56,407,

385,525 [

2,561,242

1,376,872 J

941,658

109,971

325,243

1,184,370]

799,259]

385,111

94

9,339

38,784)
118'

30,931
3&4.504

1,098,682
14,983
263,207

936,369
2,050
3,239

38,254

17,505

1,534,341
15,S49
1,011,052

124,059
12*933
188,251

435,659
866
747,845
99,555

306,045

;

45,183
202

1,375

2,427

500

4,613

93,990 J

997,731

592,131; J

506,379 ;

50,735

35,017 J

405,600]

2,070
357

500

3,052
1,561

93,990

578,358
419,373

356,588
235,543

280,732 ;
225,647

50,735

25,121
9,896

221,770
183,830

16,658

14,086

35,477

20,970 J 1,204,608

863,560 |

689,683

5,630

168,247 J

341,138 J

16,658

14,086

34,477
1,000

20,970

1,074,362
130,336

764,362
99,198

590,485
99,198

6,630

168,247

310,000
31,138

29,008

134,395

1,477,208

1,006,871

815,159

49,816

141,896

907,627

578,348

514,992

63,356

1,703,034

1,033,469

669,565

440,284

229,281

99

96,085

101,824

100

945,784

679,011

101

117,532

9,646

11,698

20,493

«

3,233

71,*17

166,534

470,337

54,136

416,201

97

329,279

332,197

* 2,918

98

16,757

23,060

684,458

182,477

1,000

16,602

576 1

677,337]

479,428 |

443,657

688

35,083 J •

197,909, J

1,000

13,244
3,358

576

431,080 I
246,257

268,679; .
210,749

247,191
196,466

688

20,800
14,283

162,401
35,508!

7,200

7,197]

2,443,421]

818,626 J

610,455

1,697

206,474 |

1,624,795 |

4,565
2,635

7^197

2,043,068
400,353 I

616,939
201,687

428,198
182,257

1,697

187,044
19,430

1,426,129
198,666

142,698

789,425 1

694,707

534,166

44,850

115,691

3,186

6,001

102,061

678,581

481,691 |

388,712

48,488

44,491 1

196,890 |

2,216
970

2,073
3,931

102,061

3957836

2S5,9I4
195,777

217,838
170,874

48,488

19,588
24,903

109,922
86,968

1,018,706

237,651

296,914

13,456
1,450

I
1

6,397

9,300

275

1

26,731

24,737

61,846

287,772,

1

8,958

9,162

2,400

143,298

1

4,618

9,162

2,400

1

2,298

282,745
1,315,620

!
842,683
143,298 i " 508,648
266,404
67,631 :

710,394

70,661

6S5,194 J

568,568

54,743

61,883 J

157,489

390T611j
236,130
58,453

2S1.620
235,745
51,203

54,743

54,248
385
7,250

118,037
30,274
9jl78

8,751

17,955

115,276|

793,123

558,259 J

420,349

29,504

108,406 J

234,864 J

17,955

115,275 !

481,283
311,840 1

317,6S2
240,577

205,032
215,317

29,504

83,146 1
25,260

163,601
71,263

166,076

970,547

712,429 J

445,212 |

66,896

200,321 J

258,118 J

66,896

197,971
2,350

215,601
42,517

18,813

1

18,703
no
<,370

8,398
8,398

1,409
2,961

1,931
1,931

166,075

819,442 I
151,105

f

14,419

98,011

998,229

594,392 J

451,449

44,794

98,149 J

403,837 J

98,011

773,641
224,588

377,811
216,5S1

25M64
196,9S5

44,794

78,553
19,596

395,830
8,007

760,175 [

600,058

60,106

100,011 J

173,395

505,978
254,197

348,546
251,512

€0,106

97,306
2,685

162,397
10,998

2,303

15,729

119,962

933,570

15,943
7,226

2,3031

12,325
3,404

119,962

668,375
265,195




338,974
106,238

13,328
1,091

|_ 23,169]

^nT" 1

603,841
108,588

;

s Excess of payments for expenses and interest over revenue receipts.

102,450

102

195,955

103

171,285

104

462,392

m

3,501

231,363

106

127,879

130,239

107

158,650

245,187

108

313,521

109

7,732

94,718

6,139
2,612
1

96

105,525

5,589

257,983

95

>
235,613

13,610

1

1

1,406,558
242,854
93,227

972,268
105,639

is

1

9,374
3,958
5,416

For
outlays.*

Excess of
govern
mental
City
cost
payments] Govern Payments num
ber.
mental
for
over
cost
expenses
revenue
pay
and
receipts.
ments. I Interest. 1

(Table 11.) (Table 15.) (Table 17.) (Table 18.)

J

1

Expenses Expenses
of general of public
Interest.
depart
service
ments. enterprises.

Total.

(Table 8.) (Tabled) (Table 9.) Table 9.) (Table 10.)
|

EXCESS OF REVENUE 1
BECEIPTS OVEB—

GOVERNMENTAL COST PAYMENTS.

935

125,629
J 304,903

J 140,126

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

150

TABLE 3 . - S U M M A R Y OP R E V E N U E RECEIPTS A N D GOVERNMENTAL

[For a list of the cities arranged alphabetically by states, with the number
G R O U P V . - C I T I E S H A V I N G A P O P U L A T I O N O F 30,000 T O 50,000 I N 1911.

REVENUE RECEIPTS.

From taxes.
City
num
ber.

CITY, A N D DIVISION o r

crrr's

GOVERNMENT.
Total.

111

112

Atlantic* fHHr N J

$1,993

$40,770

$1,100

$24,140

49,497

3,387

31,702

5,933

21,728

574,958
284,730

356,091
262,325

49,497

3,387

31,702

5,933

220,391

13,783

575,001
i

1

1

City c o r p o r a t i o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
School d i s t r i c t . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

118 Pueblo, Colo

|

School district

119
120 B a y City, Mich

121

122 Maiden, M a s s . . . . . . . .

198,921

4,032

6,579

218,151
250,732
57,124

63,750

60,334

4,032

314,176

1,181
1,181

34,511

* 1,919

9,525

1,177

43,112

34,511

1,910

9,525

1,177

1,875
41,237
25,177

633

100

868]

100

8681

136

1.685)

136

83
1>602

3,046

5,148

56,062

5,342

3,046

5,148

56,062

5,342

739,994 |

361,912

96,616

17,712

125,966

40,102

430,589
309,405

126,262
235,650

85,956
10,660

17,712 ^ 1 2 5 ^ 6 6

40,102

736,911

108,753

3,695

330,381

7,055

120,232

558,366
178,545

103,753

3,695

KM81

7,055

8,857
111,375

1,025,488 J

542,846

116,197

793

63,008

7,158

46,787

784,355
241,133

350,125
192,721

116,197

793

68,008

7,15S

46,787

279

704,195

429,064

50,821

55,343

11,736

103,602

2,810

434,816

33,352

845

72,547

2S2

109,699

315,432
119,384

33,352

845

72,547

282

2,672
107,027

28,085

2,626

70,356

54,184

40,315

26,085

2,626 ~

70^356 ~54,184

997
39,318

787,919
1

9,292

60,334

$633)

650

707,561

1,229,762
296,590

City Corporation ••
...........
School district. . * . . . . . .

79,174

63,750

S184

$650

415,867
291,694

1 1,526,352 J

117

21 728

529,007

189,223
124,953

639,023
324,383

116

$17,471

1,042,406

1

404,985
170,016
963,406

115

(Table 6.) (Table6.) (Table 6.) (Table 6.) (Table 6.) (Table 6.) (Table 7.) (Table?.) (Table7.)
341,176

446,269
263,170
58,638

Park Hf utriet

(Table 6.)

Poll.

618,416

768,077

114

Special
property.

3505,667

1,938,803

113

General
property.

859,688 |

3790,456

110

From spe
cial assess From
sub From
From
ments and fines, From
ventions donations pension
forfeits,
from
and
and
assess- 1
Non
and
special
gifts.
ments. 1
Business. business charges for escheats. grants.
license. outlays.

1

556,705
231,214
705,302 [

480,588

382,223
323,079

208,083
272,505

6,810
6,810

25,177
62,092

2,292
2,292

62,092

279

1,014,377

638,284

99,818

23,340

592

478

43,751

1,665

2,721

1,000

123 NW> B n t a i n , Conn

815,559

538,054

9,374

2,257

27,095

1,837

28,947

8,506

25,616

2,973

124 Haverhill^ Mass

946,998

566,345

57,791

23,198

58,321

1,169

25,808

4,774

3,833

18

125 Salem, Mass..

780,160!

492,258

63,432

22,000

992

2,777

6,399

4,300

2,027

10,567

126

908,686

573,358

8,020

55,692

2,071

94,344

3,301

25,370

572,470
336,216

315,222
258,136

8,020

2,749
52,943

2,071

94,244

1,680
1,621

7,931
17,439

046,599 J

477,166

11,805

4,608

241,024

2,127

176,001

564,235
382,364

277,531
199,635

11,805

4^608

241,024

2/127

973,570

676,469

58,422

4,877

181,042

3,694

697,893
275,677

425,198
251,271

School district

127

128
School district

129

••

176,001
58,422

4,877

181,042

634,293

School district

683,084
346,343

305,362
328,931

730,207

500,037

36,719

1,138

16,295

School district

441,422
288,783

260,360
239,677

36,719

1,138

16,295

131

3,694

142

947

142

947

18,835

1,034,427

130

18,835

*

16,958

5,580

203,727

4,284

16,958

5,580

203,727

4,284

12,545

610
510

12,545
11,300
11,300

37,211
1,073
36,138

51
26
25

596,778]
331,365
3,136
943
33,880
67,607
53,019
4,583
City corporation
442,754
235,797
3,136
33,880
943
67,607
4,583
School district
1
154,0241
95,568!
1
53,6i6
I F or explanation of differences i n amonnlts reported uithlscolumi A and total payments for outlays reported 1n Table 18,
s e t t e x t d iscussionfo r Table 18, p a g e 90.




1

GENERAL TABLES.

151

COST PAYMENTS, BY DIVISIONS OP CITY GOVERNMENT: 1911—Continued,
assigned to each, see page 20.

For a text discussion of this table, see page 50.)
GROUP V.-CITIB8 HAVING A POPULATION OF 30,000 TO 50,000 IN 1911.]
■

1

REVENUE BECEIPTS—continued.

1 From
earnings From
Of general highway
priv
I departileges.
1 ments.

From
rents.

•

From
earnings
From
of public
interest.
service
enterI prises.

For expenses and interest.

Total.
TotaL

Expenses Expenses
I of general of public
Interest.
depart
service
ments. enterprises.

(Table 8.) (Table 9.) (Table 9.) (Table 9.) (Table 10.)

|

1
J
I

1

J

1

J

1

EXCESS 07 BE VENUE
RECEIPTS OVER—

GOVEBNMENTAL COST PAYMENTS.

For
outlays.!

(Table 11.) (Table 15.) (Tablel7.) (Table 18.)

811,984

813,049

8251

$576,823

$485,798

$57,669

$33,35d

$174,062

5,215

15,137

£2

1,634

105,674]

892,948 |

621,991

496,943

40,677

84,371]

270,957]

4,55d
665

15,137

70
12

1,634

105,674

593,339
299,609

366,512
255,479

258,475
238,468

40,677

67,360 I ~226,827
44,130
17,011

29,730
11,564

29,411

240

84,610

230,761

2,513,913

1,538,855!

13,576

103

70S

80,366

1,014,165 1

4,878

13,576

103

111j

80,366

541,877
356,481
115,807

827

Excess of
govern*
mental 1
City
cost
payments j Govern Payments num*
ber.
mental
for
over
cost
expenses
revenue
pay
and
receipts.
ments. interest.

$12,673 I $120,182

$750,885

687

$39,571

$213,633

110

$33,260]

237,697]

111

1,143,032

87,262

308,561

975,058

575,110

399,948

112

604,993 [

506,026

55,862

43,105

409,172

246,088]

163,084

113

333,864
246,028
25,101

253,5S0
235,482
16,964

55,862

24,422
10,546
8,137

208,013
110,453
90,706
19,724]

07,341

114

374,712^

115

308,829

116

107,825

582,205

ui

85,710

177,174

218

17,041

119

161,393

228,287

120

99,684

348,271

121

2,727

3,000

16,054

147,619

594,725 [

507,660 j

364,262

92,100

51,298

87,065]

1,725
1,002

3,000

14,411
1,643

147,619

410,535
184,190

338,470
169,190

212,341
151,921

92,100

34,029] |
17,269 (

72,065
15,000]

26,082

5,204

26,072

101,891

917,679

588,694

477,354

30,172

81,168]

328,985]

22,981
3,101

5,204

23,263
2,809

101,891

624,484
293,195

388,157 1
200,537

288,169
189,185

30,172

69,816
11,352

236,32fl
92,659

15,934

7,575

4,854

4,939

748,607

431,165'

391,571

6,786

32,808]

317,442]

14,931
1,003

7,575

4,854

4,939

507,821
240,786

270,538 j
160,627

242,195
149,376

6,786

21,557 >
11,251

237,283
80,159

39,407

459

2,400

177,059

1,418,527

944,147

835,625

67,534

40,988

474,380

32,737
6,670

459

2,400

177,059

1,115,243
303,284

655,220*
288,927

546,698
288,927

67,534

40,988

460,023
14,357

8,548

11,000

2,052

221,820]

939,778 j

848,314

547,530

134,871

165,913 1

91,464

* 7,202
1,346

11,000

2,052

221,820

718,464
221,314

634,796
213,518

344,792
202,738

134,871

155,133
10,780

83,668^
7,796

32,919

3,281

45,727

8,613]

j

11,665

2,309

956,239

687,154

545,290

2,708

139,156

269,085

3,418

7,960

125,000J

626,526

559,632

409,207

82,681

67,744

66,894

1 1,523

5,052
2,908

125,000

434,375
192,151

367,949 '
191,683

222,460
186,747

82,681

62,80^
4,936

66,426
468

10,890

284]

605,618 j

357,031]

319,846

150

37,035 j

248,587

7,980
2,910

284

399,841
205,777i

186,168
170,863,

163,488
156,358

150

22,530
14,505

213,673
34,914

41,119

108,408]

953,877

865,516

679,099

34,943

151,474

88,361

148,861

123

9,976

131,332]

1,017,031

576,786

428,845

32,123

115,818

440,245

201,472

238,773

123

L

645

1,895

|

2,812

10,352

1,276
1,536

10,352

47,870

7,331

28,672

920

252,044

60,500

39,993

11,427

40,721

113,600]

1,004,367

738,875

602,605

32,682

103,588

265,492

57,369

208,123

124

37,262

3,419

14,154

120,573

804,592

666,671

558,222

55,295

53,154

137,921

24,432

113,489

125

1

12,928

10,915

12r703

110,084]

801,880

564,063

430,476

52,455

81,132

237,817

344,623

120

1

6,939
5,989

10,915

318,937
245,126:

196,799
233,677

52,455

69,683
11,449

237,774
43

1

13,541

13,823

j

289,505

127

1

0»857
3,684

13,823

1

20,554

1,787

j

60,911 1

345,353

128

15,705
4,849

1,787

18,599

162

j

76,159 j

371,916

129

j

45,939

122,055

130

1

1

556,711
245,169

12,615
8S
1,417

11070S4
2,043

968,444 |

657,094

608,888

3,493

44,713 j

311,350 j

1,417

2,043

585,827
382,617

298,941 1
358,153

279,327
329,561

3,493

16,121
28,592

2S6,8S6
24,464

318

5,348

1,135]

912,659 j

628,217

600,079

980

27,158 j

284,442

318

4,626
722

1,135

643,727
268,932

377,077
251,140

361,873
238,206

980

14,224
12,934

266,650
17,792

9,856

127,913]

958,268 j

662,511 j

508,143 i

3,044
3,044

107,154 1

295,757

47,214

84,05S
23,096

239,821
55,936

47,214

14,073
4,526

162

9,515
341

127,913

640,272
317,996;

400,451
262,060

11,408

655

10,316

105,077]

684,268 j

608,149 j

269,179
238,964
444,871

95,786

67,492 j

76,119

3,438
7,970

655

105,077

448,072
236,196

377,116
231,033

233,298
211,573

95,786

48,032
19,460

70,956
5,163

67,906|

842,532 1

359,003 1

302,720

26,756

29,527 j

483,529 j

67,906

610,026
232,5061)

212,715
146,28811

183,462
139,258

26,756
1

22,497
7,030 i

397,311
86,218

[_

29,053

5,341
4,975
5,286

|
1

26,062
2,991

2,840
2,446




1

|

106,806

21,845

1

245,754

L~.l
L..:

237,771
3

m

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

152

TABLE 3.—SUMMARY OF R E V E N U E RECEIPTS A N D GOVERNMENTAL
[For a list of the cities arranged alphabetically by states, with the number
GROUP V.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 30,000 TO 60,000 IN 1911-Continued.

BEVENUE RECEIPTS.

From taxes.
City
tram*
her.

From spe
cial assess From
sub . From
From
ments and fines, From
[donations I pension
forfeits, ventions
from
and
Non
assess
and
and
special
business charges for escheats. grants.
ments.
gifts.
license. outlays.

CUT, AND DIVISION OF CITY'S
GOVERNMENT.

Total

General
property.

Special
property.

Poll.

(Table 6.) (Table 6.) (Table 6.)! (Table 6.) (Table G.)| (Table 6.) (Tabled) (Table 7.) (Table 7.)| (Table7.)
1374,754

976,224

$1,1C6

$5, SSI

$24,9271

374,754

76,224

1,106

5,881

24,927

1,851,713

795,239

S7,52S

13,193

493,741

15,752

114,525

S267|

1,552,609
299,104'

612,332
182,907

87,52S

13,193

493,741

15,752

2,741
111,784

267

92,356

$637,164

132 Tampa, Fla.
City corporation.
ol district...
School
133 San Diego, Cal
City corporation.
*" ' * district...
School

525,662
111,5021

$111,420
111,420

134 El Paso, Tex.....

762,936|

486,692.

20,579

3,600

18,878

4S,785|

133 Wheeling, W.Va.

745,630

401,707

$3,081

64,646

1,522

12,919

16,402

533,123
212,507

207,832
193,875

3,031

64,646

1,522

12,919

136 Racine, Wis

6S7,80a|

385,793

77,332

2,66$

120,3S$

5,026

29,381

$14,494

137 Kalamazoo, Mich.

652,859

379,902

16,06S|

1,802

79,382

7,633

73,239

103

415,221
237,638||

217,246

16,068

1,802

79,382

6,323
1,311

3,723
69,518

103

101,464

1,316

110,291

19,3S3

22,623

354

162,857

2,3S0

16,674

19,077

115,403

162,857

2,380

16,674

19,077

City coi
.tion.
School itrict...

tion.

City
School
138 Superior, Wis.,

775,78oj|

139 Augusta, Ga..,

885,167

City corporation.
IOI district...
School
140 Macon, Ga,
City corporation...
School district....
141 Newton,
142 Butte, Mont

162,656
497,957
327,624

16,402

337,624

705,4891

295,386

2,399

94,5S6

745

87,84$

22,164

601,334
104,155

295,386

2,399

94,586

745

87,84$

22,164

101,074

133

1,723,480

1,213,896

19,3951

1,197

394

40,039

2,854

8,755]

8,882

124,498

1.973
115,402

$112,458

101,074

807,292

425,735

21,256

87,537

3,742

111,118

21,945)

556,742,
250,£50

300,703
125,032

21,256

87,537

3,742

111,118

21,945)

143 Woonsockett,lt.I..

611,213|l

354,187

2,131!

43,629

16,424

256]

10,165)

144 Chester, Pa

414,839

304,576

9,665|

20,728

8,946|

16,504

1,193

33,364

250,409
164,430|

189,302
115,274

20,728]

8,946

16,504

1,193

9,665

760
32,601

12,121

144,717

1,017

136,697

22,927

29,559

18,993

39,199

419

29,717

2,801

1,856
12,932

751,933

246,188

146 Fitchburg, Mass...

864,071

520,812

147 Dubuque, Iowa....

643,066

483,029,

45,2661

579

28,034

289

502,120
140,946'

355,189
127,840

45,266

579

2S,034

289

840,316

484,151

17,05$

12,130]

9,304

2,746]

93,624

739,520
100,796]

431,565

17,05$)

12,130]

9,304

2,746]

49,246
44,378

149 Elmira,N.Y...

552,062|

437,173

43,379

2,389

9,719

1,997

20,774

150 New Castle, Pa.

458,741

347,156

18,642]

1,914

42,626

3,624

25,666

City corporation.
School district...

247,526
211,215

166,580.
180,576.

18,643

1,944

42,626)

3,624

963
24,701

151 West Hoboken, N . J .

495,918

217,890,

1,000

51,773

1,362

61,995]

531

156,699

152 Knoxville, Term

805,569

379,435

1,124

70,353

1,632

60,427

15,216]

69,318

734,7401

374,044

57,380)

3,134

94,158

283

21,378

57,380

3,134

- 94,158

2331

148 Galveston, Tex
City
School

ktion.

153 Hamilton, Ohio
Cfty
School

ration,
itrict...

154 Springfield, Mo.
City corporation.
School district...

,

53,488

11,035

185,431

212,563
161,476

581,367

260,815).

3,984

55,778

4,563

199,323

2,374

368,384
192,9831

92,855
167,960

3,984

55,778

4,563

199,323

2,374

133

124,49S)

145 Montgomery, Ala..

City corporation.
"" ■district...
School

1,973

759,507
125,660

City
School

City corporation.
School district...

1,042)

1,509

1,300

2,811
2,811]

12,9321

3,129

21,378)
20,753

20,753
562,9851
5,377
13,3491
ll,01ll
59,1571
l,49ll
10,161'
142,08l'
»For explanation of differences in amounts reported in this column and total payments for outlays reported in Table 18, see text discussion for Tabls 18, page 90.

155 East Orange, N, J.,




1,023,87311

681

521

GENERAL TABLES.

153

COST P A Y M E N T S , B Y D I V I S I O N S O F C I T Y G O V E R N M E N T : 1 9 1 1 - C o n t i m i e d .
assigned to each, see page 20.

For a text discussion of this table, see page 50.] '
GROUP V.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 30,000 TO 50,000 IN 1911-Continued.

BEVENUE BECEITTS—continued.

From
From
learnings highway
of general priv^
depart- lieges.
1 ments.

For expenses and interest.

From
From
rents.

From I of public
interest.
service
; enter
prises.

Total.
Total.

((Table 8.) (Table 9.) (Table 9.) Table 9.) (Table 10.)
1578

38,648

$3,005

12,368 I

1612,264 j

28,171
82

578

8,648 |

3,005

2,368

492,325
119,939

25,5S6

62,277

2,985

240,620 J 2,156,038 j

21,173
4,413

62,277

2,985

240,620

1,903,360
252,678
2,111,520

J

1

J

J

J

1

J

J

1

1

'

$518,449

$447,772

$1,634

438,146
80,303

381,296
66,476

1,634

939,709

694,411

144,024

690,964
248,745

464,193
230,218

144,024

82,747
18,527

1,212,396
3,933

92,316

1,388,553

$69,043

$93,815

55,216 1
13,827

101,274 j 1,216,329

57

1,484

67,884

722,967

582,268

48,383

10,504

6,180

1,129

6,319

221,221 J

908,072 1

617,614 |

426,039

138,594

52,981 j

290,458 |

8,360
2,144

6,180

1,129 >

6,233
86

221,221

689,170
218,902

442,606
175,008

260,356
165,683

138,594

43,656
9,325

246,564
43,894

12,506

21,141

6,397

12,007

722,688

449,404

397,688

11,848

39,868

273,284

11,836

11,657

215

6,696

64,306 1

507,401 j

451,940

383,771

23,827

44,342

145,461

7,902
3,954

11,657

215 1

6,59S
98

64,306

367,408
229,993

240,8S5
211,055

186,248
197,523

23,827

30,810
13,532

126,523
18,938

13,165

1,267

56

6,868

41,172

14,373

1,227

4,496

35,410
5,762

14,373

1,227

28,077

23,156

4,368

45,553 |

25,129
2,948

23,156

4,368

45,553

45,281

6,664

10S,302

155,363

10,744

411

306

9,724
1,020

411

306

21,102

3,637

32,130

4,861

2,989

10,984

954
3,907

2,989

22,588

6,094

6*,941

4,263

4,496
1

$24,900

$118,715

132

912,001

133

54,179'
39,636

22,621

$304,325

1,348,584

j

162,442

34,886
55,45S

39,969

134

128,016

135

238,398

136

200,919

137

896,815

567,312

527,300

40,012

329,503

121,029

208,474

138

167,912

963,981 j

697,252

551,508

59,100

86,644 j

266,729 j

78,814

187,915

139

167,912

815,370
148,611

568^796
128,456'

426,543
124,965

59,100

83,153
3,491

246,574
20,155

1,423,826 j

472,844 j

419,462

33,997

19,385 j

950,982

718,337

232,645

140

1,317,229
106,597

370,234
102,610

317,333
102,129

33,997

18,904

946,995
3,987

1,467,959

1,342,411

981,432

35,983

824,429

737,795

679,706

558,370
266,059,

502,805
234,990

454,359
225,347

555,219

517,881

354,070

23,156

371,445 j

329,405]

283,064

5?7

45,804 j

42,040

207,735
163,710

173,734
155,671

142,379
140,685

537

30,818
14,986

34,001
8,039

|

134,180
1,029 [

8,004 ^^1,029
2,980

481

58,089
48,446
9,643

j

140,655

86,634

381,069

141

69,497

142

55,994

93,332

143

43,394

85,434

144

255,521

125,548

324,996

i

17,137

55,565
31,069
37,338
j

1,437

128,583

1,071,140

664,205

423,079

64,861

176,265

406,935

319,207

87,728

145

30,900

89,047

910,193

737,113

589,182

78,761

69,170

173,080

46,122

126,958

146

2,013

80

67,352

576,218

498,067

391,444

45,224

61,399 j

78,151

144,999

147

1,839
174

80

67,352

450,109
126,109

371,958
126,109

269,275
122,169

45,224

57,459
3,940

78Tl51

1,109,853

691,596

426,974

53,677

210,945]

418,257 1

148,720

148

'581,370
110,226

316,748
110,226

53,677

210,945

418,257
67,521

149

149,483

160

61,260
61,260

1

For
outlays.*

Expenses Expenses
o! general of public
Interest.
j depart
service
ments. enterprises.

Excess of
govern
mental
City
cost
payments Govern Payments num
ber.
mental
for
over 1
cost
expenses
revenue
pay
and
receipts.
ments. interest.

[(Table 11.) (Table 15.) (Table 17.) (Table 18.)

1 128,253

J

EXCESS OF REVENUE
BECEOTS OVEB—

GOVERNMENTAL COST PAYMENTS.

1,335

117,999] [

87

39,557

2,400

87

35,725
3,832

117,999

999,627
110,226

289

2,400

j

269,537

4,209

1,056

5,967

ljoso

594,087

484,541

442,658

8,172

33,711

109,546

42,025

10,770

2,743

5,530

40|

474,487

309,258]

287,483

1,440

20,335

165,22y j

15,746

7,137
3,633

2,743

3,225
2,305

40] 1

228,094
246,393

162,084
147,174 |

145,560
141,923

1,440

15,084
5,251

66,010
99,219

1,993

9,463

2,791

527,044

397,355

348,335

49,020

129,689

20,096

4,840

5,811

177,312 1

716,074

588,613 i

353,493

57,481

177,639

127,461

j

98,563 1 151

31,126
89,495

2,884

1,864

7,582

172,031

968,690

589,100]

364,258

107,410

117,432 j

379,590 j

867
2,017

1,861

7,021
558

172,031 j

789,604
179,086

410,014
179,086

201,790
162,468

107,410

100,814
16,618

379,590

8,806

150

3,528

1,293]

518,323

270,485]

268,282

163

2,040 |

247,838

7,699
1,107

150

365
3,163
25,412

1,293

369,176 i
149,147 !

153,45?
117,028

152,004
116,278

163

1,290
750'

215,719
32,119 \\V.V.V.Y.Y.

852,4691

645,721

115,176

20,624'

19,243




185

151,334"

1,227,4141

91,672 1

374,945 i

66,848

233,950

j

203,541

43,044

1

216,956

152

145,640

153

290,882

154

171,404■

155

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

154

TABLE 3,—SUMMARY OF REVENUE RECEIPTS AND GOVERNMENTAL
[For a list of the cities arranged alphabetically by states, with the number
GROUP V.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 30,000 TO 50,000 IN 1911—Continued.

1

BBYENT7E RECEIPTS.

From taxes.
City
num
ber.

FromspeIcial assess From From sub From
From
ments and fines,
donations pension
Crom
forfeits, ventions
and
and
assess
Non
special
and
gifts.
ments.
Business. business charges (or escheats. grants,
license. outlays,

CITY, AND DIVISION OP CITY'S
GOVERNMENT.

Total.

General
Special
property. property.

PolL

(Table 6.) (Table 6.) (Table 6.] (Table 6.) (Table 6.) (Table 6.) (Table 6.) (Table 7.) (Table 7.) (Table 7.)
156

8566,416

$413,3$;

380,526
178,931
6,959

241,15£
172,225

1

;j
13,286

179,468

83,515 j

132,079

12,795

79,468

3,515

32,079

2/795

96,545

2,496

10,240

13,757

22,148

102,992

2,394

64,649

2,06S

43,161
11,214

5S9,669

402,131

158

656,940

434,32!

159

306,249 1

224,481

197,969
103,280

127,832
96,65C

566,139 1

298,772

371,324
194,815

111,261
187,511

635,473

398,098

373,144

193,174

775,150

366,999

780,974

516,242

165 1 Portsmouth,Va

349,540

182,566

166 Pittsftold, Mass ,

686,600

440,192

39,518

11,680

167 Qui«fiy, Mass

911,397

642,302

36,418

13,958

1,899

168 Cedar Rapids, Iowa.

934,339 |

507,121

62,297

266,311
240,810!

62,297

3,687

157 j Roanoke,Va

1

Sfhnnl tfiatriM.

160
School district
161 Auburn, N. Y
162 Charlotte, N. C
163 Taiirton, Mass...

,,„„.-„.,
.
|

164

Jit!

City corporation..
School district
169 Oshkwh, Wte.
170 Perth Amboy, N. J
171 Lansing, Mfch,....» T T
City corporation
School district
172

173
174

175

176
School district

177
School district
178 1
City corporation
179

180

1

1

371

12,411

^71

12,411

1,529

57,642

2,880

1,529

57,642

2,880

4,907

34,649

2,679

4,907

34,649

2,679

143,353
143,353

i

•

16,018
6,018

820
20
313

11,214
5,111
5,111

70
70

32,131

1,559

40,541

2,362

17,710

115

5,002

35,002

2,794

3,155

8,100

35,835

3

76,301

12.3S4

36,136

306

27,483

2,271

3,699

58,395

15,308

944

522

25,985

1,192

3,396

6,000

67,363

2,026

2,983

20,601

128

34,344

412

33,941

3,179

1,694

517

44,421

3,338

2,467

50

3,687

201,427

5,946

35,996

1,635

316]

201,427

5,638
308

21,528
14,468

1,635

316

134,881

401

99,190

374,857
1,075

198,455

37,637

1,757

16,105

3,063

27,337

65,493

1,540

77,821

3,415

89,092
44,351

426,6S6

1,471

1,670

73,123

5,742

530,505
200,3071
1,192,486]

272,978
153,708

1,471

1,670

73,123

6,742

692,775

3,8*4

9,316

211,837

4,664

793,868
393,618

423,394
264,381

3,864

9,316

211,837

4,664

405,933

227,885

29,117

461

14,347

2,09&

12,577

27,522

44,351

1,000
1,000

127,254

16

iz7,254

15

526,449)

351,843

2,429

295

23,313

5,898

63,720

365,034
161,415

250,776
101,067

£*29|

295

23,313

M54
4,244

53,720

59S,599|

322,859

16,521

16,866]

677

28,972

2,823

18,498

435,396
163,203

188,886
133,973

11,801
4,7201

16,866

677

23,972

2,210
613

i8,498

755,756|

343,410

62,685

3,281

199,026

2,772

135,518

496,919|
258,8371

221,616
121,794

62,585

3,281

199,026

2,772

551,289]

331,115

43,266]

504

93,377]

8,585

356,127
195,162

145,715!
185,400

43,266

504

93,377

8,585

4,465
4,465

1*35,618
4,792^

30

325]

30

325
6,327]

4,792

874,281

641,513

13,601

30,7is|

2,612j

111,497]

3,185]

437,591
203,922

9,319
4,282

30,718

2,612

111,497

3,185

18,934
100
18,834

6,369

637,748
236,533

10,853

20,749

60

100

20,749

50

1,262

29,985

430,358||

244,396

71,611

1,457

47,857

282,404
147,954

119,245
125,151

n,6ii

M57

47,857

414,525||

301,267]

30,636

1,199

11,353

13,392]

869 " 6 , 3 2 7
5,500

264,268
189,674
7,392
30,636
1,262
11,353
hw
School district
1
150,2571'
111,5931
6,000'
23,4291
I F or explanation of differences in amounts reported in 1his column imd total paymentsfbi ' outlays rejK>rtedinT able 18, see textdlscu ssion for Ta ble 18, pas•6 90.




8922

GENERAL TABLES.

155

COST PAYMENTS, BY DIVISIONS OP CITY GOVERNMENT: 1911-Continued.
assigned to each, see page 20. For a text discussion of this table, see page 50.)
G R O U P V.-43ITIES H A V I N G A P O P U L A T I O N O F 30,000 TO 50,000 I N 1911-Continued.
BEVENUE RECEIPTS—continued.

From
From
earnings highway
of general priv
depart* ileges.
ments.

From
rents.

]

J

1

1

1

J

1

I

J

$9,347

S1,3S5

1425;

$16,897

1.733
655
6,959

1.3S5

425'

16,867|
30

10,179

9,147

1,661

250

4,812
4,426
416

Total.

(Table 11.) (Table 15.) (Tablel7.) (Table 18.)

$1,084

$462,409 J

$350,362 J

$316,400

$1,886

$32,076]

$112,047]

1,0S4 !

291,422
165,680
5,307

206,392
133,663
5,307

178,376
132,717
5,307

1,886

26,130
5,946

85,030*
27,017

12,53S

6,689

934,789

43S,SS0

363,498

3,322

72,060

300

3,75^

612,352

472,081

412,230

1,667

58,184

412

6,130

4,151

476,170 J

367,074 J

324,994

2,539

39,541

412

6,130!

4.151

332,336
143,834

270,737
96,337

234,093
90,901

2,539

34,105
5,436

• • . ••
1,3S5

$216,054|

156

150,789

157

184,859

158

140,271
61,599
109,096
47,4971

169,921]

* 60,825

159

11,592]

80,674

160

4,500

887

47,501 1

577,731 J

485,465 J

404,215

58,091

23,159 1

92,266

4,500

SS7J

47.501

337.205
190,526

334,065
151,400

253,843
150,372

58,091

22^131

53,140
39,126

4,147

8,000

6,963

113,735

677,842

504,712

408,837

59,017

10,253

10,000

2,701

339,089

286,667

199,103

24,172

39,300

7,338

30,066

172,867

732,586

624,762

431,238

94,567

15,862

4,787

15,444

116,897

731,097

627,596

465,131

39,057

3,872

5,397

561

73.810

505,291

306,765

235,006

5,587

14,493

4,529

'

1,109,142

525,423

433,560

23,066

16,075

7,031

840

4,622.

97,996

1,046,932

693,591

509,223

28,725

15,005

1,098

1,235
'
i

16,606.

135,475

1,009,850 J

513,245 J

378,491

88,280

12,831
2,174

1,09S

1,235

206,529
171,962

88,280

5,371

1,292

581

4,018

3,657

233

67,125 [

1
i

-

309
309'

1,028

130,761

161

52,422

34,055

86,477

162

107,824

42,564

150,388

163

103,501

49,877

153,378

164

63,392
1

123,40s
66,172
68,797
155,643
46,474
35,651
10,823

198,526

155,751

42,775

165

583,719

422,542

161,177

166

353,341

135,535

217,806

167

75,511]

421,094

168

496,605 J

98.267
98.267

659,554
350,296

330,460
182,785

8,2S5

860

500,201

369,429

346,823

2,014

20,592

130,772

243,001

169

10,175

111,773

719,448

438,700

318,573

43,989

76,138

280,748

152,934

127,814

170

8,014]

310,967

171

469,043

172

329,094
167,511

4,905

220

171,644

738,826 J

419,045

301,638

95,400

22,807 J

318,981

2,657
2,248

220

171,644

532,914
205,912

283,457
136,388

167,250
134,388

95,400

20,807
2,000

249,457
69,524

13,999

•3,660

12,031
1,968

3,660

3,673

6,218

42,369

173,130

36,858

98,957

44,588

545,909,

3,894

'

$104,007

1 $395,120

1,701
2,193

725

4,557

119 ttXV

1,098,337 |

723,443 J

602,603

73,983

46,857 J

374,894

725

4,557|

119,820 |

767,637
330,700

411,027
312,416

309,941
292,662

73,954

27,132
19,725

356,610
18,234

1 41.1

384,001

310,635

241,506

622

ft

17,152

719

114

66,501

536,391 1

383,791 J

321,619

14,768
2,384

719

114

66,501

371,113
165,278

257,253
126,538

200,418
121,201

29

47,986

21,143
37,003
37,003

112,229

94,149

19,832
5,337

113,860
38,740

18,352

350

5,111

159,575

690,222 |

440,358 J

314,555

63,963

61,840 J

249,864 J

18,352

350

2,257
2,854

159,575

466,401
223,821

282,058
153,300

168,240
146,315

63,963

49,855
11,985

184,343
65,521

8,230

934
934

J

718,530 J

506,985 J

472,685

484,699
233,831

281,878
225,0S7

264,5SS
208,097

i
;

5,451

8,6SS

50,156

763,870 J

354,948 J

283,126 (

43,465

4,561
890

4,608
4,030

50,156

491,028
272,812

220,146
134,802

156,529
126,597

43,465

6,742

1

6,742

14,663
1,271

J 1,093,075 J

16,849
■*-■'"——■'—■•

675,457
417,618

14,125
2,724

7,991

304

4,119

7,616
375

304

20,590
1,529

20,971 J
20,971

1

7,533

4,6S0

13,218 J

I

4,428
3,105l

3,550
1,130

13,218




_

34,280 J

211,565

17,290
16,990

202,821
8,744

28,357 J

408,922 |

20,152 |
8,205

270,882
138,040

782,794 1

663,178

119,616

310,281 J

527,399
255,395

428,173
235,005

99,226
20,390

148,058
162,223

308,470 J

255,096

31,905

21,469 J

146,965 |

176,545
131,925

135,752
119,344

31,905 [

8,88S
12,531

91,052
55,913

324,200

309,007 J

289,027

19,372 J

15,193

603

17,418
608 ,
160,736
178,762
193,955
!
1,954
128,291
130,245 1
1
130,245 1
s Excess of payments for expenses and interest over revenue receipts.

174

91,623]

158,241

17S

248,791

176

37,226

^267,597
187,83S

455,435 J

173

142,658

21,932

152,600 J

7,995

6,705
1,525

95,298

9,942|

73,366

25,169 J

5,450
2,545

[_ 15,934

J

Expenses Expenses
of general of public
Interest.
depart
service
ments. enterprises.

Total.

(Table 8.) (Table 9.) (Table 9.) Table 9.) (Table 10.)
J

Excess of
govern
mental
City
cost
payments (1 Govern Payments num
For
ber.
mental
for
over
outlays.* I
cost
expenses
revenue
pay
and
receipts.
ments. interest.

For expenses and interest

From
earnings
of public
service
enter
prises.

From
interest.

EXCESS OF B E V E N U E
BECEIPTS O V E E —

GOVERNMENTAL COST PAYMENTS.

15,193

212,581

J

196,341

177

218,794:

J

91,487

178

121,838

179

105,51?

180

25,077

J

r.™.™:

90,325 1

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

156

TABLE 3.—SUMMARY OF REVENUE RECEIPTS AND GOVERNMENTAL
[For a list of the cities arranged alphabetically by states, with the number
GROUP V.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 30,000 TO 50,000 IN 1911—Continued.
REVENUE RECEIPTS.

From taxes.
GOYEBNMEOT.
Total.

1 General
property.
(Table 6.)

181 Niagara Falls, N . Y
182
School district

183 Lima, O h i o . .

.

.*.......*T..

City corporation..
School district

184 Chelsea, M a i s . . * , . . . , u . , . .
185 Aurora, 111
School district

.. |
•

....a..
1

Special
property.

Poll.

Business.

From spe
cial assess From
From sub From
ments and fines,
donations
from
!1 forfeits, ventions
and
Non
and
special
and
gifts.
business charges for escheats. grants.
license.
outlays.

«!!_. ll

City
num
ber.

(Table 6.) (Table 6.) (Table 6.) (Table 6.) (Table 6.) ( T a b l e d ) (Table 7.) (Table 7.)
156,512

12,022

189,906

33,597

819,590

7,214

2,506

206,023

33,423

24,123

134,781
74,893

7,214

2,506

206,023

33,423

298,658

38,797

590

81,420

3,999

29,264

380,170
162,877

154,099
144,559

38,797

590

81,420

3,999

11,956
17,308

881,531

532,076

32,842

2,015

14,021

5,248

519,664 |

309,317

46,555

52

81,956

2,322

371,157
148,507

167,450
141,867

46,555

52

81,956

2,322

1972,846

9658,189

582,590

209,674

480,519
102,071
543,047 |

133,730

1

$664

24,123

36,901

$13,064

20,000
4,684

35

509]

35

509
2,378]

4,6S4

186 N e w Bochelle, N . Y

935,872

726,805

29,182

3,041

106,359

779

17,875

188

187 Austin, T e x .

628,747

300,305

10,031

782

1,250

6,707

38,631

1,449

523,9731

238,530
61,775

10,031

782

1,250

6,672
35

1,200
37,431

1,449

324,866

42,792

2,681

32,742

1,754

* 23,587

26,462

229,866

21,033

4,680

631

34,960

City corporation
School district

188 L a Crosse, W i s
189

531,250
361,890

190

192
City corporation

193 Lynchburg, Va

14,061

500

40,406

1,997

36,605

2,320

127,543

505,319
355,462
149,857

265,455

59,261

488

73,803

2,107

14,009

133,197
132,258

59,261

488

73,803

2,107

628,904

191

1

104,774

291,645

$1,096

895
775

1
H,009

471,527

332,037

2,654

36,724

1,075

70,422

3,749

12,194

100

44l|

303,890
167,637

176,470
155,567

2,654

36,724

1,075

70,422

3,749

959
",235

100

441

730,576

392,544

5,521

144,583

3,957

28,652

8,432

19,021

253

3731

For explanation of differences in amounts reported in this column and total payments for outlays reported in Table IB, see text dbcussionforTable 18, pago 90.




GENERAL TABLES.

157

COST PAYMENTS, BY DIVISIONS OP CITY GOVERNMENT: 1911—Continued,
assigned to each, see page 20.

For a text discussion of this table, see page 50.)
GROUP V.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 30,000 TO 60,000 IN 1911-<5ontittued.

BZVENUE RECEIPTS—continued.

From
From
earnings highway
of general priv
depart* ileges.
menta,

From
Interest.

From
rents.

From
earnings
of public
service
enter
prises.

For expenses and interest.

Total

|

(Table 11.) (Table 15.) (Tablel7.) (Table IS.)

673,900

81,332,654

6674,784

6498,224

654,448

6122,112

6657,870

6359,808

6298,062

181

7,563

85,277

902,951

503,857]

313,610

49,419

140,828

399,094]

320,361]

78,733

182

5,881
906

5,414
2,149

85,277

722,804!
180,1471

386,666
117,191

217,338
96,272

49,419

119,909
20,919 ]

336,138
62,956
192,240

183

3,927

4,000

0,72$

72,664 1

448,172 |

350,807

263,214

24,711

62,882]

97,365

3,539
388

4,000

9,106
622

72,664

300,844
147,32S

219,633 I
131,174

141,873
121,341

24,711

53,049 1
9,833

81,211
16,154

16,096

18,985

53,881

135,232

970,299

728,199

517,821

23,491

186,887

242,100

88,768

153,332

184

7,023

6,132

4,242

56,837 J

600,169 1

351,006

292,324

32,234

26,448

249,163 1

80,505

168,658

185

5,067
1,956

6,132

4,242

56,837

443,646
156,523

225,7171 1
125,289

170,770
121,554

32,234

22,713] [
3,735

217,929
31,234

15,233

4,606

506,315

213,529

186

16,230

190,324

187

61,170

719,844

j 194,875

59

12,518

2,786

1,442,187

722,343

582,096

1,850

138,397

3,072

8,768

248,849 J

643,977

438,423

259,679

108,185

70,559

205,554 1

248,849

469,408
174,569

335,785
102,638,

159,589
100,090

108,185

3,072

8,527
241

68,011 |
2,548'

133,623
71,931

20,398

51,911

520,743

407,631

324,886

36,841

45,904 j

113,112

10,507

123,619

188

68,036

337,687

317,491

228,284

35,530

53,677 |

20,196

24,203

44,399

189

27,^058

79,056

679,2S2

554,502

391,344

37,700

125,458 I

124,780

74,402

190

3,368

14,008

72,820 1

645,395 |

420,996 |

288,439

46,161

86,396 |

224,399 j

j

84,323

191

2,308
1,060

11,478
2,530

72,820

502,887
142,508

295,100 1
125,896

176,060*
112,379

4fi.lfil

72,879 |
13't517

207,787
16,612
13,461 |

153,474

192

290,528

193

8,903

2,862

300

2,664
9,863

|

City
Govern Payments num
ber.
mental
tor
cost
expenses
pay
and
ments. Interest.

612,047

112,869

6,683
2,220

|

For
outlays.*

Excess of
govern
mental
cost
payments
over
revenue
receipts.

6,787

68,724

1

1

Expenses Expenses
of general of public Interest.
depart
service
ments. enterprises.

Total.

(Table 8.) (Table 9.) (Table 9.) Table 9.) (Table 10.)

J

EXCESS C* REVENUE
EECEIPTS OVEB—

GOVERNMENTAL COST PAYMENTS.

11,136

6,009

4,728

25

810

659 1

458,066 J

318,053 J

296,272 |

893

20,888 j

140,013

5,174
835

4,728

25

810

559

294,196
163,870

155,763
162,290

144,385 j
151,887

893

10,485
10,403

138,433
1,580

10,676

19,945

3,038

10,804

82,77?

835,160

440,048

312,061

107,711

445,112




20,276

]

50,780
140,076

j

154,584

158

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.
TABLE 4.—PER CAPITA REVENUE RECEIPTS AND GOVERNMENTAL COST PAYMENTS: 1911.

[For
a list of t h e cities arranged alphabetically b y states, with the number assigned t o each, see page 20. For a text discussion of this table, see page 57. For absolute
1
amounts, see Table 3.J
FEB CAPITA GOVERNMENTAL COST
PAYMENTS FOR—

PER CAPITA REVENUE RECEIPTS PROM—

Expenses and interest.

Taxes.

Sub
ven
tions, Earn- High Earn-]
I
grants,
way
Fines, gifts,
Busi-]
privi "of
ness, ments, for dona
All
* & ■
leges,
gener [rents,
feits,
and ■
rev
al de and serv
and es tions,
enues. Prop Poll. non special!
and
busi charg cheats. pen part inter ice
erty.
ness es for
(enter-1
sion ments.!
out
lirorises.
I cense. lays.
ments.
a n d

Grand total.
Group I
Group I I
Group I I I
Group I V
Group V

All
govern- All e x
men- Ipenscs]
tal and in-

Ex
E x penses!
pensesl|ofpub*|
of gen
Ineral serv terde
est.
ice
part*
ments. enter
prises.

Per
capita
excess
of gov1

crnmental
cost
pay
ments
over
revcnue re-|
ccipts.

Oatlays.

1*28.21 1*17.38 [10.05 111.92 $2.40 10.14 51.31 10.60 [11.41 1*2.99 j$32.51 |S21.44 *16.62 $1.26 1*3.55 *11.07
34.26 22.50 0T02 "2T18 1.94 0.13 0.81 0.64 £ 2 6 3.79 38.96 27.24 20.55 1.50 5.18
1.10 1.32 2.17 33.52 22.04 ! 18.47 0.92 2.65
29.88 17.44 0.03 2.43 2.26 0.15 2.97
24.90 13.99 0.08 1.66 3.85 0.14 1.30 0.51 0.86 2.51 29.99 17.29 13.67 1.07 2.54
20.27 11.51 0.13 1.45 2.27 0.14 1.25 0.34 0.46 2.73 24.56 15.09 11.53 1.32 2.24
19.66 11.76 0.09 1.38 1.90 0.19 1.26 0.41 0.50 2.17 21.89 14.56 11.45 1.06 2.05

PEE CAPITA
EXCESS OF
REVENUE
RECEIPTS
OVER—

Gov
ern- Pay
men ments
tal forexcost .penses
pay- [and in
ments. terest.

54-77

$0.48

$6.77

5.38
3.94
5.32
4.49
2.05

0.70
0.30
0.22
0.20
0.71

7.03
7.84
7.61
5.18
5.10

*1.69

$7.21
8.98
2.53
8.04

GROUP I.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER IN 1911.
1
?
3
4
5
6
7
8

Chicago, 111
Philadelphia, Pa
St. Louis, Mo
Boston, Mass
Baltimore, Md
Pittsburgh, Pa

$1.51 $2.48 $0.12 $0.48 $0.26 $2.27 $4.51 $50.76 $32.93 $23.23 $1.54 $8.15 $17.84 |$10.62
$40.14 $28.51
4.12 2.51 0.25 0.27 0.85 2.04 2.91 I 27.78 20.49 I 17.47 1.35 1.67 I 7.29
29.47 16.52
5.50 1 2.97
1.05 3.17 3.02 ! 27.89 22.39 18.39 1.56 2.43
24.92 13.93 *6*05* 1.44 0.48 0.05 1.73
3.06 2.81 0.12 0.68 0.71 1.40 3.26 32.25 20.84 17.64 1.64 1.56| 11.41 | 3.37
28.88 ! 16.86
49.86 35.40 0.18 1.54 0.39 0.15 2.50 1.11 3.00 5.60 43.40 37.18 26.94 1.84 8.41 | 6.22
2.51 2.04 0.05 0.63
1.20 0.94 2.69 ! 28.45 19.72 15.58 1.11 3.02! 8.73
25.73 15.67
2.24 0.11 0.03 0.99 0.38 2.61 2.62 26.97 20.01 14.70 1.19 4.12! 6.96 I 2.72
24.52 15.54
2.45
7.75
1.70 1.54 0.15 1.41 0.96 1.69 3.90 36.27 28.52 22.22 1.76 4.54
34.15 22.81

1

6.46

! 2.12

1

12.68
6.01
4.51
5.63

I

GROUP II.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000 IN 191L
9 Detroit, Mich.
10 Buffalo, N . Y
11
12
13
14 Newark, N.J.
15
16
17
18 Minneapolis, Minn

$24.50 $14.81
27.30 18.02
29.39 19.32
23.56 15.41
35.29 19.66
33.33
37.60
23.47
39.83
27.88

$1.73 $1.78 $0.07 $1.82 $1.50 $0.82 $1.96 $25.04
1.54 0.06 0.81
1.71
1.70 0.99 2.47 J30.06
3.08 3.32 0.08 1.82
1.18 0.58 0.01 40.95
2.21 2.08 0.12 0.85 0.67 0.25 1.96 23.90:
3 15 1.27 0.10 0.76
1.05 6.09 3.20 41.89

18.37 $0.22 1.92
2.40
22.08
15.80 0.15 2.65
14.13
4.14
17.20
1.61

2.69
5.10
1.32
3.88

0.07
0.54
0.14
0.27
0.15

3.95
2.36
0.72
16.95
1.65

0.86 1.72 3.54 36.01
0.93 0.79 3.41 1 48.08
0.85 0.88 2.28 24.00
1.01 0.28 1.73 36.42
0.95 0.92 1.52 31.95

$17.49 $16.01 $0.44 $1.04 $7.54 $0.54
8.24
2.76
21.81 1 18.01 1.32 2.43
23.52 21.75 0.02 1.75 17.43 11.56
18.12 16.33 0.73 1.06
5.77
0.34
28.80 21.09 1.46 6.25 I 13.09 6.61
25.47 20.15
22.19 1 18.25
17.84 12.40
27.23 24.79
19.19 16.25

1.10
0.84
1.52
1.27
0.73

4.22
3.10
3.93
1.18
2.21

2.68
10.54
125.89 10.48
! 6.16
0.53
1 9A9\
' 12.76
4.07

$7.01
5.48
5.88
6.43
6.48

$3.41

7 86
15.40
5.63
12.59
8.69

GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000 IN 1911.
Jersey City, N . J . . .
Seattle, Wash
Kansas City, Mo...
Indianapolis, Ind..
Providence, R. I...

$25.12 $12.61 (*) $1.96 $0.72 $0.02 $3.76 $0.18 $1.30
51.51 17.64
1.71 21.28 0.25 3.42 0.52 0.77
29.09 13.82
2.37 6.44 0.29 0.59 0.32 1.17
19.44 11.72 $0.06 1.75 3.67 0.06 1.31 0.20 0.56
24.97 16.19 0.09 1.36 0.31 0.04 0.24 0.64 2.53

$4.57 $48.46 $18.38 !$U.9S $2.92 $3.48 $30.08 $23.34
5.91 65.64 25.15 16.50 2.23 6.37 40.50 | 14.13
4.0S 29.50 19.90 16.60 1.90 1.39
0.41
9.60
0.12 20.61 13.67 12.85 0.09 0.73
1.16 1 . . . . . . .
6.93
3.58 22.36 19.31 15.37 0.86 3.07
$2.61
3.05

$6.74
26.36
9.19
5.77
5.66

Louisville, Ky
Rochester, N . Y . . .
Denver, Colo
,
Portland, Oreg....
St. Paul, Minn

26.65
25.08
29.53
40.55
20.59

15.86
15.48
19.71
16.33
12.37

2.46
1.10
1.96
3.21
2.00

2.48
3.89
4.87
14.29
2.08

0.12
0.05
0.11
0.22
0.11

1.32
0.50
0.69
1.68
0.68

0.34
0.23
0.78
0.22
0.50

0.53
0.85
1.26
0.68
0.73

3.55
3.00
0.16
3.92
2.10

26.73
32.31
29.92
66.86
21.10

17.52
19.78
20.03
18.12
15.84

14.31
15.91
18.25
12.71
12.60

0.97
1.40
0.27
1.41
0.83

2.24
2.47
1.51
4.01
2.41

9.21
12.52
9.89
48.74
5.26

0.08
7.22
0.39
26.31
0.51

9.13
5.30
9.50
22.43
4.76

Columbus, Ohio
Toledo, Ohio
Atlanta. Ga
Oakland, Cal
Worcester, Mass....

23.42
21.61
20.26
27.05
25.07

13.36
12.64
10.47 0.10
14.53
16.66 0.57

1.37
1.92
1.95
1.81
1.18

2.58
3.04
2.95
5.68
0.83

0.08
0.02
0.54
0.47
0.07

0.51
0.53
0.82
4.01
0.10

1.24
0.27
0.74
0.19
1.41

1.22
1.13
0.36
0.24
1.37

3.06
2.03
2.35
0.13
2.83

26.45
23.14
26.80
32.87
28.10

19.34
14.68
13.95
15.55
21.25

14.47
10.75
11.54
14.44
17.87

1.64
1.22
1.26
0.03
0.72

3.23
2.70
1.16
1.09
2.66

7.11
8.46
12.85
17.32
6.84

3.02
1.53
6.54
6.82
3.03

4.09
6.93
6.31
11.51
3.80

34
35
36
37
38

Birmingham, Ala...
Syracuse, N . Y
New Haven, Conn..
Memphis, Tenn
Scranton,Pa

14.08
24.03
18.56
22.21
12.86

4.50
2.64
15.71
1.29
15.05 0.20 1.40
12.36
0.72
7.99 0.27 2.03

3.58
3.26
0.34
2.56
1.51

0.43
0.04
0.15
0.16
0.10

1.62
0.56
0.63
2.26
0.79

0.70
0.27
0.44
0.45
0.04

0.40 0.19
0.33 2.58
0.33 0.02
0.38 3.32
0.12

22.07
25.27
18.15
32.45
13.84

12.87
18.90
15.73
17.60
10.36

9.85
15.08
14.67
12.61

0.20
0.94
0.01
1.66

9.42

2.83
2.88
1.05
3.34
0.91

9.19; 7.99
1.24
6.37
2.42
14.85 i0.24
0.98
3.48

1.20
5.13
2.82
4.61
2.61

39
40
41
42
43

Richmond, Va
Paterson.N. J
,
Omaha, Nebr.
,
Fall River. Mass.....
Dayton, Ohio

25.86
15.45
23.64
18.89
20.47

15.38 0.09 1.48
9.50 0.05 1.59
14.13
2.28
13.67 0.44 1.24
12.58
2.09

0.60
0.52
4.18
0.09
2.64

0.19
0.07
0.17
0.10
0.05

0.68
2.77
0.74
0.05
0.58

0.10
0.27
0.38
0.38
0.39

1.84 5.49
0.68
1.76 0.01
0.94 2.00
0.45 1.69

28.79
15.18
30.63
18.89
20.79

16.89
11.96
17.93
14.90
15.41

10.56
10.37
14.96
11.79
12.55

2.80 3.53
0.01 1.59
0.01 2.96
0.74 2.37
0.99 1.87

2.93
11.91
3.22 1
6.99
12.70
3.98
5.38
6.32

44
45
46
47
48

Grand Rapids, Mich..
Spokane, Wash
Nashville, Tenn
Lowell. Mass
Cambndge, Mass

21.15
33.97
17.49
18.79
30.08

11.50
12.64
9.45
13.68 0.35
20.72 0.35

0.64
2.13
0.52
1.05
0.05

3.60
9.34
0.30
0.39
0.47

0.06
0.26
0.17
0.09
0.04

2.12
3.68
3.22
0.05
0.09

0.74 0.34 2.17
1.16 0.29 4.46
0.27 0.84 2.72
0.44 0.63 2.11
3.15 1.39 3.82

25.90
52.06
20.66
19.85
25.18

13.98
20.99
13.60
16.98
21.10

11.80
15.26
10.46
13.87
15.23

0.81
1.27
0.95
1.43
0.95

1.38
4.46
2.20
1.68
4.91

11.92
31.08
7.05
2.87
4.08

49
50
51
52
53

Bridgeport, Conn
New Bedford, Mass...
San Antonio, Tex
Hartford, Conn
Albany, N . Y

16.21
24.07
13. SO
26.79
22.40

12.44
17.44
11.28
20.18
14.21

1.41 0.94
0.89 0.45
0.47 I 0.10
0.75 0.47
1.40
1.54

0.14
0.05
0.14
0.10
0.02

0.52
0.16
1.20
0.52
0.51

0.34
0.55
0.32
0.51
0.09

15.92
32.07
13.93
29.33
22.54

12.53
18.97
9.90
20.13
17.54

11.73
14.82
8.37
16.43
13.78

0.02 0.78
1.04 3.11
0.14 1.39
1.04 2.66
1.62 2.13

3.39
13.10
4.03
9.20
5.00




0.04
0.43
0.13
0.13

1

0.38
1.06 3 %
0.03 0.12
0.76 3.36
0.88 3.76

Less t h a n one-half of 1 c e n t .

o.ii
6.26

4.75
18.10
3.17
1.06
4.90
0.29

8.66
0.13
2.55
0.14

.......

8.97
3.49
5.72
3.98
5.06
7.17
12.98
3.88
1.81
8.99
3.68
5.10
3.90
6.65
4.86

GENERAL TABLES.

159

TABLE 4.—PER CAPITA REVENUE RECEIPTS AND GOVERNMENTAL COST PAYMENTS: 1911—Continued.
f For a list of the cities arranged alphabetically by states, with the number assigned to each, see page 20. For a text discussion of this table, see page 57. For absolute
amounts, see Table 3.]
GROUP IV.-CITIE8 HAVING A POPULATION OF 50,000 TO 100,000 IN 1911.
PER CAPITA GOVERNMENTAL COST
PAYMENTS JOB—

PER CAPITA REVENUE RECEIPTS PROM—

Taxes.

Expenses and interest.
Sub
ven
tions,
High EarnEarn- way
All
BusH
Fines, grants,!
ExTin*/1
privi
Ex .Jens
govness, ments,
forAll
and ', felts, lonaleges,
ernand
I All ex penses!
rev
ofpub-j In
tions,
IrentsJ
of
gen
and es and al de and ervpenses
enues. Prop PolL non
tal and in-l eral
erty.
busi es Ze
part inter-| ice
erv- terfor cheats.! pen ments.
deness out
enter-l
costs.
ice
sion
est.
part- enter
li- lays.
; cense.
prises.
ments.
Spe
cial

QTT.

Springfield, Mass.
Lynn, Mass
Lawrence .Mass..
Taooma, Wash.
w«
Pes Moines, Iowa...

30.77

Wilmington, Del....
Kansas City, Kans..
Yonkers,N.Y
Youngstown, Ohio..,
Houston, Tex
Norfolk, Va.
Duluth,Minn....
Fort Worth, Tex.
SomerviUe,Mass..
St. Joseph, Mo....

13.00
21.29
27.47
2a io
18.72
18.60
3a 71
26.20
22.23
19.39

Utica,N.Y
Troy.N.Y
EUxabeth,N.J
Schenectady, N . Y .
Waterbury.N.Y...

16.44
21.16
15.45
22.37
17.98

Akron, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okla..
Manchester. N . H
Hoboken.N.J.
E vansville, Ind

16.16
19.65
15.81
21.12
17.65

84
85
86
87
88

Wilkes-Barre, Pa
Erie, Pa
Peoria, 111
Fort Wayne, Ind
Harrbburg, F a . .

12.72
17.16
19.01
19.43
17.22

89
90
91
92
93

Savannah. Ga
Jacksonville, Fla
East St. Louis, 111
Terre Haute, Ind
Holyoke, Mass

19.78
25.10
15.43
13.91
27.53

94
95
95
97

Portland, Me
South Bend, Ind
Charleston, S. C
Brockton, Mass

29.56
15.13
16.37
24.08

98
99
100
101

Passaic, N . J
Bayonne,N.J
Johnstown, Pa
Wichita, Kans.

9.76
21.46
10.06
26.94

87.91 pa io $1.28 81.56 80.08 $2.85 $0.28 $1.26 $2.41 M$2a27 $14.37 $10.81 $0.92 $2.63
7.84
0.84 0.63 0.01 0.83 0.08 0.18 2.49 12.50 9.41
7.56 0.81 1.04
13.43 0.35 0.46 2.71 0.54 1.18 a 24 0.58 2.16 25.34 13.80
2.04 1.64
14.41 0.13 3.66 3.97 0.05 2.79 0.24 0.11 3.32 32.27 18.26 i a n
1.31 3.04
7.05 0.07 1.54 0.53 a 04 2.08 0.13 0.65 2.62 15.90 13.76 13.91 0.78 2.14
ia84
21.47 0.50 1.26 0.58 a 12 0.05 0.96 0.78 5.04 36.40 24.88 19.64 2.59 2.65
15.92 0.52 0.08 0.46 0.10 0.07 0.88 0.67 3.67 22.40 17.22 12.63 2.04 2.56
12.49 a 21 1.51 0.59 a 05 a 15 0.42 0.17 1.82 18.68 15.88 13.40 1.09 1.39
15.17
1.56 12.98 a 16 4.31 a is 1.06 11.61 73.86 26.49 15.34 5.45 5.71
0.42 0.17 28.89 15.79 14.38 0.28 1.13
15.85
1.36 5.41
0.22 0.30 0.17
a io 0.69 0.09 0.40 0.21 0.45 2.76 14.95 11.39
8.28
8.69 1.01 1.69
13.16
0.82 3.21 0.16 0.20 a 16 0.53 3.06 31.25 14.81
9.45 1.27 4.09
18.85
1.27 1.28 0.02 2.56 0.13 0.49 2.87 37.70 25.33 19.32 2.06 3.95
11.18
1.94 3.30 0.14 0.47 0.47 0.47 2.13 24.81 13.06 l a 67 1.02 1.36
1.40 0.61 0.23 2.85 27.83 15.57 11.01 1.02 3.53
12.84 0.13 0.44
a 21
10.55 0.03 3.98
0.57 0.17 0.97 2.29 28.52 16.78 11.27 1.23 4.28
16.19
2.67 3.85 a 03 0.87 0.26 0.11 6.47 32.13 20.68 13.28 3.68 3.72
0.39 0.58 2.96 37.62 15.59
12.41
8.96 3.94 2.69
a 47 8.03 0.29 L l l
15.49 0.50 0.04 0.73 a24 0.24 2.01 0.18 3.01 21.76 19.02 15.72 0.76 2.54
0.03 1.08 0.16 0.22 0.07 18.71 12.70 11.31 0.04 1 1.35
11.41
2.00 4.28
1.42 1.93 a 17 0.48 0.22 0.28 0.02 19.69 13.63 12.42
12.05
1.21
1.40 0.50 a 04 0.56 0.16 0.18 2.76 22.12 18.06 14.51 0.94 2.62
15.60
2.75 0.30 0.69 0.02 15.19 10.87 9.09 0.01 1.76
8.20 a 13 1.95 1.38
1.48 3.95 0.04 0.52 0.12 0.46 2.02 23.02 15.49 12.12 a 91 2.46
13.76
11.50 6*28 1.27 asi
a 05 a74 a 17 0.40 2.69 23.21 14.02 12.18 0.42 1 1.41
0.13
a 44 0.09 0.35 0.05 22.38 11.99 ia 63 a 04 1.32
1.36 1.88
11.84
a 40 6.84 a 15 0.34 0.89 0.08 1.75 55.89 18.02 12.29 a 93 4.80
8.60
9.70 0.46 2.19 a 02 a 74 0.13 0.13 0.60 2.58 15.57 11.74
9.86 0.90 0.98
02
0.51 3.05 20.96 18.04 13.52 3.00
1.52
11.94 0.01 1.82 a 12 a
a 03 3.53 a n
9.14
an 1.92 1.87 a 03 1.62 0.17 a 37 2.32 17.21 l a 70 8.51 0.89 1.30
0.02 15.22
8.71 0.03 1.07
9.81
8.98 0.54 1.24 0.90 0.06 a 76 0.06
8.34 1.20 0.74
8.29 a 15 0.93 2.47 0.05 0.84 0.20 a 17 3.68 18.31 l a 28
0.55
0.06
21.54
0.74
13.60
14.47
3.10 2.84 a n
11.63
a 08 0.79
a 21
9.07 2.20 0.64
8.82 0*42 0.94 3.99 0.04 1.40 0.15 0.25 3.36 19.56 11.91
10.53 a 08 a75 1.50 0.04 0.82 0.03 0.30 2.81 19.93 12.88 10.12 1.02 1.74
0.65
9.63
2.79 1.54 0.38 2.40 0.25 0.24 2.54 18.85 14.99 11.63 1.33 2.04
7.70
2.42 1.03 a 56 2.07 0.38 0.53 10.40 25.24 17.02 11.19 4.28 1.55
28.25 12.06 ia27 0.01 1.78
8.30
3.48 3.30 0.03 0.09 0.11 0.12
12.98 11.45 10.71 0.22 0.52
7.69 0.04 1.46 0.06 a 03 3.95 0.16 0.19 &
14.69 0.27 1.27 0.22 0.07 0.05 0.38 1.08 9.49 28.31 21.48 13.50 5.61 2.37
16.35 0.48 0.90 0.78 a 04 2.65 0.76 1.13 a 47 42.97 23.10 15.80 ! 1.85 5.46
9.97
8.53 0.85
8.75 0.09 1.74 1.70 0.03 1.11 0.04 0.09 1.58 16.80
0.84 0.35 2a 35 14.59 11.65 0.10 a 59
2.07
9.03
a si 2.98 0.28
0.84 2.84
a
65
17.04
25.00
1.99
13.79
1.35
a
06
6.55
2.27
15.97
1.05 a 19
2.40
9.81
8.73
1.07
15.39
5.06 0.02 1.19 0.42 aos 2.38 0,20 0.40
9.28
1.08 2.25 0.04 3.66 0.09 0.68 4.38 28.94 17.56 11.63 3.io 2.83
aoi
0.30
0.61
8.30
7.68
11.73
aoi
a
23
0.60
7.06 a 23 1.29
0.33
0.20 0.27 a 13 0.13 43.96 14.73 10.98 a 03 3.71
a 46 13.23
12.36

102
103
104
105

Covington, Ky
Allentown, Pa.
Pawtucket, R. I
Springfield, 111

14.76
12.60
22.17
21.46

8.53
7.35 a 41
13.02 0.09
13.09

1.25
0.81
1.08
2.51

0.46
1.19
0.37
2.45

0.02
0.04
0.08
0.16

1.58
0.74
0.25

106
107
108
109

Altoona, Pa
Mobile, Ala
Canton, Ohio
Saginaw, Mich.

14.79
15.99
16.06
2a 93

8.41
5.34
9.69
11.25

a 79
2.95
1.51

2.03
1.77
2.07
3.20

an
a32
aos

0.79
1.91
a 52
2.40

Trenton, N.J.
B17.73
Reading, Pa...
13.25
Dallas, Tex..
21.30
Salt Lake City, Utah. 28.66
Camden, N.X.
, 14.71
17.43
46.99
23.90

,
,
,

an

a is

0.10 0.18 2.64
1.90
0.06
0.50 an 5.36
0.17 1.43 2.68
0.22
0.16 a 34 2.16
3.15
0.36
0.08 0.20 1.87
a 45 a 28 2.34
a 35

Per
capita

of gov
ern
ment
tal
cost
Out paylays. ments
over
revenuereceipts.

PER CAPITA
EXCESS OP
REVENUE
RECEIPTS

Gov- Pay
ernmen- ments
for ex
tal penses
cost land
in
payments. terest.

$5.91
3.09
11.55
14.01
2.14

$2.55

11.51
5.18
2.80
47.36
13.10

5.63
0.01
1.25
26.86
4.99

$3.36
3.83
7.50
10.39
a 95
5.88
5.16
1.55
20.50
8.11

3.55
16.44
12.37
11.76
12.26

1.95
9.95
10.23
4.72
9.11

1.61
6.49
2.15
7.04
3.15

11.73
11.44
22.03
2.74
6.00

9.92
1.42
11.42

1.81
l a 02
10.61
3.21
6.68

6.06
4.05
4.33
7.53
9.19

3.26
0.96

ia39
37.87
3.83
2.92
6.50

6.22
3& 24

5.41
8.02
7.08
7.64
7.05

2.50
1.15
2.54
a 13
2.72

3.86
8.23
16.19
1.53
6.83

0.14
12.82

19.87
6.83
5.76
7.96
11.38
3.43
29.23

4.04
3.61
1.19

$a74

0.48

aos
0.66
5.23

"6778

0.26

0.24
0.15
0.34

12.86
8.96
18.98
12.81

9.89
7.23
13.24
10.63

0.83
0.90
1.32
1.02

2.14
0.83
4.43
1.16

1.75
3.66
5.53
2.94

a 02
2.34

14.85
18.42
19.09
18.19

10.45
13.52
11.37
14.82

7.87
8.45
8.63
11.69

0.55
1.27
0.86
1.17

2.03
3.80
1.88
11.95

4.40
4.90
7.72
3.38

a 07
2.43
3.03

$9.76 $1.15 $0.67
10.06 0.82 1.71
23.68 1.81 6.39
10.53 1.16 0.90
7.60 1.92 1.07

$3.50
5.49
20.19
8.51
1.82

$0.67
11.91
5.12
0.41

4.17
1.63
4.08
3.08
6.85
2.91
6.87
4.54
7.51
4.34

0.93
"6."93

4.79
8.08
3.37
2.47
6.05
6.46
5.15
1.78
7.04

13.41
1.68
3.98
a 92
5.63
7.48
1.66
17.02

14.61
12.62
24.52
15.76

2.80
3.09
4.59
6.88
3.96

*ao5
3.90
1.76
12.22
0.14
5.70

1.90
3.64
3.19
8.65
4.33
2.47
4.69

2.73

an

$0.80

$4.29
4.81
8.29
3.39
1.40

a 96
6.88
2.13 19.19 12.31
9.98 0.63 1.70
0.56 0.55
6.69
9.09
8.25 0.14 0.69
15.77
6.18
0.85 1.36 0.34
a
io
10.18
0.88
20.27
1.45
30.45
17.94
0.85
2.58
0.15
*• 2.31
3.80 20.27 18.30 11.81 2.91 3.58
1.97
1.02 0.18
1.85
a 15 2.31
4.79 20.74 14.91 11.83
5.84 .. 5."47l
3.02
0.71
0.05
0.25
* Per capita excess of payments for expenses and interest over revenue receipts.

7.84
6.51
12.50
3.82
0.37

0.04

GROUP V.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 30,000 TO 50,000 IN 1911.
110
111
112
113
114

BInghamton.N.Y.
Sioux City.Iowa...
Atlantic City, N. J.,
Rockford,IU.
Lancaster, Pa

115
116
117
118
119

Springfield, Ohio...
2a 15 14.80
Little Rock, Ark...
7.63
15.59
8acramento, Cal....
32.77 15.62
Pueblo, Colo
22.12 11.71
9.31
Chattanooga, Tenn.
15.28
i Less than one-half of 1 cent.




^15.88 $10.51
17.40 12.52
4a 16 21.59
15.98 10.94
6.55 $ao2
12.00

$0.87 $0.82 $0.02 $a49
1.07 0.64 0.12 0.47
4.85 1.64 0.19 4.12
1.33 1.26 0.08 0.16
0.76 0.20 0.02 0.90
0.17
2.41
2.41
2.52
1.10

1.17
2.65
7.09
1.47
1.20

an

$a24
0.11
0.62
0.24

aos

$0.52
a 34
2.37
0.30
0.40
0.65
0.26
0.06
0.28
0.34

$2.41 $15.09 $11.59
2.14 18.08 12.59
31.88
4.78
1.67 21.10 12.59
3.08 12.41 10.59

160

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.
TABLE 4.—PER CAPITA REVENUE RECEIPTS AND GOVERNMENTAL COST PAYMENTS: 1911—Continued.

IFor a list of t h e d t i e s arranged alphabetically b y states, w i t h tho number assigned to each, see page 20. For a t e x t discussion of this table, see page 57. For absolute
*
amounts, see Table 3.1
G R O U P V.—CITIES H A V I N G A P O P U L A T I O N O F 30,000 TO 50,000 I N 1911—Continued.
FEB CAPITA GOVERNMENTAL COST
FATUENTS F O B —

F E B CAPITA B E V E N U E BECEIFTS FBOM—

Taxes.

Sub
ven
tions, Earn- High Earn-1
way I
[grants,]
Fines, gifts,
privi-j
for dona
leges,
and , feits,
jpecial and es tions, gener
de |rents,|
and serv
charg cheats. and al
pen part inter-| ice
es for
ments.
est. J enter
sion
out
prises.
lays.
Spe
cial

Busi
ness,
All
and
rev
enues. Prop Poll. non
busi
erty.
ness
11*

CITY.

y

$1.57 810.0 82.38 $0.07 SO. 17
1.53 1.18 0.87 0.06 0.46
0.95 0.04 0.08 1.04 1.05
0.63 a 19 0.62 0.63 0.24
0.57 0.10 0.08 a 88 1.14
0.08 0.14 0.10 0.28 0.82 0.39
1.30 2.12 0.07 0.57 0.29 0.53
0.37 5.50 0.05 4.02 0.31 0.42
1.45 4.14 0.08 0.46 0.47 0.17
0.52 4.66 0.10 0.30 0.43 a 23

$0.74
19.43
10.43 SO. 15 0.62
16.06 0.51 0.02
11.94 0.05 0.63
13.67 0.51 1.30

Bay City, Mich
York, Pa
Maiden, Mass
New Britain, Conn.
Haverhill, Mass....
Salem, Mass
Lincoln, Nebr
Berkeley, Cal
Davenport, Iowa.
Topeka, Kans....

$17.09
15.30
22.07
17.79
20.75
17.27
20.43
21.62
22.25

12.30
12.89
10.90
15.46
14.52

McEeesport, P a . . .
Flint, Mich.
Tampa, Fla
San Diego. Cal
£1 Paso, T e x . . . : . .

16.73
13.75
14.78
43.82
18.07

11.46
7.63
8.69
18.82
11.53

Wheeling. W.Va..
Racine, Wis
Kalamazoo, MichSuperior, Wis.
Augusta, Ga.

17.76
16.41
15.76
18.77
21.47

9.57
9.20
9.17
12.05
8.19

0.07

Macon, Ga.
Newton, Mass
Butte, Mont
Woonsocket, R. L..
Chester, Pa.

17.19
42.52
20.22
15.44
10.61

7.20
32.72
10.67
8.95
7.79

0.06
0.48
0.53
0.05
0.25

Montgomery> Ala...
Fitchburg, Mass...
Dubuque, Iowa.....
Galveston, Tex
Elmira,N.Y.
,
Newcastle. Pa
West Hoboken, N. J..
Knoxville, Tenn.
Hamilton, Ohio
Springfield, Mo

19.26
22.16
16.71
22.15
14.71

0.49
0.18

Expenses and interest.
All
governmental
costs.

AllexJjponses
jand in-j
terest.

$2.71 513.59 $12.14
7.75
0.01 13.14
2.32 20.76 IS. 83
2.87 22.19 12.58
2.49 22.00 16.19

ExEx
penses!jofpub-|
Inof general
ter
serv est.
de
ice
part
ments.! enter
prises.
$8.88
6.94
14.78

2.67
2.47
0.05
0.03
2.93

17.81
IS. 02
22.12
20.85
21.94

14.76
12.68
15.01
14.35
15.17

9.36
13.20
12.36
9.68
13.91
13.71
11.63

Out
lays.

SI. 79 $1.47
0) 0.S0
a 76 3.30
0.70 2.53
a 72 2.27

$1.45
5.39
1.93
9.60
5.S2

1.22 1.18
1.13 1.S3
0.03 1.02
0.02 0.62
1.08 2.45

3.05
5.35
7.11
6.50
6.77

Per
capita
excess
of governmental
cost
pay
ments
over
rovoc u o re-]
cclpts.

$4.40
1.26
0.54

*6."S0

0.87
0.09
1.79
2.38
0.57

0.37
1.56
0.14
11.68
2.19

0.26
0.11
0.58
0.37
0.45

0.85
2.00
2.58
2.72
1.16

0.26
0.67
0.66
0.61
0.54

0.25
0.12
0.28
1.51
0.04

2.41
1.56
0.05
5.69
1.61

15.63
19.41
14.20
51.02
50.02

13.94
8.27
12.02
22.24
17.13

10.20
6.97
10.38
16.43
13.79

2.20 1.55
0.62 0.GS
0.04 1.60
3.41 2.40
1.15 2.19

1.74
11.14
2. IS
28.78
32.89

1.58
1.91
0.43
2.49
4.01

2.87
1.92
2.67
0.40

0.31
0.12
0.18
0.47
0.46

0.39
1.06
1.77
0.58
2.85

0.25
0.30
0.29
0.32
1.00

0.33
0.66
0.45
0.20
0.49

5.27
0.29
1.55

21.63
17.24
14.42
21.70
23.3S

14.71
10.72
10.91
13.73
16.91

10.15
9.49
9.26
12.76
13.37

3.30 1.26
0.2S 0.95
0.58 1.07

3.87
0.83

0.97
2.10

6.92
6.52
3.51
7.97
6.47

2.32
0.04
2.29
1.15
0.76

2.14
0.99
2.78
0.41
0.42

0.54
0.07
0.55

2.47
0.44
3.12
0.29
0.85

0.63
1.12
0.27
0.53
0.12

0.67
2.86
0.02
0.90
0.36

1.11
3.83

11.52
33.12
18.4S
13.08
8.43

10.22
24.21
17.03
8.94
7.24

0.83
0.89

0.47
8.02
1.46
3.55
1.17

23.17
3.10
2.17
0.94
1.08

17.00

3*i4
0.03

34.69
35.22
20.65
14.02
9.50

6.31
14.73
12.55
12.76
11.94

0.31 3.73
0.49 1.02
1.19
0.77
1.22

3.50
0.76
0.73
0.25
0.26

0.59
0.07
0.01
0.07
0.05

0.76
0.08
0.43
2.47
0.66

0.53 0.19
1.79 0.91
0.05 <V
1.62 1.11
0.11 0.19

3.29
2.28
1.75
3.11
0.27

27.44
23.34
14.97
29.26
15.83

17.02
18.90
12.94
18.23
12.91

10.84
15.11
10.17
11.26
11.79

1.66 4.52
2.02 1.77
1.17 1.60
1.42 5.56
0.22 0.90

10.43
4.44
2.03
11.03
2.92

8.18
1.18

12.32
13.41
21.89
20.04
15.31

9.33
5.89
10.31
10.20
7.11

0.55
1.44
1.96
1.65
1.65

1.15
1.41
1.64
2.57
5.44

0.10
0.01
0.41
0.01
0.06

0.69
4.25
1.88
0.58
0.57

0.29
0.05
0.55
0.08
0.24

0.22
0.33
0.29
0.26
0.10

<>)

8.31
10.75
16.00
16.07
7.38

7.72
9.42
9.61
9.93
7.32

1.56
2.93

0.55
1.33
4.83
3.20
0.06

4.44
3.51
3.46
10.35
6.76

0.42
0.84

4*82'
4.C9
0.04

12.75
14.26
19.46
26.42
14.14

0.04

0.03
0.03

0.14

0.66
2.27
2.71
2.91
1.06

1.61
0.88
0.28
1.79
0.01

0.04
0.08
0.38
0.06
0.35

4.18
0.16
0.62
1.19
0.32

0.56
0.26
0.28
0.05
0.14

1.22
0.51
0.59
0.05
0.19

4.13
0.03
0.19
0.10
0.12

33.49
12.62
26.97
16.93
13.45

23.26
9.57
12.02
13.05
10.38

17.62
8.64
9.96
11.40
9.19

3.14
0.05
0.09
0.05
0.07

2.50
0.88
1.97
1.61
1.12

10.23
3.06
14.95
3.88
3.09

0.14
0.35
0.44

4.10
0.96
1.08
1.04
0.04

1.63
1.15
0.09
0.78
0.75

0.08
0.07
0.23
0.06
0.03

0.15
0.53
1.02
0.11
0.27

0.11
0.12
0.29
1.12
0.46

0.15 1.34
0.42 3.23
0.36 1.91
1.07 4.93
0.59 3.33

16.36
19.26
9.05
20.89
21.16

13.74
14.34
8.16
17.82
IS. 16

11.44
11.62
5.67
12.30
13.46

1.64
1.68
0.69
2.70
1.13

0.66
1.05
1.S0
2.82
3.57

2.61
4.92
1.49
3.08
3.00

0.33
1.20

1.72
1.03
0.07
1.96
1.17

1.00
1.32
5.97
0.48

0.09
0.09
0.10
0.18
0.09

0.60
0.05
0.07
1.12
4.83

0.11
0.43
0.48
0.44
0.16

0.18
0.27
0.73
0.OS
0.30

2.14
2.89
4.01
2.91
0.03

14.67
32.76
31.02
29.93
14.85

8.91
15.52
20.55
15.21
10.97

6.82
12.81
15.09
11.22
10.30

0.16
0.68
0.85
2.62
0.06

1.92
2.03
4.61
1.38
0.61

5.77
17.21
10.47
14.72
3.88

4.52
12.48
4.02
2.24

1.99
0.09
0.40
0.89
0.08

2.31
2.18
6.36
0.43
0.71

0.10
0.17
0.14
0.06
0.18

2.65
1.35
3.82
0.38
1.78

0.12
0.15
0.42
0.11
0.52

0.41
0.01
0.27
0.21
0.03

3.32
5.13
3.59
2.46
2.03

21.37
22.07
32.95
11.60
16.41

13.03
12.54
21.70
9.38
11.74

9.46
9.01
18. OS
7.29
9.84

1.31
2.85
2.22
0.64
1.13

2.26
0.68
1.41
1.45
0.77

8.34
9.53
11.25
2.22
4.67

4.54
0.24

1.96

7.66
6.49
12.56
9.58
4.55

2.81

0.11

4.07

1.43

0.5S
0.01

5.66
7.20
31.95

2.93
1.91

"6*43

7.11
1.12

6.3S

East Orange, N. J —
Quincy, I
Roanoke, Va.
Lexington, Ky
Huntington, W. Va..
Joliet,HI
Auburn, N . Y . .
Charlotte, N. C.
Taunton, Mass..
Everett, Mass...

27.94
15.46
16.15
18.16
8.66

15.36
11.29
11.01
12,01
6.35

16.03
18.05
10.62
22.11
22.60

8.46
U.57
5.50
12.64
16.63

Portsmouth, Va
Pittsfield, Mass
Quincy, Mass.
Cedar Rapids, Iowa.
Oshkosk,Wis

10.15
20.28
27.00
27.70
18.18

5.30
14.17
19.81
15.03
11.13

Perth Amboy, N. J..
Lansing, Mich
Pasadena, Cal
Amsterdam, N. Y . . .
Jackson, Mich

16.83
21.83
35.78
12.26
16.10

5.90
12.74
20.78
7.71
10.76

Jamestown, N. Y.....
San Jose, Cal
Decatur, 111
Mount Vernon, N. Y.,
Joplin, Mo

18.36
23.18
16.94
26.98
13.33

10.41
10.53
10.17
20.22
7.57

0.54
2.02
1.34
1.03
2.26

0.89
6.10
3.02
3.44
1.48

0.09
0.09
0.26
0.10
0.34

0.57
4.16
0.16
0.98
0.64

0.25
0.25
0.17
0.49
0.25

0.73 4.89
0.03
0.27 1.54
0.73
0.14 6*65

21.17
22.04
23.47
33.73
14.10

13.50
15.55
10.90
24.16
9.55

9.65
14.50
8.70
20.47
7.90

0.99

1.90
1.05
0.87
3.69
0.66

Williamsport, P a . . . .
Niagara Falls, N . Y .
Muskogee, Okla
Lima, Ohio
Chelsea, Mass

12.86
30.94
18.53
17.30
28.19

9.34
22.01
6.67
9.51
18.19

0.99
1.86
0.31
1.25
0.42 1.11

0.35
2.86
6.55
2.59
0.45

0.04
0.11
1.06
0.13
0.17

0.93
0.68
0.77
0.93
0.64

0.23
0.28
0.22
0.13
0.51

0.15 0.41
0.79 2.35
0.24 2.71
0.44 2.31
2.38 4.32

10.06
42.39
28.73
14.28
31.02

9.58
21.46
16.03
11.18
23.23

8.97
15.85
9.98
8.39
16.56

0.02
1.73
1.57
0.79
0.75

0.60
3.88
4.48
2.00
5.98

0.47
20.92
12.70
3.10
7.74

Aurora, HI
NewRochelle,N.Y..
Austin, Tex
La Crosse, Wis
Newport, Ky.
,

16.63
30.22
20.40
17.28
11.84

9.90
23.92
9.75
10.57
7.52

1.49
1.04
0.35
1.48
0.84

2.62
3.43
0.04
1.06

0.07
0.03
0.22
0.06
0.02

0.17
0.66
1.30
1.66
1.14

0.22
0.49
0.29
0.09
0.09

0.33 1.82
0.55 0.09
0.38 8.07
0.67 1.69

11.23
23.33
14.22
13.26
10.39

9.35
18. SO
8.42
10.57
7.47

1.03
0.06
3.51
1.20
1.16

0.85
4.47
2.29
1.49
1.76

7.97
23.24
6.67
3.68
0.66

2.58
16.35
0.49

2.23

19.21
46.57
20.89
16.94
11.05

Orange, N.J.
,
Lorain, Ohio
,
Council Bluffs, Iowa...
Lynchburg, Va.

20.62
16.59
15.60
24.22

9.56
8.72
10.99
13.01

1.39
1.96
0.09 1.25
0.18 4.92

1.20
2.42
2.33
0.95

0.08
0.07
0.12
0.28

4.21
0.46
0.42
0.65

0.32 1.25 2.59
0.12 0.46 2.39
0.20 0.18 0.02
0.35 1.12 2.74

32.27
21.19
15.16
29.34

18.18
13.82
10.53
14.59

12.83
9.47
9.80
10.35

1.23
1.51
0.03
0.67

4.11
2.84
0.69
3.57

4.09
7.37
4.63
14.76

1.65
4.60




0.16
0.09

0.34
0.41

0.03

0.42

0.02

x Less than one-half of 1 cent.

1.34

5.55

id.'82
4.81

0.30

6.53
6.75
0.78
11.44
10.19
2.84

5.12

t Per capita excess of p a y m e n t s for expenses and interest over revenue receipts.

GENERAL TABLES.

161

TABLE 5.—PER CENT DISTRIBUTION OF REVENUE RECEIPTS AND GOVERNMENTAL COST PAYMENTS, BY PRIN
CIPAL CLASSES: 1911.
[For a list of the cities arranged alphabetically by states, with the number assigned to each, see page 20. For a text discussion of this table, see page 59. For amounts on
which percentages are based, see Table 3.]
7ER CENT Or GOVERNMENTAL COST
PAYMENTS BEPBESENTED BT—

REVENUE BECEXPTS.

Per cent obtained from—
City
num-l
ber.

Taxes.
Special

CRT*

Busi ments, Fines,
ness,
and
and special forfeits,
and es
non
chargesl
Poll. busi
for ' cheats.
ness
out
li
lays.
cense.

Prop
erty.

Grand total..

61.C
65.7
58.3
56.2
56.8
59.8

Group I . . .
Group n . .
Group III.
Group IV..
Group V . .

Sub
ven
tions,
grants, Earn- ;
gifts,
dona
tions,
and general
pensionl depart
ments.
ments.

T

Payments for—
Per
cent
avail
able
Reve
EarnEx
Exfor
nue
out penses] peases
re
of '
lays
Out
Inter
ceipts.
and gener public est. lays.
Ex
Inter
al
de
[service
other
public
part enter
pur
service penses, est.
poses. ments.] prises.
enter
prises.
Percent
required for
meeting-

High
way
privi
leges,
rents,
and
inter
est.

T

0.2

6.8

8.5

0.5

4.6

2.1

5.0

10.6

0.3
0.6
0.5

6.4
8.1
6.7
7.1
7.0

5.7
7.6
15.5
11.2
9.6

0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
1.0

2.4
9.9
5.2
6.2
6.4

1.9
3.7
2.0
1.7
2.1

6.6
4.4
3.5
2.3
2.5

11.1
7.3
10.1
13.5
11.1

12.6
64.4
64.9
63.4

15.1
8.9
10.2
11.0
10.4

20.5
26.2
30.6
25.6
25.9

51.1

3.0

10.9

34.0

86.8

52.8
55.1
45.5
46.9
5X3

3.9
2.7
3.6
5.4
4.8

13.3
7.9
8.5
9.1
9.4

30.1
34.2
42.4
38.5
33.5

88.0
89.2
83.0
82.5
89.8

GROUP I.-C1TIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER IN 191L
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

New York, N . Y

71.0
56.1
55.9
58.4

St. Louis, Mo

0.2

71.0
60.9
63.3
66.8

Boston, Mass.
Cleveland, qh{o_.,,,_._.

0.4

3.8
14.0
5.8
10.6

6.2
8.5
1.9
9.7

0.3
0.8
0.2
0.4

1.2
0.9
6.9
2.3

0.6
2.9
4.2
2.4

5.7
6.9
12.7
4.9

11.2
9.9
12.1
11.3

61.7
63.9
80.1
66.8

20.3
5.7
9.8
5.4

18.0
30.4
10.1
27.8

45.8
62.9
65.9
54.7

3.0
4.9
5.6
5.1

16.2
6.0
8.7
4.8

35.1
26.2
19.7
35.4

79.2
106.1
89.3
89.6

3.1
9.8
9.1
5.0

0.8
7.9
0.5
4.5

0.3
0.2
0.1
0.4

5.0
2.5
4.0
4.1

2.2
4.7
1.5
2.8

6.0
3.6
10.7
4.9

11.2
10.5
10.7
11.4

57.7
64.9
64.8
70.2

16.9
11.8
16.8
13.3 j

25.4
23.3
18.4
16.5

62.1
54.8
54.5
61.3

4.2
3.9
4.4
4.9

19.4
10.6
15.3
12.5

14.3
30.7
25.8
21.4

114.9
90.4
90.9
94.1

1.8
4.4

4.2
8.2
4.3
4.4
14.9

30.1
27.4
42.6
21.2
31.2

97.9
90.8
71.8
98.6
84.2

11.7
6.4
16.4
3.2
6.9

29.3
53.8
25.7
25.2
39.9

92.6
78.2
97.8
109.4
87.3

62.1
61.7
32.5
33.6
13.6

51.8
78.5
98.6
94.4
111.7

GROUP H.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000 IN 1911.
9 Detroit. Mich
10 Buffalo, N . Y
11
12 Milwaukee, Wis
13

60.5
66.0
65.7
65.4
55.7

14 Newark, N . J
15
16
17
18

55.1
58.6
67.3
35.5
61.7

0.6
0.6

9.1

67.2
70.8
74.1
72.4
63.9

4.2
9.1
5.9
4.5
17.7

28.6
20.1
20.0
23.1 |
18.4

63.9
59.9
53.1
68.3
50.3

10.6
9.1
9.7
4.3
5.5

63.8
50.8
59.3
65.4
60.9

12.7
8.2
16.7
3.0
7.9

23.5
41.0!
24.0
31.6
31.2

56.0
37.9
51.7
68.0
50.9

3.5
3.1
1.8
6.3
3.5
2.3

7.1
6.3
10.5
9.4
8.9

7.3
5.6
11.3
8.8
3.6

0.3
0.2
0.3
0.5
0.3

7.4
3.0
6.2
3.6
2.1

6.1
6.2
4.0
2.9
3.0

3.4
3.6
2.0
1.2
17.3

8.0
9.1

5.8
6.4
11.3
10.4
5.8

8.1
13.6

0.2
1.4
0.6
0.7
0.5

11.8
6.3
3.1
42.5
5.9

2.6
2.5
3.6
2.5
3.4

5.2
2.1
3.7
0.7
3.3

3.3
13.9

Si

GROUP HI.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000 IN 1911.
19
20 Seattle, Wash
21
22
23

50.2
34.2
47.5
60.2
64.8

24
25
26
27
28

Louisville. Ky.
Rochester, N. Y
Denver, Colo
Portland. Orcg
$t-P*m1, Minn

59.5
61.7
66.7
40.3
60.1

29
30
31
32
33

Toledo, Ohio
Atlanta, Ga
Oakland, Cal
Worcester, Mass

57.0
58.5
51.7
53.7
66.5

0.5

34'
35 Syracuse, N. Y
36
37 Memphis, Tenn
38

32.0
65.4
81.1
55.6
62.2

"**i.Y

39
40
41
42
43

Richmond, Va
Patcrson, N. J
Omaha, Nebr
Dayton, Ohio

44
45 Spokane, wash
46 Nashville, Tenn
47 Lowell. Mass
48
49
50
51
52 i Hartford. Conn
53 Albany, N . Y

0>
0.3
0.4

2.3

59.5
61.5
59.8
1 72.4
61.5
54.4
37.2
54.0
72.8
1 68.9 !
76.8
72.4 1
81.8
75.3
63.4
!

2.1
0.4
0.4
2.3

15.0
6.6
2.1
6.8
1.0

0.7
1.0
1.1
1.0
2.5

5.2
1.5 I
4.0
2.9
.10.1

18.2
11.5
14.0
0.6 |
14.3

59.3
36.5
63.6
66.5 !
65.0

26.9
13.8
12.4 1 51.1
4.8
31.6
3.8
29.7
12.3
22.7

24.7
25.1
56.3
62.4
68.8

6.0
3.5
6.5
0.4
3.9

7.2
9.7
4.7
3.5
13.7

0.4
0.2
0.4
0.5
0.6

4.9
2.0
2.3
4.1
3.3

1.3
0.9
2.6
0.5
2.5

2.0
3.4
4.3
1.7
3.5 j

13.3
11.9
0.5 i
9.7
10.2

57.3
69.0
62.7
34.8
65.2|

8.4
9.8 j
5.1
9.9|
11.7

34.3
21.2
32.2
55.3
23.1

53.5 1 3.6
49.3
4.3
0.9
61.0
2,1
19.0
3.9
59.7

8.4
7.6
5.0
6.0
11.4

34.4
38.8
33.1
72.9
24.9

11.0
14.1
14.6
21.0
3.3

0.3
0.1
2.7
1.7
0.3

2.2
2.6
4.0
14.8
0.4

5.3
1.3
3.6
0.7
5.6

5.2 i
5.2
1.8
0.9
5.4

13.1
9.4
11.6
0.5
11.5

68.8
55.4
63.1
53.5
74.2

13.8
12.5
5.7
4.0
10.6

54.7 1
17.4
46.5
32.1
43.0
31.2
,
43.9
42.5
63.6
15.2

6.2
5.3
4.7
0.1
2.6

18.8
5.4
7.6
3.2
15.8

25.5
13.5
1.8
11.5
11.8

3.1
0.2
0.8
0.7
0.8

11.5
2.3
3.4
10.2
6.1

5.0
1.1
2.4
2.0
0.3

2.9
1.4
1.8
1.7
0.9

1.4
10.7
0.1
15.0

71.4
66.7
79.0
64.2
73.2

20.1
12.0
5.7
15.0
7.3

8.5
21.3
15.3
20.8
19.5

44.6
59.7
80.8
38.8 j
68.1

0.9
3.7
0.1
5.1

5.7
10.3
9.7
6.5
10.2

2.3
3.3
17.7
0.5
12.9

0.7
0.4
0.7
0.5
0.3

2.6
17.9
3.1
0.2
2.8

0.4
L8
1.6
2.0
1.9

7.1
4.4
7.4
5.0
2.2

21.2

51.7
67.2
63.3
66.3
66.2

13.6
10.3
12.5
12.6
9.1

34.7
22.5
24.2
21.1
24.7 I

36.7
68.3
48.8
62.4
60.4

9.7

6.5
13.1
12.6
8.9
16.3

33.9
38.2
22.2
9.7
29.9

4.8
45.5
3.1
29.3
2.4
50.6
4.6
69.9 I 7.2
60.5
3.8

5.3
8.6
10.6
8.4
19.5

4.8
i 72.5
12.9
65.9
&7
10.1
0.9 ! 61.7
65.2
12.5
9.9
63.8 1 9.5
16.8

22.7
21.2
28.2
24.9
21.7

73.7
46.2
60.1
56.0
61.2

0.1
3.3
1.0
3.6
7.2

4.9
9.7
10.0
9.1
9.5

81.7
46.0
59.7
65.2
34.1 i 84.7
14.5
94.7
16.2 119.5
21.3 101.8
40.9
75.1
99.1
28.9
91.3
31.4
22.2
99.4

7.8
3.3
8.1
9.0
5.5

2.9
41.3
22.1
18.9
1.2

0.1 !
0.5!
1.0
0.3
0.1 |

9.2
4.4
6.6
7.9
9.7

9.3
15.5
16.5
35.2
10.1

5.8
8.9
9.6
6.7
4.7

17.0
! 3.0
1 6.2 1 27.5
1.7
3.0
2.1
i.9 1 5.6
1.6 1
0.1
1-2
5.8 1
0.3 j 8.7
3.7
1.9
1.8
3.4
0.7
0.9
2.8
0.5
1.8
6.2
6.9

10.0
0.3
0.8 j 10.8
18.4
0.9
0.3
0.5
0.3
0.1 |

3.5
3.4
1.5
2.3
10.5 j

3.2
0.7
8.7
2.0
2.3

2.1
2.3 i
2.3
1.9
0.4

0.9
0.2
1.0
0.4
0.1

S.

|
8.3
59.6
10.3
1.6
0.9 | 13.1 i 48.7
15.6 i 65.2
4.8
81.4
3.3 1 11.3
53.8
12.7
4.6

2.3
4.4
0.2
2.8
3.9

» Leas than one-tenth of 1 per cent*

6127°—13




\l

100.3
77.6
98.7
60.6
97.6
12.2 26.9
88.6
11.7 36.6
93.4
4.3 ! 47.9! 75.6
3.3 52.7
82.3
9.5 24.4
89.2
12.8 41.7
63.3
95.1
11.4 25.2
5.8 13.3 102.2
68.4
10.3 45.8
6.8 25.2
92.9
89.8
12.2 41.3
10.4 21.2 101.7
9.7 4L5
77.2
12.6 21.1 100.0
9.0 25.9
98.5

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

162

T.B M 5.-PEK CENT DISTRIBUTION OF ^g^SSS^SJ^SS^1^^

°°"

PAYMENTS BY PMN

'

"

GROUP IV.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 50,000 TO 100,000 IN 1011.
PER CENT Or GOVERNMENTAL COST
PAYMENTS REPRESENTED BY—

REVENUE RECEIPTS.

Percent
required for
meeting—

Per cent obtained from—
Taxes.
City
num-l
ber.
Property.

Trenton, N. J...
Beading, Pa
Dallas, Tex.
Salt Lake City, Utah.
Camden, N. J.

44.6
59.2
63.1
50.3
47.9

Springfield, Mass..
Lynn, Mass
Lawrence, Mass...
Tacoma, w a s h —
Pes Moines, Iowa..

69.8
71.1
71.6
32.3
66.3

"Wilmington,
Del
W:
Kansas City, K a n s . . . .
Yonkers,N.Y
I Youngstown, O h i o . . . .
Houston, Tex

63.7
61.8
68.6
55.6
68.6

Norfolk, Va
Duluth,Minn....
Fort worth, Tex.
Somervflle, Mass..
St. Joseph, Mo....

56.8
52.7
47.4
69.7
58.9

Utica,N.Y
Troy.N.Y
Elizabeth, N.J
Schenectady, N. Y .
Waterbury, Conn...

73.3
73.7
53.1
61.5
64.0

Akron, Ohio..,
Oklahoma City, Okla..
Manchester, N. H
Hoboken. N. 7.
Evansville, Ind

73.3
43.8
61.4
56.6
52.1

Wflkes-Barre, Pa.
Erie, Pa
,
Peoria,Ul
Fort Wayne, Ind.,
Harrisburg,Pa....

70.6
48.3
61.2
45.4
61.1

Savannah, Ga
Jacksonville, Fla..
East St. Louis, HI.
Terre Haute, Ind..
Holyoke, Mass

48.7
30.7
53.8
55.3
53.4

Portland, Me
South Bend, Ind..
Charleston, B . C . . .
Brockton, Mass....

55.3
57.9
55.2
66.3

98
99
100
101

Passafc,N.J
Bayonne,N. J
Johnstown, Pa
Wichita, Kans

51.9
43.3
70.1
45.9

102
103
104
105

Covington, Ky
Allentown,Pa
Pawtucket,R.I...
Springfield, 111

57.8
58.3
58.7
61.0

106
107
108
109

AItoona,Pa
Mobile, Ala
Canton, Ohio
Saginaw, Mich.....

56.8
33.4
60.3
53.8

04
95
96
97

Sub
ven
tions,
grants,
gifts,
dona
tions,
and
pension

Special

Busi ments,
ness, and , Fines,
forfeits,
and
es
non special
charges| and
PoU. busi
cheats.
ness
out
li
cense. lays.
ments.

II
8:1

7.2
6.3
2.1
12.8
10.4

8.8
4.8
12.7
13.8
3.6

0.4
0.1
2.5
0.2
0.3

3

4.1
0.4
8.6
3.3
6.7

1.9
2.1
3.4
27.6
22.6

0.4
0.5
0.5
0.3
0.9

0.8
3.9
4.6
9.6
2.4

5.3
15.1
4.7
16.4

0.7
0.8
0.1
0.7
1.1

21.4
8.7
1.8
0.2
10.3

12.5
30.7
3.3
22.1

0.2
0.9
0.9
0.1
1.0

11.7
2.4
8.9
17.7
4.5

0.3

0.8

8.6
6.6
12.6
6.6
7.0

2.9

8.4
2.0
13.8
8.6
11.0

11.6
34.8
0.1
0.6
10.6

0.9
3.8
0.1
0.1
0.1

1:1

9.8
5.4
16.3
4.8
4.4

7.0
14.4
15.0
20.6
8.7

0.5
0.3
0.9
0.2
0.3

°d

14.1
9.6
22.6
10.5
4.6

7.8
4.1
21.4
0.4
0.8

1.9
2.2
0.2
0.2
0.3

3.1
11.5
12.6
0.2

2.6
11.2

0.2
0.2
5.0
0.8

0.7
0.1

«•
4.2
0.9

tt
2.3

0.2
0.2
0.7

4.4

2.3

12.2
5.0
12.8
1.7

0.8
0.2
3.2
0.6

ft

8.5
6.4
4.9
11.7

0.1
0.3
0.4
0.8

0.2

5.3
18.5
9.4
4.3

i!
I!

0.7
2.0
0.2
0.2

Earn
ings of
general
depart'l
ments.

1
I

li
si
"si
si

High
Earn
way
privi ings of
public
leges,
Inter
Ex
rents, service penses.
est.
enter
and
inter prises.
est.

ExEx
Reve
pcnsesl penses]
nue
of [ of
re
Out
Inter
gener public est. lays. ceipts.
al de jservice
part enter
ments.! prises.

1.6
0.6
1.1
0.8
0.9

7.1
1.4
2.7
0.3
4.4

13.6
18.8
10.1
11.6
17.8

66.2
63.2
57.1
53.1
79.0

14.9
7.8
7.7
10.6
14.6

18.9
29.0
35.2
36.3
6.4

53.3
60.5
39.9
43.1
63.2

4.6
6.5
8.1
4.1
4.9

13.0
8.3
0.6
9.4
13.5

59.1
24.7
45.6
43.4
13.5

87.4
105.9
84.0
88.8
92.5

3.1
3.9
2.4
0.3
0.7

2.5
3.0
1.0
2.3
1.8

16.4
16.4
10.4
24.7
0.7

72.3
65.5
83.1
44.2
61.6

8.6
11.4
8.0
12.1
4.7

19.1
23.1
8.9
43.7
33.7

54.0
56.4
71.7
20.8
49.8

7.1
9.1
5.8
7.4
1.0

7.3
11.4
7.6
7.7
3.9

31.6
23.2
15.0
64.1
45.3

84.5
99.9
93.3
63.6
82.3

1.6
0.8
0.5
2.3
3.3

3.5
2.5
1.8
2.3
1.2

21.3
14.4
10.4
10.6
15.2

75.2
50.4
77.8
53.2
64.3

13.0
19.2
14.4
6.8
18.9

11.8
30.4
7.8
35.0
16.8

58.1
30.2
51.3
43.0
39.6

6.8
4.1
5.6
4.1
3.7

11.3
13.1
10.5
5.5
12.7

23.8
52.6
32.8
47.4
44.1

87.0
68.2
72.9
81.0
67.3

0.9
0.9
1.5
9.1
0.8

5.2
0.3
2.2
0.8
1.1

12.3
21.1
11.3
13.5
0.3

67.2
55.3
49.0
74.1
58.6

23.0
12.1
10.3
11.4
7.0

9.8
32.6
40.7
14.5
34.4

39.5
41.4
23.7
72.3
60.5

4.3
11.6
10.5
3.6
0.2

15.0
11.6
7.2
11.7
7.2

41.1
35.6
68.6
12.6
32.1

65.2
95.6
69.7
102.2
103.6

1.4
0.8
1.9
0.6
0.9

1.7
0.9
4.5
2.0
2.2

0.1
13.0
0.1
9.0
15.0

75.6
73.0
58.9
64.1
70.1

17.0
14.6
29.7
24.9
22.0

63.1
65.6
59.8
52.6
62.5

6.2
11.8
11.6
10.7
6.1

30.8
18.3
28.5
32.7
39.6

83.5
95.7
101.7
97.3
77.5

0.5
4.5
0.8
0.5
1.0

2.2
0.4
3.8
2.4
2.1

0.3
8.9
16.3
14.4
13.2

66.0
67.3
68.0
78.3
53.6

7.4
12.4
11.4
11.0
7.9
8.2
24.4
6.2
7.2
7.4

25.8
8.3
25.8
14.5
39.0

47.5
22.0
63.3
64.5
49.5

5.9
8.6
6.3
7.2
7.6

46.4
67.8
24.6
13.9
37.8

72.9
35.2
101.6
100.7
102.0

0.5
1.2
3.9
0.7
0.2

1.3
3.2
1.3
1.5
3.8

0.1
21.4
0.3
17.3
16.3

68.8
55.6
72.0
58.0
64.7

8.4
4.3
4.2
3.3
10.1

22.8
40.1
23.8
38.7
25.2

57.3
45.6
63.1
46.4
50.8

7.0
4.0
3.7
3.3
8.7

35.6
43.8
32.8
39.1
35.4

83.6
93.7
88.2
99.3
86.4

1.3
1.5
0.7
1.1
1.3

1.2
2.1
0.8
1.3
3.9

(')

12.8
41.5
2.4
34.6

65.5
61.6
66.6
78.6
69.4

10.3
6.2
11.5
3.7
8.6

24.2
32.2
21.9
17.7
22.0

61.7
44.3
36.4
82.5
47.7

10.8
6.2
6.3
4.0
8.4

20.5
32.6
67.3
11.8
24.1

101.9
99.4
54.6
107.2
97.2

2.6
0.3
1.7
8.3

3.8
0.6
5.1
2.7

21.9
10.5
2.2
9.4

59.7
62.0
71.7
60.8

18.5
3.9
17.4
10.0

21.8
34.1
10.9
29.2

36.8
50.8
57.2
55.2

12.7
3.5
14.0
9.6

46.2
40.7
28.3
31.8

68.8
90.0
80.4
96.3

2.0
0.4
2.3
1.0

4.1
3.2
3.0
0.6

20.4
0.1
0.6

89.5
68.6
76.4
40.9

11.0
13.2
6.0
13.8

a.

7.0
9.8
5.2
8.5

36.3
39.3
29.2
66.6

63.4
74.1
85.8
61.3

0.7
0.5
2.2
0.8

1.2
0.9
6.4
1.0

17.9
15.1
24.2
12.5

72.6
64.5
65.6
54.3

14.5
6.6
20.0
5.4

17.6
45.3
12.9
28.9
14.4
40.3

56.7
40.2
65.5
25.0

14.7
6.6
18.1
7.3

12.0
29.0
22.6
18.7

101.0
99.9
90.5
# 136.2

1.1
2.2
0.5
2.2

2.3
1.2
1.7
1.7

14.6
19.7
11.7
11.2

57.0
60.8
59.1
61.5

13.7
23.8
11.7
9.3

29.3
15.4
29.2
29.2

13.7
20.6
9.8
10.7

29.6
26.6
40.5
18.6

99.6
86.8
84.1
116.0

4.4
9.4
12.3
4.3
8.6

23.2
30.4
38.8
40.3
14.6

105.3
96.2
77.1
75.7
96.7

8.8
4.4
2.9
17.7
14.6

35.8
42.4
33.4
9.7
28.1

105.0
98.8
107.6
109.1
73.6

10.8
6.1
15.9
11.4
10.3

10.7
41.0
9.3
43.3
26.4

125.8
116.5
10ft. 3
80.2
94.3

1
I

Payments for—
Per
cent
avail
able
for
out
lays
and
other
pur
poses.

67.7
57.3
54.0
67.6
53.0
45.9
45.2
64.3

1

1I!
I
II
II

GROUP V.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 30,000 TO 50,000 IN 1911.
110
HI
112
113
114

Binghamton,N.Y..
Sioux City. Iowa...
Atlantic City, N. J..
Rockford,Hl
Lancaster, Pa

5.2
3.7
4.1
7.9
1.7

0.1
0.7
0.5
0.5
0.2

115
116
117
118
119

73.4
0.9
5.8
8prmgfield,Ohio...
Little Rock, Ark...
48.9
15.4
17.0
Sacramento, Cal....
48.3
21.6
7.4
52.9
6.6
Pueblo, Colo
11.4
60.9
7.9
7.2
Chattanooga, Tenn.
Bay City, Mich
55.2
4.3
9.2
York, Pa
68.1
4.1
1.0
10.0
Maiden, Mass
72.8
0.1
2.3
4.3
New Britain, Conn
67.1
3.5
0.3
3.5
Haverhill, 2
65.9
6.3
2.4
2.7
* Less than one-tenth of 1 per cent.

0.6
5.4
0.6
0.7
1.7

120
121
122
123
124




66.2
71.9
53.8
68.5
54.6

'"6."2

5.5
6.2
12.1
8.3
6.3

(

?.7
0.2
1.0
0.5

1
I

1.5
0.6
1.5
1.5
0.5

3.3
2.0
5.9
1.9
3.3

15.2
12.3
11.9
10.5
25.7

68.8
62.5
63.5
86.2
79.4

4.2
9.8
15.9
5.6
8.9

27.0
27.7
20.6
8.2
11.7

64.7
55.6
46.5
49.9
61.3

2.7
2.2
2.6
0.8
4.7

3.2
1.7
0.2
1.3
2.2

10.6
0.7
11.6
21.6
0.3

52.7
63.8
59.2
66.6
77.8

8.4
4.4
2.7
16.2
19.8

38.9
41.8
38.1
17.3
2.4

52.0
52.3
58.9
58.3
67.0

li
i
i

0.4
1.0
15.9
62.4
8.6
65.3
29.0
0.4
3.0
45.4
5.3
52.8
49.3
4.7
4.8
70.4
14.9
71.2
14.7
3.5
1.3
16.1
56.5
14.2
42.2
29.3
4.2
5.5
12.0
67.1
10.9
59.9
22.0
* Payments for expenses and interest are in excess of revenue receipts.

8.5

GENERAL TABLES.
TABLE

163

5.—PER CENT DISTRIBUTION OF REVENUE RECEIPTS AND GOVERNMENTAL COST PAYMENTS, BY PRIN
CIPAL CLASSES: 1911—Continued.

[For a list ot the cities arranged alphabetically b y states, w i t h t h e number assigned t o each, see page 20. For a text discussion of thfe table, see page 59. For amounts o n
w h i c h percentages are based, see Table 3.]
G R O U P V.—CITIES H A V I N G A P O P U L A T I O N O F 30,000 TO 50,000 I N 1911—Continued.

PEE CENT OF GOVERNMENTAL COST
PAYMENTS REPRESENTED BY— *

SEVENUE BECEIPTS.

Per cent obtained from—

,
l

City
num
ber.

Taxes.
Special

CITY.

Prop
erty.

Poll.

Busi ments,
Fines,
ness,
and
a n d special forfeits,
n o n  chorees! a n d es
busi
for ' cheats.
ness
out
IIlays.

Sub
ven
tions,
grants,
gifts,'
dona
tions,
and ,
pension

High
way
Earn
ings of privi
leges,
general]
depart rents,
and
ments.
inter
est.

Percent
required for
meeting—

Earn
ings of
public

Payments for—
Per
cent
avail
able
for
out
lays
and
other
pur
poses.

ExEx
penses!
of
Out
gener public! Inter- lays.
al de
part enterments. prises.

Ex
enter penses.
prises.

Inter
est.

78.6
53.1
64.7
61.7
53.7

6.8
8.9
4.7
2.8
ia4

14.6
38.0
30.6
35.6
35.9

69.4
53.7
62.8
65.7
53.0

6.9
as
a4
0.2
4.9

74.0
55.2
7as

9.2
4.9
ias
5.5
12.1
7.1
5.8

16.8
39.0
18.7
49.2
5.2

65.0
35.9
73.1
32.2
27.6

17.2
34.7
3a 8
26.8
21.2

46.9
55.0
64.3
58.8
57.2

14.0
3.2
a3
6.7
2.3
15.3
1.7
4.0

33.0
22.1
8.6
15.3
20.6

29.6
66.9
82.4
63.8
76.2

11.7
14.7
22.6
17.7
12.2

39.5
64.7
68.0
38.5
74.5

32.6
19.9
26.9
19.8
51.8

6a6
66.1
49.4
37.6
51.8

Reve
nue
re-

ments.

2.8

125
126
127
128
129

Salem, M a s s — .
Lincoln, Nebr
Berkeley, Cal
Davenport, Iowa
Topeka, Kans

130
131
132
133
134

McKeesport, P a
Flint, Mich
Tampa, Fla
San Diego, Cal
E l Paso, T e x

55.5
58.8
42.9
63.8

135
136
137
138
139

Wheeling, W . V a
Racine, Wis
Kalamazoo, Mich
Superior, Wis
Augusta, Ga.

53.9
56.1
58.2
64.2
38.1

0.4

140
141
142
143
144

Macon, Ga
Newton, Mass
Butte, Mont
Woonsocket, R . I
Chester, F a

41.9
77.0
52.7
57.9
73.4

as

145
146
147
148
149

Montgomery, Ala
Fitcnburg, Mass
Dubuque, Iowa
Galveston, T e x
Elmira,N.Y

32.7
66.6
75.1
57.6
81.2

150
151
152
153
154

N e w c a s t l e . Pa
West Hoboken, N . J .
Knoxvttle, Tcnn
Hamilton, Ohio
,
Springfield, Mo

75.7
43.9
47.1
51.0
46.5

155
156
157
158

E a s t Orange, N . J . . . .
Qunicy, 111
Roanoke, V a
Lexington, K y
,
Huntington, W . V a . .

55.0
73.0
68.2
66.1
73.3

Joliet,M
Auburn, N . Y
Charlotte, N . C
Taunton, Mass
Everett, Mass

52.8
64.1
51.8
57.2
73.6

160
161
162
163
164

71.2
63.1
50.4
69.5
61.3

,

165
166
167
168

Portsmouth, V a
,
Pittsfield, Mass
QuincyvMass
,
Cedar Rapids, I o w a . .
Oshkosh,Wfs

52.2
69.9
73.4
54.3
61.2

170
171
172
173
174

Perth A m b o y , N . J . . .
Lansing, Mich
,
Pasadena, Cal
Amsterdam, N . Y . . . ,
Jackson, Mich

35.0
58.4
58.1
62.9
66.8

175
176
177
178
179

Jamestown, N . Y
San Jose, Cal
,
Decatur, 111
,
Mount Vernon, N . Y .
Joplin, Mo
,

56.7
45.4
60.1
74.9
56.8

180
181
182
183
184

WilIiamsport,Pa....
Niagara Falls, N . Y . .
Muskogee, Okla
Lima, Ohio
Chelsea, Mass

72.7
71.1
36.0
55.0
64.6

185
186
187
188
189

Aurora, III
N e w Rochelle, N . Y .
Austin, T e x
LaCrosse, Wis
Newport, K y .

59.5
79.2
47.8
61.2
63.5

190
191
192
193

Orange, N . J
Lorain, Ohio
Council Bluffs, Iowa.
Lynchburg, V a .
,

46.4
62.5
70.4
53.7

as
6.4
1.7
6.5
2.2

0.8
10.4
25.5
18.6
19.7

0.6
a4
0.2
a4
a4

1.6
2.8
18.6
2.0
1.3

4.8
1.4
1.4
2.1
1.8

2.3
2.6
1.9

5.2
a7
12.1
5.4
3.2
8.9
11.6
2.7
13.2
18.7

2.2
1L3

1.5

5.1
14.6
17.5
6.2
6.4

1.6
4.9
4.4
1.4
3.0

1.0

2.2
6.6
11.2
3.1
13.3

1.4
1.8
k8
1.7
4.7

14.3
1.0
15.4
1.9
8.0

4.0
2.6
1.3
3.5
1.2

3.9
a4
2.6
11.1
4.5
5.6
31.7
&6
2.9
3.7

3.0
8.1
a3
7.8
as

13.6

17.5
12.2
14.2
1.9

11.?
7.4
7.2

12.5
2t3
13.8
2.7
4.0

19.4
4.6
7.1
3.6
8.3

18.2
3.4
4.4
1.1
1.8

1.6

4.5
ia7
8.9
8.2
ia7
2.4
14.7
16.8
16.0
12.2

9.3
ias
7.5
12.8
35.5
5.8
5.7
1.7
9.8

1.3
1.6
2.0

25.6
5.3
iai
4.7
a2

ias
6.4

17.0
5.1
a3
7.1
6.4

3.6
3.3
4.9
4.9
21.6
2.6

1.1
2.6
0,3
2.3
1.6
2i2

a2
ai
0.7

ao
ao

1.7
1.6

a2

7.7
6.0
1.7
7.3
4.0

2.7
9.2
35.4
15.0
1.6

9.0
3.4
1.7
8.6
7.1

15.8
11.4
0.2
6.2

6.7
11.8
8.0
2a 3

6.8
14.6
14.9
3.9

1.1
7.3

as

1.5

ai
ao
0.8

as

2.9
8.7
7.9
3.8
17.0

a4

3.2

ai

13.7
iao
17.8
3.5
4.4
4.8
26.3
17.8
12.8
11.1

11.8

» L e s s than one-tenth of 1 per cent.




ao

26.7
12.1

as
3.9

ao
2.6
L7
a7
1.2
2.6
2.2
3.1
a2
2.7
a3
3.0
a3

%
a4

as
ai
1.9

%
ai

as
as

2.3
4.1

as
a4
2.2

as

a2
a9

as
a4
ao
as
ao
as
a4
as
1.1

as
0.4
1.6
0.4
2.5

as
0.4
5.7
a7
0.6
0.4
ai
1.1
a3
a2
a4
a4
as
1.2

15.0
1.1
3.8
6.6
3.7

ao

3.0
9.6
as
1.2

5.9
a2
a3
4.1
26.6
15.7
6.2
ia7
3.1
11.1
3.1
17.9

ao
3.6
4.8
7.2
2.2
4.1
5.4
2.3
1.0
2.2
6.4
ao

as
1.5

ao

1.9
3.5
a2
1.8
4.0
2.8
1.1
2.3
3.9
a7
ai
5.9
3.4
1.0
4.2
L3

15.5
12.1
a2
ai
12.4
14.4
11.4
a4
13.0
8.9
29.7
1.7
9.8

45.3

82.7

19.0

75.7
59.5
62.4
68.0
69.0

as
9.0
2as
a2

64.3
59.0
84.2
61.7
68.4

17.1
ia3
ias
14.0
1.8

64.9
77.3
67.9
57.2
81.7

(«)

63.0
70.2
51.0
64.2
47.8

23.4
8.0
9.5
25.1
ai
4.4
9.9
22.1
iao
a4
8.9
5.7
12.2
8.9
12,9

16.8
38.1
25.6
27.1

(«)

52.6
68.4
36.9
67.3
68.2

4.1
5.8
17.0
12.8
15.8

14.2
20.6
23.2
19.4
19.6

7ao
6U3
58.7
58.9
63.6

18.9
. iao
17.1
5.0
3.4
13.4
64.0
3.1
54.3
3.9
56.7
11.8
64.7
4.8
68.1

12.3
23.5
23.9
45.0

46.5
39.1
48.6
37.5
69.3

22.6
42.6
39.4
23.5
27.1

44.3
40.8
54.9
62.9
60.0

*4.*9

63.2
62.5
59.2
75.9
66.7

ia3
4.5
5.1
13.7
5.0

45.6
65.8
37.1
60.7
56.0

3.2
7.6
14.6
13.4
15.3

69.9
56.8
62.3
53.0
61.4

4.7
12.6
24.2
11.6
21.2

26.5
33.0
35.7
ia4
28.3
25.4
3a 6
13.5
35.4
17.4

10.9

0.3
39.6
9.8
18.8

62.5
62.4
58.5
68.1
72.9

5.1
14.8
11.2
8.6
14.8

32.4
22.8
30.3
23.3
12.3

48.7
4a4
40.3
62.4
67.6

12.6
14.4
ai
11.3

66.2
G3.0
45.5

19.9
17.1
4.4
14.7

11.9
ia7
32.6

57.6
44.7
64.7
35.3

2.3
a4
2.5
a4
1.6

1.8
2.5
1.3
1.3

2.0
1.7
1.7
as
1.6
a7
a7
2.7
5.1
2.0

4.4
3.3
3.7
0.3
2.1

14.8
a2
1.2
1.4

74.3
56.2
62.2
64.0
106.9

as

8.4
17.9
18.0
22.3
15.0

81.7
73.6
59.8
67.8
64.6

1.1
2.1
1.8
1.6

1.8
1.3
2.7
a2

21.1
14.3
14.9
ias
ai

68.8
66.5
59.0
50.0
57.0

ao
a7
a7
1.2
0.9
3.3
1.3
1.1
1.0
1.8
1.9
1.8

ao
1.2
a7
1.8

ae

2.4
3.4
4.8
2.6

1.7
2.4
(
&7
1.7
a2
4.0
ai
1.6
2.7
1.0
1.1
2.6
1.3
2.5
&4
2.0
1.8
1.9
3.9

9.7

1.4
1.6
1.4
0.5
a7

20.4
2.8
2.7
2.7

1.6
a7
1.3
1.5

ai
2.8
1.0
4.6

22.0
23.4
a2

ae

19.7
23.5
10.0
2ai
12.6
2&7
9.1

as
5.2
9.8

2.7
18.9

7.2
23.0
11.0

37.4
34.7
58.7
53.4

ai
2.4
2.5
4.2
ai

17.1
29.7
32.1
31.2
30.9

97.0
113.3
97.7
load
107.9

11.1
57.4
15.3
56.4
65.8

106.7
70.8

5.8
5.5
7.4
4.6
9.0

32.0
37.8
24.3
3& 7
27.7

82.1
95.2
109.3
86.5
91.8

1.4
22.1
7.0
25.3
12.3

66.8
8.6
ias
a7
11.3
38.0
19.0
13.6
37.7
18.4

4a 5
117.4
97.9

as

10.1
4.6
3.0
11.2
9.9
3.5
1L3
4.7
4.4

104.1
85.9
3a 1

nao

34.8
24.6
17.8
39.2
47.7

111.7
7a2
94.6
U1.6
75.7
92.9
96.7
94.1
112.6
75.8
108.3

30.5
24.2
55.4
22,9
22.9

83.4
122.5
69.9
107.3
47.1

4.0
5.4
18.7
13.5
16.9

iao
25.5
15.5
14.7
14.2

98.0
93.7
110.0
105.8
106.8

13.1
6.2
14.9
4.6
4.1

39.3
52.6
33.8
49.2
2a 1

69.2
61.9
87.1
92.5
122.4

ia6
3.1
4.3
12.5
4.7

43.2
34.1
19.1
28.5

78.7
98.9
108.6
105.7
98.1

7.0

9.0
4.8
3.7
10.9
4.7

3a 2
29.4
53.5
28.4
32.3

86.7
105.2
72.2
80.0
94.5

a2
4.1
5.5
5.5
2.4

ao
9.2
15.6
14.0
19.3

4.7
4a 4
44.2
21.7
25.0

127.9
73.0
64.5
121.2

5.4
ai
16.8
7.1
ias
5.5
7.2
a2
2.3

4.4
9.6
11.0
8.8
16.9

41.S
49.9
31.0
21.7
ao

86.6
64.9
97.6
102.0
107.2

18.5
13.4
4.6
12.2

18.4
34.8

92.6
78.3
102.9
82.5

ai
8.7
7.8
4.8
1.4

as
8,0
11.1
l

<)

9.4
a4

as
0.3

as
iai
8.7
7.1
12.9
5.3
1.1
2.1
2.7
8.7
a4
ai
12.9
a?
5.5
6,9
5.7

» P a y m e n t s for expenses and interest are i n excess of revenue receipts.

16.5
7.6
ia7
iao
5.7
4.3
9.3
24.8
12.1
a4
7.5
6.9
7.3
9.5
8.3

sae
sas

oao

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES-

164

TABLE 0 . — R E V E N U E RECEIPTS FROM T A X E S , SPECIAL
[For alist of the cities arranged alphabetically by states, with the number

Grand total.
Group I
Group n
Group III
Group IV
Group V
GROUP I.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OP 600,000 AND OVER IN 1911.
14,749,804
$148,793,260 1136,551
- ;24s| 8134,511,219 82,040,
115,871
37,101,06a 36,935,197
46,352,295
269,282
22,011,770' 21,742,483
24,369,309
11,812,783
125,887)
11,656,901
13,954,710

New York, N.Y,
Chicago. Ill
Philadelphia, Pa.
St. Louis, Mo....
Boston, Mass....
Cleveland, Ohio..
Baltimore, Md...,
Pittsburgh, Pa...

25,571,477
10,552,69$
10,035,915'
13,292,941

21.884,1721
9,091,735
8.610,890
12,371,911

21.731.355
152,81,
9,091,735
8,462,52fl "**i48,*363|
12,281,391
90,520

2,505,229
950
161,259

876,722
121,29$

$6,768,906.' 85.766.697
8,313.768| 7,233.492
1.959.000
2,l65,lod
1,063,07-' 1,137,675
1.024.3831
1,423, ~ '
1,230.
833,5

8332,7731
217,610]
004,905

960.473
1,406,794
1,125.833
764.29»

862,666]
206.10«
221,399
63,910
16,673
110,467

G R O U P n . - C I T I E S H A V I N O A P O P U L A T I O N O F 300,000 T O 600,000 I N 1911.

9 Detroit. Mich
10 Buffalo', N . Y
11
12
13 Cincinnati, Ohio.

88,157,224
8,536,626
9,546,041
6,975,128
8,625,709

14
15

7,450,036
8,507,498
6,427.893
6,168,485
5,851,587 |

16
17 W a s h i n g t o n / D . C
18 Minneapolis, Minn

$7,303,674
7,658.618
8.231,944
6,079,051
7,433,002

87,248,157
7,614,973
8,216,659
6,074,104
7,429,348

6,671,136
7,673,132
5,459,024
4,770,174
5,262,538

6.516,094
7,670,085
5,366,039
4,731,949
5,251,500

855,5171
43.645H

836S
184, HO

4.947H
3,654|

22,392
677
2,792

155,0428

..*•..•...
878,078
51,995|

88,604

8810.652
702,914
l,2b5.203
808,517
I,115,085
674,113
721.4351 i
835,238 i
1,323.016
487,355. |

$767,250
620.703
1,072,610
451.630
1,028,118
605.210
421.898
647.29S
459.319
402.751

825,647
40,981
14,480
734,984
39,272

843,393
56,664
192,593
315.90ft
86,947,
64,423
299,637
247,940
128,713
45,332

11,038|
G R O U P I I I . - C I T I E S H A V I N G A P O P U L A T I O N O F 100,000 T O 300,000 I N 1911.

N.J..
Seattle, Wash.
City, Mo...
Indianapolis, Ind..
Providence, R. I...

$4,028,074
$3,485,356
5,025,257 , 4,530/222,
3,566.560
4,178,0581
3,254,526
2,817,90S
4,070,012
3,733,844

19
20
21
22
23

Jersey Cityv

24
25
26
27
28

Louisville, K y . . . .
Rochester, N . Y . .
Denver, Colo
Portland, Oreg...
St. Paul, Minn...,

4,166,052
3,763,451
4,822.659
4,346.616
3,151,018

3.607,355
3,397,888
4,387,227
3,631,566
2,681,951

3.525,683
3,370.890
4,366,088
3,631,566
2,674,079

29
30
31
32
33

Columbus. Ohio.,
Toledo, Ohio....
Atlanta. Ga
,
Oakland, Cat.'...,
Worcester, Mass..

2,763,3351
2.518,764
2,020.914
2,608,364
2,768,768

2.507,028
2,186,834
1,690,704
2,318.846
2,158,286

2,507,028.
2,186,834.
1,660,716

34
35
36
37
38

Birmingham, Ala...
Syracuse, N . Y
New Haven, Conn..
Memphis, Tenn
Scranton,Pa

1,016,799
2,416.419
2,276,934
1,742,875
1,371,383

640,959
2,181,335
2,002.975
1,647,036
1,064,750

634,953
2,158,647
1,991,250
1,647,036,
1,084,750.

6.006
22,688
11,725:

Richmond, Va
Pateison, N.J
Omaha, Nebr.
Fall River, Mass....
Dayton, Ohio

2,199,206
1,438,086
2,080.013
1,881.050
1,740,599

1,995,458
1,225.896
1,790,629'
1,530.649
1,492,603

1,984,72«
1,171,043
1,778,758
l,518.49d
1,492,608.

10,732'
54.853
11,871
12,159

$3,363.81«
4,580.222
3,550.063
2,803,061
3,722,847

$116,5

81,<
$116,822
7,872|

15,655R

2,316.161
2,139,491

346,492]

Grand Rapids. Mich..
Spokane, Wash
Nashville, Tenn
Lowell. Mass
Cambridge, Mass

1,407,472
1,679,470
1,112,715
1,643,169
2,251,675

1,334.517
1,437,110
1,054,957
1,329,743!
l,993,354j

1,329,018
1,437,099
1,045,962
1 307,424
1,931,039

Bridgeport, Conn
New Bedford, Mass...
San Antonio,Tex....
Hartford, Conn
Albany,k.Y

1.470,418
1,914,891
1,210,927
2,132,283
1,576,159

1,301.924
1,453.052
1,149,795
1,680.913
1,346,537

1,292,909
1,450,767
1,137,348
1,680.404
1,338,665

9,7151
2,285'
12,447
509
7,872.




51,411
55,017

86,244{

27,497
3«,006H

I
5,499
11
8,995
22.319
12,315,

1

* *29,°780(

12,I65fl
7,000il
145,28ft

53.624

161.02*
215, KM

38,0001
37,7081

15,381
327,43d

4,50o|
43,437f
13,1841
13,577fl

361,79H
83,3771

$525,721
427.574t
532.810fl
344.9009
300,7080

$491,024]
363.30,
307.0001
317,384
264.675

512.734!
238.208H
409.314
642.990
432,820(1

359,039
209.97SJ
301,040
581.0301
401,56O|

222.795
326.358H
314,555
259,645
173,074

209,971
312,725

20,219)

ioil
13,987

82,996]
203.910
160,465

350.27S
175,974
176.124
69,485
263,4782

252,794

183.528i'|
192.SSS
281.475150.131
235,4141

77,000
173,700
260,680
139,381
229,265

65,581
233,077
54.131
112.853
3,63#|

48,551
211,
,
1,500
104,763
46

141,022
89.OS0,
37.595
71,595
135,315|

137,864
82.184
32.219
68,485
124,507

Exclusive of receipts from permits issued by public service enterprises, which are included in Table 10.

$9,24W

151.14JM
170,159

8,352

8,988
2,135

$22,44«
59,267
205,591
27,516)
35,930]
153,695
14.243
108,274
61,970
31.260
12,824
13,633
281,559
55.735
12,609
350,275
16,473
5,965
89,48M
10,684
106,528]
15,167]
18.66W
10,79fl
6,149
17,030
21,310
52,631
8,0901
3,493

16
5,604

3,158
6,889
5,376
3,110
5,204

GENERAL TABLES.

165

ASSESSMENTS, FINES, FORFEITS, AND ESCHEATS: 1911.
•signed to each, see page 20.

For a text discussion of this table, see page 63.]

BECEZPTS FROM TAXES—continued.

RECEIPTS FBOM SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS AND F B O l i SPECIAL CHARGES FOR OUTLAYS.

Special assessments for
expenses.

Nonbusiness license taxes.

Total.
Total.

Total.
Doe;

Special assessments for outlays.

Penal
ties,
In
Original terest,
levies.
and
collec
tors
fees.

Paid by persons granted—

General
1
licenses. Permits.

RECEIPTS FROM TINES, FORFEITS,
AND ESCHEATS.

Total.

special
charges
Penalties,
for
outlays.
Original interest,
and
levies. [collectors'

Total.

Court
fines
and
forfeits.

City
num
Com
ber.
mer
Escial kfteats,
for
feits.

fees.

03,824,919 1674,891 $1,190,SSS 11,959,140 $68,600,773 [12,108,484] 12,092,024 $16,460 $65,193,415 $62,765,601 $2,427,814 $1,207,874 $4,110,891 $3,822,596»228,396»5$,899
2,142,856
520,750
595,120
330,236
235,«W

215,259
125,500
166,358
87,633
$0,141

777,397 1,150,230 22,996,269
82,410
312,840' 8,672,370,
211,044, 21,547,656
172,658 9,194.042
112,368 6,099,536

314,780
532,538
839,702
210,276
211,188

217,7181
69,945
43,418}

309,316
529,435
832,595
209,637
211,041

5,464 22,508,827 21,456,814 1,052,013
3,103 8,025,125 7,873,474 151,651
7,107 20,401,319 19,838.431 562,888
639 8,635,256 8,074,951 560,305
147 5,622,888 5,521,931
100,957

172,662 1,540,103 1,509,358 7,355 23,390
114,707 ' 578,648 472,214 96,403 10,031
306.535i 806,971 760,138 23,862 22,971
348,510 570,246 526,740 40,714 2,792
265,460 614,923 554,146 60,062
715

GROUP L-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER IN 1911
$723,902,
$723,902 $12,278,772
937,459 $121,564 $586,157 229,738 5,631,731
115,711
765,022
20 115,691
22,949 117,068
177,943
37,926 1,967,146
36,395!
36,546!
27,466'
87,4641

27,212
4,520
25,958
13,056

74,152

9,183
32,026
1,508
256

$12,270,899 $11,269,991 $1,000,908
$7,873 $600,592 $590,581
5,629.228! 5,629,228
558,457 555,505
742,543
742,543!
f'22,'479
76,029
75,448
203
296,649 $5,464 1,618,864 [ 1,618,661
80,680
46,169
79,060

$2,503

$2,503

302, iiat

271,755
1,181,450
64.093 I
836,300

9,610

9,510

654

654

262,245
1,092,687
56,524
835,837

»

211,343
1,092,687
56,524
835,837

50,902
88,763
6,915
463 |

101,549; i 101,208
28,542 i 25,853
14.2621
4,936
79,992
76,767

S25 $9,986
1,606 1,346
581
461 1,159

1
2
3
4

3
989
9,326

5
6
7

338
1,700
3,225

$

GROUP II.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000 IN 1911.
$42,530
40,324
48,894
65,168
76,965

$12,281
11.690
9,778
24,838
5,248

23,917
112,931
21,636
75,295
13,090

4,355
27,184
2,825
22,115
5,183

$12,323
335
51,429
1,838
2,946
13,539

$876,734
669,707
38.781 1,415,567
824,330
40,330
481,331
20,288'

$30,2491
16,311

19,559
83,909
15,866
39,641
7,907

978,721
1,773,056
444,849
1,208,075

$585
31,018

$585
31,018),

99,614
18,534

99,614
18,534

100,107

ioo, ion

103,168
179,512

100,987
178,590

$839,589
$808,390
638,689
1,415.567 1,415,567
724,716
724,71«
453,047}
453,047

$31,199

919,2811
1,672,949

978,721
1,672,949
277,206
1,024,641

$2,181
922

273,811
967,024

$33,844
28,260
32,925
47,497
36,521

$30,331 $3,000
27,905
30.727
47,231
35,275
1371

9
10
11
12
13

59,440

24,876

3,395
57,617

47,593
91,422
46,711

24,736.
111,204 75,811
30,927 16,455
87,767
1,000
46,111

14
16
16
17
18

$36,560

9,750

64,475
3,922

GROUP IIL-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000 IN 1911.
$13,969
10,465
21,113
16,993
2,735

$199,710
5,525,262
1.661,069
882,471
71,52&

6,728
42,881
6

2,529
12.938
13,363
5,604

563,724
882,489
1,084,033
3,179.059
455,548

2,116
4,319

21,240

10,156
1,253

29,873
4,672

9,015
3,016

2,341

18,517
1,656

484,082
526,654
476,578
906.147
125,379

25,565!
7,699
15,321
6,354
7,155

4,201
4,268
2,267

11,044
319

10,320
3,112
13,054
6,354
4,956 1

509,932
462,743
46,451
341,468
201,145

$16,394
17,4611 I
78,688
76,518
13,759 j

$2,425
6,996
19,059
14,978
10,964

45,963
10,533
26,118
72,060
6,467

9,426
8,004
7,452
15,816
857

36,537

33,512
6,072

$38,516
44,547
60

2,i99

8,055
12,335
7,909 !
1,307
12,677 j

7,524
6,161
3,415

531

607

9,742

7,374
9,283
3,627
1,549
1,267

5,354
5,046

7,591
1,878
10,353 i
4,401
5,930

2,627
1,404
3,350
3,502

2,409

1,317




500

6,184
4,494
1,307
2,228

9103,650

417,447
1,061,148
33,134
42,874
50,511

4,964;
l,878j
7,632
1,051
1,928

99.375
46,161
10,240
47,533
155,241

97,388

91,487 $5,901

7.237
91,060

7,237
91,060

96,367
66,808
104,530 ;

96,367
66,808
104,530

60,959

60,573

32,395 |

32,395

561,710
771,093
1,084.033
3,171,822
364,488

386
|

l:::::;"::i 1

77,872 1
66,567
529,598
11.055
313,328.

2,020
1,828
3.627
1,549
1,267

$199,710
$173,561
5,4S2,529 5,482.529
1,557.419 1 1,557,419
882,471 |
882,471
71,528 1
70,266

$103,650

47,346

2i,i38

47,346
21,138

561,710
706,725
946,781
3,171,822
352,231

$26,149
$42,733
i,262

12,257

374,846
459,330
305,932
906,147
64,420 i

374,846
459,330
305,932
906.147
61,619

509,932 1
413.441
46,451
341,468
201,145

488,895
365,967
45.808
327,094
201,145

21,037
47,474
643
14,374

14.429
66,567
525,347

14,429
62,861
489,686

3,706
35,661

276,433

276,433

417,447
1,056,501

399,069
899,605

18,378
156,896

1 12,869
516
1
66,116
2,801

22,055
36,219

~ i4,292

i4,238

54

34,411

34,411

57,464
18,2S9

57,464
18,016

273

""-»•"*.
18,139

17,319

29,394
155,241

29,394
134,938

20,303

1

1

i6,907

16,097

22,055
36,219

"** m

2,014
14,008

64,363
137,252

4,25i
11,055
15,757
4,647
33,134
20,819
7,500
27,872
10,240

1

$1,507
$6,922
$5,415
64,662
62,796 $1,866
74.270 1 60,823
500 12,947
15,041 * 13,773
1,268
8,333
8,333

19
20
21
22
23

52
15,455 11,503
10,886
555
18,917 4,533
47
47,304
852
23,444
1,412

24
25
26
27
28

27,010 '
11,441
23,497
48.156
24,856

14,390
14,154
2,796
2.538
87,239
87,047
74,716 j 74,716
10,046
7,985
61,274 i
6,249
20,713
20,750
13,923

61,274
6.235
20,639
20,731
13,892

24,965
8,486
22,144
12,847
6,114

24,965
8,456
21,187
12,847
6,114

6,894
30,056
18,533
9,956
3,865

6,894
29,247
18,533
6,752
3,786

14,726
5,040
14,645
10,613
1,803

13,726
4,240
14.645
10,586
1,803

236
158
132

ioo
60
2,061
9
i
30

29
30
31
32
33

5
74 1
19 l
31 !

957

500

309

48

,va

1,000
800
27

1

!

34
35
36
37
38
3$,
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

166

TABLE 6 . — R E V E N U E RECEIPTS FROM TAXES,

SPECIAL

[For a list of t h e cities arranged alphabetically b y states, w i t h t h e number
G R O U P I V . - C I T I E S H A V I N G A P O P U L A T I O N O F 50,000 T O 100,000 I N 1911.

RECEIPTS FBOU TAXES.

Business taxes.

T h e general property t a x .

City
num
ber.
Total.
Total.

54
55
56
57
58

Trenton, N. J
Reading. Fa
Dallas/Tex
Salt Lake City, Utah.
Camden, N. J.

$928,726
8S5,519
1,362,263
1,770,835
842,844

59
60
61
62
63

Springfield, Mass..
Lynn, Mass
LawrenoejJIass...
Tacoma. wash
Des Monies, Iowa..

2,153,286
1,525,828
1,274,317
1,495,12CN
1,528,657

64
65
66
67
68

Wilmington, D e l . . .
Kansas City, Kans.
Yonkers,N.Y
Youngstown, Ohio.,
Houston, Tex

1,197,6711
1,697,787^
1,090,561'
1,111,498

69
70
71
72
73

Norfolk, Va
Duluth, M i n n —
Fort Worth, Tex.
Somerville,Mass..
S t Joseph, Mo....

74
75
76
77
78

Utica,N.Y
Troy.N.Y
Elisabeth, N . J
8ohenectady, N. Y .
Waterbury, Conn...

79 Akron, Ohio..
80 Oklahoma City, Okla..
81 Manchester, N. H
Hoboken. N. J
Evansville, Ind
Wflkes-Barre, Pa
Erie, Pa
PeoriaJU
87 Fort wayne, Ihd
Harrisburg, Pa
Savannah, Oa
Jacksonville, Fla
East St. Louis, 111
Terra Haute, Ind
HolyokB,Mass
94
95
96
97

Portland, Me
South Bend, Ind.
Charleston. 8 . C . .
Brockton, Mass...

744,2-4

$790,535
769,533
1,317,476!
1,402,633
686,205
1,791,933
1,360,938.'
1,355,897
1,407,618'

Original
levies.

Penalties,
interest,
and
collectors'
fees.

$769,164
767,988
1,303,783
1,402,633
676,096)

$21,371
1,545
13,694

1,775,697^
1,339,071
944,649]
1,355,897J
1,402,764

16,236
21,8671
12,550;

5,691

1,193,215
1,542, sm
1,022,861
1,269,772]
1,059,014'
1,037,711
1,307,694
786,87d
1,165,466|
989,619|

864,723
l,306,412i
985,580;
1,147,662
900,7661

853,305
1,306,412
973,735
1,140,206

867,210
1,166,346||
627,731'
1,032,4221

864,7391
1,159,372)
613,356]
1,027,293
854,406

954,672
650,550]
884,989]'
984,952
789,973
742,30«
639,93d
999,0901
673,169
746,467

856,245
621,67"'
647,7! ,
854,321
646,491

856,245
621,676]
613,748]
846,688]
646,494

619,443
565,673
788,882
583,259^
691,814

613,207
563,20H
788,882],
583,259],
691,814

6,1461
2,465,1

631,914
488,050
512,173
458,932,

757,618J|

629,003
481,563
512,173
458,93d,
751,2221

974,750]
519,651
534,648
852,387]

972,031
619,186]
533,7501
833,164

2,719]
465f
898^
19,223
3,574
26,494]
4,0961
4,28Sfl

814,878
641,264]
727,046
548,337
967,531
1,057,072
628,152
657,16"'
979,75

98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105

Passaic, N . J . . .
Bayonne, N. J..
Johnstown, Pa.,
Wichita, Kans..

369,91 ,
609,688
495,763'
712,676[

546,2691
407,7TO
686,975

294,795
519,775
403,67W
688,975]

Covington, K y . . .
Allentown,Pa....
Pawtucket, R. I.,
Springfield, HI....

528,
460,71!
761,15 ,
834,141

460,623
395,025
698,570]
700,048

456,339
393,618]
695,623
700,048]

106
107
108
109

Altoona, P a . . . .
Mobile, Ala
Canton, Ohio...
Saginaw, Mich..

448,842
281,372'
506,463
577,410

448,843
281,372
508,463
567,4871

$10,000
34,000.

$198,053
108,933
163,263

12,248,1
7,270
46,322
48,240
18,41a1

4,854

723,700
1,127,252
1,535,0SS

O thcr than on liquor
traffic.

Poll
taxes.
On Hnuor
Hnu
On
traffic,

Total.

10,109]

734,391
1,127,252
1,570,163
929,573
1,064,209|

929,573
1,053,33S|

Special
property
taxes.

$120,970,
76,9781
43,59?|j
338,977)
139,465
114,478.
6,477
134,066
133,033

112,727J
1,413J

831

5.8,032;
99.591
160,73*

$109,185
69, COO]
37,053
236,926}
129,9721

Collected
without
hsue of
license.
$3,033

5,0361

109,345

115,9isl
97,822
5,726
3,182

10,851

31,690J

11,418

319,985!
207,864:
31,00Ol
2,024,1
148,570'

109,893
181,342]
27,744
43
80,370]

21,316
10,569]

106,039!
103,517
146,796.
109; 532J
91,475*

99,07jJ
97,231
141,757
100,403
SS,S30|

4,05fl
4,744
1,859]
3,523

90,001,
18,967
150,519
125,290
122,651!

87,731
53,7
115,1
112,903

93,394
3,387]

27,478,
5,432,

79,661!
60,200
199,939;
69,911!
47,2»J

M,20«
54,400]
180,173
51,9871
33,000t

7,604]

2,911
6,487]

180,897^
144,553

6,396j|

15,901*

201,549
79,543
75,313

92,25ffl
171,778
74,085
72,402

28,545,
5,204

53,000,
8R.616J

84,232]

20,3391

18,212

11,845
7,456]
l,103j
2,471
6,974
14,375,
6,247|

4,0441

79,165

39,8

61,3301
33,965
19,713
11,518)

47,697

7,633

32,7901
719
7,M7|
37,216-1

10, f

118,020)

91,494

2,947^1

32,55ft

59,33W
61,5901
35,850J

65,424!

"i3,"24M

63,337)
15,018'

22,000?
4.629

61,226
42,191
65,023
129,922j|

44,0401
30,00<K
46,725
114,200)

37,167^
151,079
76,863!
44,192!

2O,80d
26,320]
76,088
41,273

9,923

10,461

3,373

1,413
52,306
5,125
3,366
4,651
188,776
10,053
3,256
1,981
57,739
2,903
1,542
3, ISO
5,606
2,645
2,273
18,967
3,346
6,728
9,74Sj

18,461,
5,800
12,162
7,924
14,258
180,897
62,303
26,397
6,458
2,9ir

51,8071

1,2S3|
4,384
120,689
2,522

1,325
1,036)
3,532

4,760
1,574
27,487
11,486

2,617]

17,166
12,191
8,289
13,115

2,522'

1,100j

$8,75^
7,378]
5,047]
102,051
4,457]
6,133
6,477
5,274
17,135
14,905

128,792^

•1,2*4
157,373
27,039]

35,0751

Collected
with
issue of
license.

16,367
124,759
775
2,919

GROUP V.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 30,000 TO 50/100 IN 1911.
110
HI
112
113
114

Bfnghamton, N. Y .
Sioux City, Iowa...
Atlantic City, N. J..
Rookford, 111
Lancaster, Pa

115
116
117
118
119

Springfield, Ohio...
LlttleRock,Ark...
8acramento, Cal.
Pueblo, Colo
Chattanooga, Tena.

715,755:
476,2491
849,359
659,836
479,885!

707,561.
361,912],
736,674]
540,944
428,706]

120
121
123
123
124

Bay City, Mich
York, Pa.
Maiden, Mass
New Britain, Conn.

469,013
516,109
762,512
578,617
706,824,1

432,518
476,643)
626,06H
533,428!
556,747*.

Haverhill, MASS.....




$566,307,

$505,667
618,416
1,042, C
526, (
314,17

$502,9111
618,41N.
1,033,400]
526,007].
314,125]

»,<

$17,4711

$2,732

$2,536
6,397
109,991
6,305
4,111

$41,176]
49,497]
220,391
63,75d
34,51V1

$35,908
43,100]
110,400]
54,461
30,400|

3,OI«|
96,616]
108,753]
116,lflfl
60,821

1,009]
78,460],
74,550]
105,664

2,037
18,156
34,203
10,533
50,821

33,352

32,345
14,400)

1,007
11,685

24,345
27,096]
55,668|
58,3211'
• KxciosiTe of receipts from permits issued b y public s e n i c e enterprises, which at* included l a Table 10,

2,750]
2,653|

671,300
1,276,764

589,757!
351,7871

$184
#

513

i,*i8i

L902J
2,301]
12!2is||
4,626!]
9,59&3

99,6181
9,374|
57,791

6,$iq
33,3401
2,2571

33,19*1

52

3,984

GENERAL TABLES.

167

ASSESSMENTS, FINES, FORFEITS, AND ESCHEATS: 1911—Continued,
assigned to each, see page 20.

For a text discussion of this table, see page 63.]
G R O U P I V . - C I T I E S H A V I N G A P O P U L A T I O N O P 50,000 T O 100,000 I N 1911.

BECEIPTS PKOM TAXES—continued.

BECEIPTS PBOM SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS AND FBOlt SPECIAL CHABGES FOE OUTLAYS.

Special assessments for
expenses.

Nonbusiness license taxes.

Paid b y persons granted—
Total.
Total.

Original
levies.

Total.
General
Dog
licenses. licenses.
t

82,069
5,008

85,152

$7,221
5,008
1,190
16,977
9,904

Permits.*

1,190!
7,016!

9,961
9,904

$155,757:
62,032,
265,52l!
386,156
51,4011
54,188
42,429;
53,178
1,160,319
480,664j
61,500
274,743;
107,9941
274,697j'

2,500
1,240
1,179
6,170
8,312

3,171
1,820

2,500
1,240
1,1791
2,999j
6,492

7,605
12,387
7,694
249
5,002

2,579
6,333
2,457
134
913

5,026*
4,329,,
5,237
115 !
4,089,

0,2771
15,381
6,281
1,023,
9,67^|

3,237]
S20]
3,520)

3,132
3,866]
2,343
3,799

2,271
2,875
1,353
2,371
2,691

81,725

4,388J
8,423
9,907
6,191
4,622
13,281

1,157
2,861
2,662
3,05S|

5,9SSJ|
3,551'
10,26$
2,521
1,963
2,067|
8,661'
13,324
7,625]
679.

1,434
I—1

687
14,680
1,831'
799

S,149J
162

5,1501
7,9211

104
1,563
1,252
1
1,013
2,0671
602

5,024
9,219
}M02
10,683

2,299
1 US
1,945
3,486

6,423
1,503
2,933
4,171

24
823
2,323

4,847
4,615

1,093

8,059
8,067

1,661

1,064

131

1,92W
4,959)

2,365

2,0801

Penal"
ties,
in
terest,
and
collec
tors'
fees.

$2SS

554

14

2,761
908;
2,809

314,936,
637,765:
57,422;
337,956]

861;
829
990!
1,428,'
1,694

148,420
38,419.1
105,3271
301,779'
61,221

8,423*
3,600
3,330
1,960
2,302.

135,oo/j,
494,285'
1,133
8,637 :
132,059

5,884
1,9S8'
9,017J

d

61,864
168,352,
192,838
263,915,
98,835
6,432
2,734

3,823
6,005
679"!

100,983*
65,370,
203,281)
3,702'
12,909

6S7
5,107]

46,246
100,940

22,497

62,109

12,908

2

9,573

1,831

554

$28,954
24,698
13,711

Special assessments for outlays.

Total.

Total.

Penalties,
interest,
Original
and
levies. [collectors'

$155,757

$120,509

262,814
378,305
51,401

262,814
328,968
48,297

12,086
17,443
27,741
1,105,069;
480,110

12,086
17,443
27,741
924,510
480,110

31,867
272,864
107,994;
270,927

29,636
272,864
97,729
270,927

291,844
637,765
20,125
337,951

1,488

637,765
20,125
337,956'
148,072
38,419
105,327
301,779
48,259|

141,323
37,886
98,361
275,043
45,213

6,749!
533
6,966
26,736,
3,046

107,545
494,285

107,545
301,513

8,637
126,915

126,915

167,695
192,83S
263,915
95,069]

164,399
192,838V
263,915)
95,069

88,799I
44,172
203,281
3,702

88,799.
42,740,
203,281
3,702i
6,668

$35,248
$62,032,
2,707
7,851'

49,337
3,104

13,148
11,726
55,250;

180,559

29,633
1,879

2,231
10,265

3,756

3,010
14,561
115

1,72CM

828,954
24,986
13,711

RECEIPTS FBOM PINES, FOBPEITS,
AND ESCHEATS.

66S

21,500
33,096

21,500
32,7451

7,410

7,41(M

28,012

28,012

1,133

1,133

5,144

5,144

351

6,432
2,734

*i2,"908

96,909
31,179

30,2

2,725
8,102
9,457
5,268|

24,941
132,447!

24,941
132,447

22,3231
109,988

735,205:

735,205

735,205

1,440
6S0
610
4,171

24,842
63,889
19,913
131,249

24,842
49,750j|
14,717
131,249]

24,842
49,750
14,591
131,249

3,754
1,570
2,003

108,625
93,380
108,349
164,363

104,45a
92,20T
108,331
159,-

104,458
82,451
108,338
159,200

1,180
11

1,180
11

*4,"20i

348
5,552

192,772
248]

20,878
96,532

22,497

104

61,864
657)

3,296]

3,766
5,752,
18,464

1,432

6,241
10
377

2,86l|
4,031]

951

18,022

2,618
22,459

14,139
5,196

1261

4,167
9,749||
*5,"i63

Court
fines
and
forfeits.

City
num
Com
mer
ber.
Es
cial
for cheats.
feits.

$7,709
1,286
53,196
4,689
4,127

$7,709!
1 286
14* 731; "$38," 465]
l
4,605'
4,127,

11,2291
9,663)'
7,403
14,619,
19,546]

11,159
9,663
7,403
14,619.
19,546

8,302
13,893
1,367
11,842,
17.79S

13,753
1,367.
11,805.
17,798.

2,482
23,666'
18,717
2,336
13,102

2,029.
22,617
18,717L
2,336.
13,047.

3,351
2851
2,845
3,679
9,756]

3,351.
285.
2,845
3,36<H
9,738

10,644
53,363
1,112
2,055
1,778

10,323
52,166^
1,112.
2,055.
1,778L

4,204
3,095
11,843
2,767]
2,939]

4,204.
3,029L
11,843.
2,721.
2,939L

25,12711
35,482
1,665
2,008
4,232

25,127L
34,380.
1,665.
1,994.
4,232.

2,675,
1,699
48,146
11,037'

2,675.
1,699.
48,097.
ll,028j.

94
95
96
97

4,757
2,139
18,803
9,328

4,757.
2,139.
18,803.
9,32a.

100
101

1,116
2,117
4389
8,804

1,116.
2,117.
4,3S9L
8,804.

102
103
104
105

5,835I
16,609
1,663
1,927

5,835.
16,60®.
1,654.
1,915.

106
107
108
109

$1,100
6,933
9,292
4,032
1,177

$1,100
5,933
9,292
4,032
1,177

6,342
40,102
7,055
7^1581
11,736

6,342
38,893
7,055
7,158
11,736

282
54,184
1,665
8,506
4,774

282
1,677
1,665
8,506

54
55
56
57
58

$84
70

60
61

63
64
65

140J

1,0491

37

67

453

69
70
71
72
73

551

74
75
76
77
78

■] 121
H

200!

79
80
81
82

121
647}

84
86
87

1,102]

90
91

......

12

G R O U P V . - C I T I E S H A V I N G A P O P U L A T I O N O P 30,000 T O 50,000 I N 1911.
$1,993
3,387
13,783

$1,350
482
1,751

$174

1,919

1,91*

5,148
17,712!
3,695
793

757
2,268
2,180
793

845

776
659

|
1

1,837
l'l69

$643
2,905
11,858

443




4,111
13,575

280
1,869;
1,515

2,067!
478<
1,394
1,169.

$40,770
31,702
79,174
60,334
9,625

$11,051
365

$11,047
365

H,438j

ii,438

$4

66,062
125,966
330,381
68,008'
55,343
72,547
70,356
43,751
28,947
25,80S! 1

i3,176
7,537
12,526

13,i76
7,415
12,507

122
I9i

$20,321
31,337
68,731
35,959

$19,435
31,337
62,443
35,959

56,062!
122,897
330,381
68,008
54,725,

56,062
122,700
330,381
48,569
48,198

72,547
70,356.
30,575
21,410

68,698
70,356
30,575
20,001

$886

$9,398

6,288

10,4431
12,937
9,525

m

3,069

W,439
6,527

|

m\

3,849
1,409

1

13,282]

1

4,774

110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118

$1,209
!
52,507

119

120
121
122
123
124

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

168

TABLE 6.—REVENUE

RECEIPTS

FROM T A X E S ,

SPECIAL

[For a list of tho cities arranged alphabetically by states, with the number
GROUP V.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 30,000 TO 60,000 IN 1911-Continued.

RECEIPTS FROM TAXES.

Business taxes.

T h e general property tax.
City
num
ber.

CRY*
Total.

Total.

125
126
127
128
129

Salem, Mass
Lincoln, N e b r — .
Berkeley, Cal
Davenport, Iowa.,
Topeka, Kans

$581,459
639,141
493,579
739,768;
656,831

$492,258
573,35S
477,166
676,469
634,293

Original
levies.

Penalties,
interest,
and
collectors'
fees.

$486,333
568,666
477,166
675,631
634,293

$5,925
4,692;

Special
property
taxes.

Other than on liquor
traffic.

Poll
taxes.
Total.

$63,432

$22,000
S,03.«

$992'
55,692.
11,805 .
5S,422,«
.0.ttS||.
36,719!
3,136 ,
76.224 1
87,52?';
20,579j;

835
7,144]
1,M2.
5977,
4,930,
8,193.

130
131
132
133
134

McKeesport, Pa...
Flint, Mich
Tampa, Fla
San Diego, Cal
£1 Paso, Tex

537,894
335,444
452,QS4
895,960
510,871

500,037
331,365
374,754
795,239

135
136
137
138
139

Wheeling, W.Va..
Racine, Wis
Kalamazoo, Mich..
Superior, Wis
Augusta, Ga

470,956
465,793,
397,772
600,737
502,861

401,707
335,793
379,902;
497,957
337,624

400,726
385,679
379,133
497,957
335,754

1,870.

140
141
142
143
144

Macon, Ga
Newton, Mass
Butte, Mont
Woonsocket, R. I...
Chester, Pa

393,116
1,347,340
538,270
401,810
343,915

295,386
1,213,896
425,73c*
354,18:
304,"

294,610
1,202,457
423,562
351,291
300,996

776,1
11.439,
2,173,
2;896J
3,580'

145
146
147
148
149

Montgomery, Ala...
Fitchburg,Mass....
Dubuque, Iowa
Galveston, T e x . . . .
Elmira,N.Y

401,013
632,911
528,874
513,339;
493,975

484,151
437,172

243,016
515,141
4S1,526
478,098
433,058

3,172
5,671'
1,503.
«,053
4,114

150
151
152
153
154

Newcastle. Pa
West Hoboken, N. 7...
Xnoxville, Tenn
Hamilton, Ohio
Springfield, Mo

367,742
272,025
452,549
434,558
325,140

347,156
217,890
379,435
374,044
260,815

342,942
209,744
379,184
374,014
259,502

4,214
8,146:
2511

1,0000
1,12*1

1,313

3,084

' 155
156
157
158
159

East Orange, N. J
Quincy,Hl.
Roanoke, Va
Lexington, K y .
Huntington, W . V a . . .

593,222
.496,366
504,456
539,709
266,718

562,9S5
413,383
402,131
434,323
224,4S3

554,162
413.3S3
400,962
431,764
223,949

8,823],

5,8TT|]

1,160
2,559,
531

"3,2S6|j

329,723
363,777
790,300
478,499

3,0S1

9S1
114

112,455

53,488

443,654
440,978
235,972
492,126
591,411

298,772
398,093
193,174
366,999
516,242

298,772.
394,317]
193,174.
364,892
503,893

165
166
167
168
169

Portsmouth, Va
Pittsneld,Mass
Qumcy,Mass
Cedar Rapids, Iowa.
Oshkosh,Wis

241,955
526.146
573,105
414,251

182,566
440,192
642,302,
507,121
374,857

177,46ty
435,255
626,844
507,121.
374,857.

170
171
172
173
174

Perth Axnboy, N. J..
Lansing, Mien
Pasadena, Cal
Amsterdam, N. Y . . .
Jackson, Mich

266,563
429,827
705,055
284,985
354,567

198,455
426,686
692,775
227,885
351,843

194,703
426,008
690,989
227,590
351,245

3,752
678'
1,786
295;.
5981

175
176
177
178
179

Jamestown, N. Y .
San Jose, Cal
Decatur, 111
Mount Vemon, N. Y
Joplin,Mo

356,923
409,276
374,885
688,444
317,464

322,859
343,410
331,115
641,513
244,396

321,43q
343,410.
331,115.
600,338
242,745

1,429

16,521

41,175}
l,65l[

13,001

ISO
181
182
183
184

Wflliamsport, Pa
Niagara Falls, N . Y .
Muskogee, Okla
Lima, Ohio
Chelsea, Mass

346,494
750,453
219,394
338,045
616,898

301,267||
658,189
209,674!
298,658,
532,076

298,233
652,532
209,674.
298,278
518,544

5,657

33,730

380
13,532j

36,901

185
186
187
188
189

Aurora, HI..
NewRochelle,N.Y..
Austin, Tex
La Crosse, Wis
,
Newport, Ky
,

355,924!
773,089
311,118
370,339
255,579

309,3171
726,805'
300,305
324,866
229,866

309,317.
705,204
294,906
324,194
229,662

21,601,
5,399
672'
201

190
191
192
193

Orange, N . J . .
Lorain, Ohio
Council Bluffs, Iowa..
Lynchburg,Va.,

334,548
325,204
372,4901
546,605'

291,645;,
265,455'
332,037
392,544

282,901
263,455,
332,037,
389,884




9,100;

2,107,
12,349'

76,301
58,395

5,106
*,937j
15,458|

39,516|
26,418

2,660

5,002!
12,351
15,303

n.osod
13,93s

1

Collected
without
issue of
license.

$50,000
43,217
$3,315
29,600

Collected
with
issue of
license.
$992
5,692
11,805
15,205
13,643
7,119
3,136
38,774
13,533
6,355

*37,"456'
73,99il
14,224 J
3,124
4,621

&l,646;j
77,332|?
16. oc?;
101,464
162,857

43,77:
71,lSd
12,900
82,000^

1,197
87,537
43,629
20,723 !

IS
48,60S
37,6ft
IS, 656)

68,347
1,077
38,929
6,9G2
2,072

144,717
39,1991
45,206!
17,055
43,379

19,028
37,143
42,615,225
38,G2S|

2,505)

125,689
2,0561
2,589
1,833
2,246]

IS, 6421
51,773
70,3'S
57,3M>J
55,778

8,000
49,925
55,518
2S,327J

2,319]

10,642
1.848
70,358
1,862
25,132

13,3491
79,4tt
96,545
102,992
31,649.

8,80«
76,221 f
41,7G0f
71,93;
23,000!

1,312

3,237
3,247
54,845
31,055,
6,649

143,353,,
32,131
35,002'
36,136,

136,19a
29,67$

3,728
1,298)

4,435
1,154
35,002
992
944

57,363
34,344
1,899
62,297'
37,637

20, m
32,523

36,958
1,821
1,899

60,137
26,17ft

2t\m

1,07&
27,522

3, aw!

8,744 I

12,12l[
18,993,

"4*0671:

Joliet.Hl
.
Auburn, N . Y . . .
Charlotte, N . C . ,
Taunton, Mass.,
Everett, Mass..,

3,781

2,399
19,395!
21,35&
2,13lT
9,665

11,035

160
161
162
163
164

On
liquor
On liqn
traffic
ic.

35,141

6,00010,81$

17,747
1,531
3,108
13,464
152,047

7,493
2,293
1,471
3,864
150,
2,429
1,148
13,65«
4,438
1,590
23,324
11,436
3,9S2
7,214
1,865)
2,33d

13,39

13,064

14,061

500
2,654,}
5,521

46,555
29,1821
10,031
42,792
21,033

5,24(M
862
1,392
7,770
9,294

40,406
59,261
36,724,

2,55«

mm

> Exclusive of receipts from permits issued b y public service enterprises, which are included in Table 10.

1,3(4

3,228
111,65$

GENERAL TABLES.

169

ASSESSMENTS, FINES, FORFEITS, A N D ESCHEATS: 1911-Oontinued.
assigned to each, see page 20.

Fer a text discussion of this table, see page 63.]
GROUP V.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 30,000 TO 50,000 IN 1911-Contlnued.

RECEIPTS FROM T A X E S - C O n t i n U e d .

Nonbusiness license taxes.

RECEIPTS FBOM SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS AND FBOM SPECIAL CHARGES FOR OUTLAYS.

j Special assessments for
expenses.

j

RECEIPTS FBOM FINES, FORFEITS, 1
AND ESCHEATS.

Special assessments for outlays.
City

Penal
ties,
in
Original terest,
levies.
and (
collec
tors'
fees.

Paid by persons grants— i
Total.
Total.

Total.
General Permits.*
Dog
licenses. licenses.

32,777
2 071
4,608
4,877
5,580

li.ios

1,138
943
1,106;
13,193!
3,600,

2,012
3,882
2,618
903
943
956
935
493

1,522
2,668
1,802
1 316
2,380

483
2,548
1,227
1,316
1,324

745
394
3,742
1,863
8,946

745
2,527
1,481
1,470

1,017
419
579
12,130
2,389

579
3,244
744

3670
72

624

52,777
963
2,596
995
2,292

$6,399
94,244
241,024
181,042
203,727

163

16,295
67,607
5,881
493,741]
92,356

iso
11,734
3,107

1,039

300

410

1,056

120,388
79,382
110,291
16,674

394
805
379
7,476

87,848
40,039
111,118
16,424
16,504.

120
275

7,877

87,848
22,166 1
75,609
13,774
16,504

17,873
35,509

136,041
4,618
27,658

87,848
21,950
75,609
12,218
16,504
134,025
4,616
27,658

54,725
32,079
10,240
64,649
362

53,966
32,079
10,240
64,649
319

57,642
40,247
3,155
17,6S9
16,335

57,642
40,118 j
3,155
17,6S9
15,986

1,587

433

845
1,524

412
365
2,842
233

1,555
1,384
20
383
306
356

57,642
40,541
3,155
27,483
25,985
33,941
44,421
201,427
16,105

8,813 I
376

8,818
376

9,446

9j

9

294

294

9,794
7,761

9,794
7,761

10,387
5,649
140

10,387
5,647
140

82

224
300

28,636
199,026
98,377
93,443
47,857

25,266
199,026
98,377
93,443
47,857

706
1,480
475
115
1,381

493
469
1,106
235
504

11,353
89,906
206,023
81,420,
14,021

11,353
89,906
206,023
81,420

11,353
86,210
206,023
81,420

77,745
106,359

77,745
100,685

32,i73

32, iK

36,605
69,109
70,422
1,352

32,638
69,109|
70,422
1,352

1,199
2,022
2,506
590
2,015

73
Q9J>

240
. 130
52

1,722
536
1,700
93

41
3,636

1,069
81
720
1,349




1,319
205
981
951
928
407
355
2,608

81,956
106,359
1,250
32,742
36,605
73,803
70,422
28,652

18,054

1
8,145

569

8,145

569

12,919
5,026
2,459
19,383
19,077

22,164
2,854
21,945
256
2,650
|
1,193
22,927
656
2,801
16,281
289
2,746
9,304
1,997
273

22,164
2,854
21,945
25G
1,193
22,427
2,801
289
2,746
1,997

3,624
531
15,216
283
2,374

3,624
531
15,216
283
2,374

1,491
2 795
13,757
2,068
12,411

1,491
2,795
13,757
2,063
12,411

2,8S0
2,362
8,100
2,271
1,192

2,880
2,282
8,100
2,271
1,192

2,983
3179
3338
5946
3,063

2,967
3,179
3,338
5,946
3,063

3,415
5,742
4,664
2,093
5,898

3,415
5,730
4,664
2,098
5,898

2,823
2,772
8,585
3,185
10,853

2,210
2,772
8,585
3,185
10,753

279

759

4,432

43
129
349

i,8S9

in

10,497
17,366
3,173

3,370

28,972
199,026
98,377
111,497
47,857

12,919
5,026
7,633
19,383
19,077

4,443
6,510
2,625

1,250
3,033

621
2,765

i8,054 1

2,016

76,571
70,090
211,837
14,347
20,492

156
516
504
2,388
1,157

677
3,281
504
2,612
1,457

210

11,285
4,575
24,927
15,387
18,878

4,468

12,886
19,452
198,114
16,105

77.821
73,123
211,837
14,347
23,313

11,300
4,583
24,927
15,752
18,878

476
7,974

2ie

1,954

2,82i
336

3,696

5,876

1

1,262
3,597
33,423
3,999
5,248

15

'

132

133
134
135
136

61

5,113

137
138

139

140
141
142
143
144
500

145
146
147
148
149

|

150
151

152

153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
|

80

161

162
163
164
16
I
!

165
166
167

168

169

170
12 I 171

172
173
174

613

175
176

in

iocH

178
179
180
181
182
183
184

1,262 1
3,597 1
33,42:
5)24

i>250

4,694

2,320
2,107
3,749
8,432

2,320
2,107
3,74fl j
8,432 1

27,300

130
131

8

365

2,322
779
6,672
1,754
631

3,967

125
126
127
128
129

$5

$138

2,322
779
6,707
1,754
631

4,211
5,674

IS

frits.

$4,300
3,296
1,989
3,694
4,284

554

i,556

Total.

num.
Court Comber.
fines j mer- 1 Es
and
cheats.]
forfeits.

$4,300
3,301
2,127
3,694
4,284

3354

92,356

13,057
21,406
198,114
16,105

940
1,111
7,689
461
85

600
559
1,627

512,4431

9,446

77,821
73,123
211,837
14,347
20,492

1,540
1,670
9,316
461
295

1,977'
488'
1,0751
3,957

110,436
63,317
98,672
9,615

59,157
32,079
10,240
64,649
371

2,026
412
517
3,687
1,757

52
3,041
7821
2,681
4,680

110,436
71,194
98,572
9,615

9,376

1,509
1,123
1,002

152

281

38,183 1
45,485
57,523
94,158
199,323

1,529
1,559
2,794
306
522

166

16,295
67,3261
5,327i
493,741

42,626
51,995
60,148
94,158
199,323

1,635
2,051
1,836
415
302

53
1,792

16,295
67,607
5,3271
493,741

42,626
51,995
60,427
94,158
199,323

11,011
3,515
2,496
2,394
2,679

1,464
660
424
993

17,873
35,509

9,476
214
11,719
2,591

8Si,447
241,024
180,429
203,022

454

769
2,024

1,581

9,476
214
11,719
2,591

613
705

$93,890
241,024
180,429
203,022

1,288
462
1,632
781
2,539

1,944
1,362
1 632
3,134
4,563

656
900

613
705

$6,399

136,697
29,717
28,034
9,304
9,719

1,017
419
8,886
1,191

36,399

Total.

Special
charges
1 Penalties, for
outlays.
levies. L e c t o r s '
fees.

1

185
186
187
188
189

1

190
191
192

35

1

1

i

193

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

170

TABLE 7.—REVENUE RECEIPTS FROM SUBVENTIONS, GRANTS, DONATIONS, GIFTS
GIFTS, AND PENSION ASSESSMENTS:
1911.
1911*
[FOTalJrttfttodttoarrangedalphalrcttcallybysta^

F o r a t e x t discussion of this table, see peg* « . )
RECEIPTS FROM DONATIONS AND GITTS BT PRIVATE
PERSONS AND CORPORATIONS.

RECEIPTS IBOH SUBVENTIONS AND GRANTS BY OTHER CIVIL
DIVISIONS.

City
num-|
tier.

Subventions for
education.

cur.

Other subventions,
and grants.

For expenses.
Total.

Total.
By state.

Grand total.
Group
Group
Group
Group
Group

I....
II...
III..
IV..
V...

$32,844,465
6,824,187
10,731,311
6,889,933
4,677,941
3,721,093

By county. By state.

Other
Pensions.!
than
pensions.

By
county.

121,625,108 $4,141,807 $6,795,835 $281,715
4,564,301
6,302,678
4,710,557
3,486,408
2,561,164

5,964
2,060,354
1,069,033
1,006,456

2,259,856
4,418,972
16,078
22,681
78,218

3,697
102,944
99,819
75,255

S3,050,503

$141,373 |

$70,275

1,859,093
363,732
190,535
336,126
301,077

24,917
36,636
17,395
25,481
36,914

30,777
8,605
12,018
12,COG
6,209

For
outlays.

Receipts
from
pension
assess
ments.

For
princpal
of public
trust
funds.

$732,925 J $2,105,990
ICO, $35
265,05?
55,559
134,743
107,731

$1,490,257

1,633,534
53,431
105,563
163,296
150,163

923,768
257,218
194,089
57,769
27,413

G R O U P I . - C I T I E S H A V I N G A P O P U L A T I O N O F 500,000 A N D O V E R I N 1911.
N e w York. N . Y . .
Chicago, HI
Philadelphia, P a . .
S t . Louis, Mo
Boston, Mass
Cleveland, Ohio..
Baltimore, Md.*,
Pittsburgh, P a . . .

$1,850,439
3S1,820
2,639,803
350,103

$1,850,439
381,820
900,790
350,103

24,912
277,757
542,925
756,428

17,834
277,757
531,683
253,875

$17,490
7,763
8,839
110,792

$8,168
2,133
7,054

$9,322
3,230
30
1,867

$108,925

7,078

1,045,396
61,CG3

442

15,575
753

**co"9i6"

11,242
502,553

7,150

7,150

$1,739,013

$516,946
215,714
81,347
14,176

$2,400
1,755 '
1,629,379

52,049
26,099
16,837

G R O U P I I . - C I T I E S H A V I N G A P O P U L A T I O N O F 300,000 TO 500,000 I N 1911.
Detroit, Mich
Buffalo, N . Y
San Francisco, Cal.
Milwaukee, W i s . . . .
Cincinnati, O h i o . . .

$872,789
315,081
737,038
306,856
172,059

$856,385
164,688
737,038
306,856
168,362

$16,404
150,393

Newark, N . J
Los Angeles, C a l . . .
N e w Orleans, L a . . .
Washington, D . C
Minneapolis, Minn.

1,417,487
795,307
191,204
5,689,401
234,089

1,300,519
789,343
191,204
"1,558,982
229,301

116,968

$3,097
$5,964
14,130,419
4,788

$6,385
3,403
3,145
200
77,779

$4,720
3,378
2,746

$415
S3!.,
399 !

12,358

724

712
6,107
40.841
15,595
209,505

712
131
11,297
1,294

1,700
5,234
48

$1,250
200
15, CSS
4,276
20,000
14,253
209,420

$20,366
32,040
33,157
30,505
36,257

$49,039

16,206
17,779
15,916
14,033
70,959

4,310

85

G R O U P I I I . - C I T I E S H A V I N G A P O P U L A T I O N O F 100,000 TO 300,000 I N 1911.

19
20 Seattle, w a s h
21
22
23

$1,030,258
877,311
143,937
276,590
32,483

$1,030,253
454,739
132,131
200,950
32,483

24 Louisville. K y
25 Rochester! N . Y
26
27
28

280,398
86,090 1
86,252
367,726
143,398

2,273
86,090
86,252
67,939
141,648

29
30 Toledo, Ohio
31
32
33

86,915
82,870 !
96,039
635,526
14,163

86,915
82,870
96,039
273,516
7,625

34
35 Syracuse, N . Y .
36
37
38

229,650
62,676
71,789
301,129
104,656

112,375
62,676
68,713
278,629
100,368

39
40
41
42 Fall River, Mass
43

73,300
354,306
77,608
5,529
59,342

73,300
354,306
40,131

44
45
40
47
48

244,205
413,742
358,017
4,587
4,914

235,770
228,506
39,380

49
50 N e w Bedford, Mass
51

53,276 !
16,067 I
121,044
50,689
43,451

50,531
10,965
119,697
50,689
43,451

52
53

Alhamr N




V

»

$200

$422,572
11,806
75,640

5,329
22,097
58

264,708

$13,417

299,787
$1,750
1
i
362,010
6,538
89,625

27,650
1
I

3,076

$10

sis

5,329
429
5S

$21,150

163

12,500

12,756
3,3<H>
63,246
1.770
1,134

93
1,828
2,516

779
1,894
35,850
872
2601

759
1,726
850
852
250

998
4,297
2,841

!

$250

i,ioi

730
• 270 ""1*566*
33

$i,54i 1
00,000!

1!

20
168

20

35,000 j

!

$8,414
10,934
4,664
17,145
23,122
6,882
24,971
4,827
3,741
4,873
8,788
10,874
3,218

10

993
699

3,698
2,841

i5,564
11,088

22,500
4,288
7,457
235 j
11,656 |

37,477

5,529
59,342

I
3,035
185,236
318,637
3,868
4,914
5,102
1,347

3,500

1,900

50

1,520

20

1,096
4,604

2,745

876
2,080
6851
i

7,854
3,057
4,215

5,258
10,500

9,267

86
1,500

2,666
1,012
764

121
2,000

755
80
685

4,054

84
3,840
1,543

380

380

....
1 B y t h e U n i t e d States.

136

2,666!

719

2,199
235
1,150

737
7,257

GENERAL TABLES,

171

TABLE 7 . — R E V E N U E RECEIPTS FROM SUBVENTIONS, GRANTS, DONATIONS, GIFTS, A N D PENSION ASSESSMENTS:
1911—Continued.
(For a list of the cities arranged alphabetically by states, with the number assigned to each, see page 20* For a text discussion of this table, see page 66.]
GROUP 1V.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OP 60,000 TO 100,000 IN 1911.
RECEIPTS IBOIC SUBVENTIONS AND GRANTS B Y OTHER CIVIL
DIVISIONS.

Subventions for
education.

City
num-l
ber.

Other subventions,
and grants.

Total.

$279,893
81,638
107,C8G
265,670
201,813

1270,893
79,699
106,952
137,752
201,813

Springfield, Mass...
Lynn, Mass
Lawrence, Mass.....
Tacoma, wash..
63 Des Moines, Iowa...
Wilmington, Del...,
Kansas City, Kans.,
Yonkers,N.Y
Youngstown, Ohio..
Houston, T e x . . . . . . .

4,448
3,775
11,795
379,095

10,031
176,725

33,825
11,713
41,616
36,027
115,796

33,825
11,713
41,616
36,027
113,024

Norfolk, Va
Duluth.Minn
Fort Worth, Tex...
Somerville, Mass....
St. Joseph, Mo.. .^..

42,155
67,704
88,057
3,050
83,937

35,004
64,662
88,057

Utica,N.Y
Troy.N.Y
Elizabeth, N.J
Schenectady,N. Y..
Waterbury, Conn..,

33,570
35,352
209,800
35,377
44,546

33,570
35,352
209,800
35,377
44,546

Akron, Ohio
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Manchester, N . H
Hobokcn.N. J
EvansvOIe, Ind

31,544
24,8S7
3,046
252,575
112,791

31,544
20,137
3,046
252,575
74,185

50,884
56,969
9,429
91,170
53,025

47,181
54,872
0,429
67,200
52,123

157,523
131,137
5,523
234,412
1,336

04
05
06
07

Portland, Me
South Bend, Ind
Charleston, S. C
Brockton, Mass

150,510
62,105
163,198
4,587

149,208
58,231

138,623
213,793
34,898
11,125

138,623
213,793
33,445
11,125

5,523
88,360

08
09
100
101

Passaic, N . J
Bayonnc, N. J
Johnstown, Pa
Wichita, Kans

102
103
104
105

Covington, Ky
AUentown, Pa
Pawtucket, R. I
Springfield, TJ1

85,257
39,670
11,128
8,794

85,257
35,943
11,128
8,794

106
107
108
100

Altoona, Pa
Mobile, A l a . . . .
Canton, Ohio..,
Saginaw, Mich.

42,325
100,146
27,284
122,080

27,284
111,061

Pensions.

For
principal
of public
trust
funds.

$110

$190

"7,'603

merits.

$4,910
$2,067

$5,000
"5,"530

665

203,270
24,229

115
3,009
1,772
3,107
1,142

1,872

4
5,000
165,305
2,802
350

$864

7,151

2,220
1,469
285
15,000
209

3,042
3,950

Savannah. Ga
Jacksonville, Fla
East St. Lours, 111
Terre Haute, Ind
Holyoke, Mass

..

$300

For
outlays.

$1,939
$734
127,018

77,307

80
00
01
02
03

Other
than

county.

4,448
3,775

24,229

Wilkes-Barrc, Pa
Erie, Pa
Peoria, 111
Fort Wayne, Ind
Harrisburg, Pa

By county. By state.

Receipts
from

For expenses.
Total.

By state.

Trenton, N. J,
Reading, Pa..
Dallas, Tex
Salt Lake City, Utah..
Camden, N . J .

RECEIPTS FROM DONATIONS A N D GIFTS B T PRIVATE
PERSONS A N D CORPORATIONS*

665

10

105
3,009

1,772
3,107
195

1,838
1,143

4
5,000
52
350

1,872
305
2,750

125,000

285

40,000

9,286
178

2,220

1,934
2,044

"i5,"o6o
209

816

234
625
804
1,373
11,515

3,053
6,735

625
99
092

705
381

3,006
1,500

10,015

88
4,750
5,150
150

540

"i50

237

38,606

1,751
3,368
250
250

23,070
1,802

350

15
10

146,052
1,336

1,812

1,812

7,449
2,652
11,058
75,000

300
900
11,051

2,292

3,018

1,431
1,302

23

1,502

250

157,523
131,137

1,302
3,874
70,013
4,587

1,501

3,703
1,557

7,140
1,452
7

300

1,098
2,324
75,000
322
595

1,492

1,492
1,453

2,372

1,355
2,320
780
1,429

40,896
100,146

8,962

2,057

350
77
1,000

350
77
1,000

GROUP V.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 30,000 TO 50,000 IN 1911.
110
111
112
113
114

Binghamton, N. Y.,
Sioux City, Iowa....
Atlantic City, N. J..
Rockford,nL
Lancaster, Pa

$24,140
21,728
198,921
6,579
43,112

$24,140
21,728
198,921
6,579
41,237

115
116
117
118
119

Springfield, Ohio....
Little Roclr, Ark...,
Sacramento, Cal....
Pueblo, Colo
Chattanooga, Tenn.

25,177
62,092
120,232
46,787
103,602

25,177
44,571
67,733

120
121
122
123
124

Bay City, Mich
York, Pa
Maiden, Mass
New Britain, Conn..
Haverhill, Mass

109,699
40,315
2,721
25,616
3,833 |i




10,184
107,027
39,318

$650

$650

100

100

$1,875
$17,521
43,642
46,787
81,376

2,037

136
2,292

$136
2,292

279
2,810

279
42

1,000
2,073
18

2,473

1,685

$5,920
12,042

2,468

$300

1,800

872

997
2,721

24,637
*3,*i38

079
605

$1,000
500
18

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

172

TABLE 7.—REVENUE RECEIPTS FROM SUBVENTIONS, GRANTS, DONATIONS, GIFTS, AND PENSION ASSESSMENTS:
1911—Continued.
IFor a list of the cities arranged alphabetically by states, xrith the number assigned to each, see page 2a For a text discussion of this table, see page 66.J
GROUP V.-CHTES HAVING A POPULATION OF 30,000 TO 60,000 IN 1911—Continued.
RECEIPTS PROM DONATIONS AND GIFTS BT PRIVATE
PERSONS AND CORPORATIONS.

RECEIPTS FROM SUBVENTIONS AND GRANTS BT OTHER CIVIL
DIVISIONS.

City
num
ber.

Other subventions,
and grants.

Subventions for
education.

CRT.

For expenses.
For
outlays.
Other
Pensions.
than
pensions.

Total.

Total. '

1 By state. By county. By state.

By
county.

Receipts
from
pension
For
assess
principal
or public
ments.
trust ,
funds.

1 •.
125
126
127
128
129

$2,027
25,370
176,001
18,835
12,545

130
131 Fl*Ht Mfrb
132
133
134

37,211
53 019
111420
114,525
48,785

135 Wheeling*W.Va... . r , , , , T.
136 Racine, Wis
|
137
138 Superior Tvis . . .
.--.
139

16,402
29,381
73,239
22,623
115,402

140 Macon, Ga
141
142 Butte, Mont
143
144 Chester, Pa

101,074
8,755
124,498
10,165
33,364

$i7,439
86,693
18,835
36,138
62,186
65,522
45,782
16,402
29,381
69,516
22,623

22,"093
10,165
32,604

29,559
1856
12,932
93,624
20,774

29,059

150
151 West Hoboken, N. J
152
153 Hamilton,'Ohio
154

25,666
156,599
69,318
21,378
20,753

24,701
156,599
9,856
21,378
16,822

155
15ft
157
158
159 Huntfigton, fr. Va

142,081
6,018
22,148
43,161
11,214

142,081
6,018
18,599
42,161
11,214

160
161 Auburn, N. Y .
J62
163
164

5,111
17,710
35,835
3,699
3,396

5,111
17,710

165
166
167
168
169 Oshkosh,Wis.

20,601
1,694 1
2,467
35,996
27,337

20,601
286

145
146 Fitahpurg, MASS..
147 Dubuque/Iowa*.. . . . . . . . . - . * .
148
149 F1»nira,N.Y

170 Perth Amboy, N. J
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181 Niagara falls', N. Y
182
183 Lima, Ohio
184
185
186 New Roehelle, N. Y
187
188
189
190
191
192
193




j

•

12,932
42,619
20,774

i4,468
27,337

89,092 1
44,351
127,254
12,577
53,720

89,092
44,351 {
69,280
12,577 1
53,720

18,498
135,518
4,792
18,934
20,749

18,493
97,892
4,792
18,934 I
15,911

29,985
19,590
24,123
29,264

28,429
19,490
6,844
17,308

4,684
17,875
38,631
23,587
34,980

4,6S4
17,875
36,549
23,587
34,980

127,543
14,009
12,194
19,021

127,543
14,009
11,235
16,627

$1,705

$322

S9,3QS

i<2

i2,545
833
111,420
46,262
3,003

$10

510
51
33,880

1,073

$51
1,515

600

$10,467
142

267

115,402
5,429

!

H,494
103
354

i4,3W
103

133
8,882

8,882

168
100

669
254

i.M2
1,973

133
i,509

760
500

1,856
1,759

49,246

•

5
1,300
2,811

1,300
2,000

£11

3,129

129

2

2

Si
3,666

965
3,931

28,139
2,399
2,096

10,161
20 1
313

3,549

1,300
1,300

1,408
2,467

7,696

2i,62S

57,974

20
313

100

6,666

6,000

128

123
1,135
I

10

30
6,369
50

4,838
1,556
100

664 |

500

50
i34,87lj

922

316
401

1,000
15

4,465
37,626

lis 1

3

50
1,635
134,881

963

10,061

70

70
115
3

.15

17,279

897
52i

59,462

1,000

$947

32,365

2,*74i

3,723
101,074
3,326
102,405

$100

$10,567

$7,93i |

4,465
30
369

6,000

325
6,327

50
193

471

528

35
1SS
325

1,090

H,956
20,000

20,666
882

1,200 j

35
188
1,449 ;
26,462

921
26,137

500
2,378
895
775

2,394 j

959

100
253

253

100

iii
373




FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

174

TABLE 8 . — R E V E N U E RECEIPTS FROM EARNINGS OF G E N E R A L DEPARTMENTS,

BY

[For a list of the cities arranged alphabetically by states, with the number
II.—PBOTECTION TO PERSON
AND rBOPEETY.

I.—GENERAL GOVERNMENT.

Executive branch.

City
num
ber.

Total.
Legisla
Law and
tive
other
Chief
branch. execu
Financial.! general
tive.
execu
tive.
Grand total.

117,270,578

165,362

Group I . . . . . . . . . .
Group n
Group HI
Group IV
Group V

7,552,597
4,212,970
2,836,155
1,364,407
1,304,449

32,897
9,590
6,889
6,168
9,818

Judicial
branch.

Elec
tions.

General
govern
ment
build
ings

757 1906,918 1236,007 12,283,562 $46,620 $109,299
7,794
607,524
84,530
1,436,050
29,447
4,770
149,334
47,037
655.8S9
2,591
20,418
77,740
53,204
129,203
2,018
12S
26,324
28,547
34,791
36,549
6,615
270
49,993
43,803
17,345
25,871
5,949
296

Police
depart
ment

Fire
depart
ment

All other.

$272,874 $148,201 $2,G92,264
59,254
77,157
59.121
44.580
32,762

Dl.—CON
SERVA
TION Of
HEALTH.

$412,961

38.346
15,530
43.449
31,846
19,030

1,631,874
648,086
239.878
107.188
65,238

156,629
70,771
107,411
39,336
38,817

$10,506
S.4S9
3,299
877

$368,792
640.001
321,716
127,323

$76,012
3,905
6.101
2,403

56.174
53,442
6.110
57,416

48,764
1,294
13.510
4,640

GROUP I.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER IN 1911.
$26,716
1,545
45,300
659

$222,525
420,264
284,017
194,216

$1,959
537

8,718

$36,095
276,343
164,530
50,466

38
13

30,831
22,308

7,523
30
2,757

49,740
86,222

1,760
77
8,831
16,219

New York. N.Y,
Chicago. Ill
Philadelphia, Pa,
St. Louis, Mo...

$1,292,483
1,910,732
1^658,623
495,700

$18,115
3,250

Boston, Mass
Cleveland, Ohio.
Baltimore, Md...
Pittsburgh, Pa..

762,881
698,494
213,328
520,356

103

26,848

2,763

179,066

$62

$2,839
575

37,726
4.337
27

1,761
502

15,807
542

1,725
326

753

6,911
5,331
2.939
2,994

$351
115
745
1,162
103

$14,491
1,007
1,278
1,073
1,222

$1*355
2,031
235
2,391
1,613

$42,366
32,558
119,760
19,399
34,814

$604
27,837
1,022
2,931

859
989
47

2.355
669
16,81$
36.681
1,563

4,766
376
2,050

2.209
4,921
28,475

813

50,607
150,947
82,349
79,246
35,950

$5,756
6,136
1,030
1.0S9
12,337

$1,024
3S6
2,34$
522
7,764

$6,863
21,670
23,610
2,503
20,109

$1,007
197
491
160
4,084

81
2,761
769
240

811
1,431
2,258
50
2,184

85
14
58,441
2,456
156

1,942
2,024
8,933
91
836

1,476
2,253
686
70
4,661

4,467
2,968
1,161
61
1,448

516
2,943
1,278
"2,"i07'

273
8
779
2,576
9,310

2,956
46

2,079
224
25

30,33$
251
326
16,892
663

5,856
1,500
491
3,340
29

712
626
3,016
1.251
625

1,940
418
907
207
2,031

13,584
1,269
4,358

53
699
6,216
1,137

33
346

5,951
2S0

1,218
1,464

2,400
2,108

""59
772

*"l36'
2

3,417
11,187
4,730
691
1,620

34,588
1,458
117
707
10,821

45
1,096
295
1.270
1,215

5,528
733
11,161
181
87

1,281
2,543
3,209
548
107

GROUP TJ.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000 IN 1911.
Detroit, Mich.
Buflalo,N.Y
San Francisco, Cal..
Milwaukee, Wis....
Cincinnati, Ohio....

$741,125
738,799
502,174
266,658

Newark, N.J.
Los Angeles, CaL...
New Orleans, La...
Washington, D . C . .
Minneapolis, Minn.,

313,092
322,180
292,106
340,831
297,113

$593
12
3,275

1,130

$5,609
6,458
25,828
4,207
20,104

$12$
2,548
24,954
3,240
273

$45,068
14,733
171,266
27,9S6
71,394

30,263

9,493
3,181
3,067

89,866
62,749
62,141
73,623
37,063

22,892

18,161
8,214
7,598

4,580

134

19

$1,419
7
730

333
102

399

455

453

1,864

GROUP ILL-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000 IN 1911.
Jersey C i f o N . J . . . .
Seattle, Wash
Kansas City, Mo
Indianapolis, Ind
Providence, R. I . . . .

$49,768
134,485
83,305
47,412
146,777

Louisville, Ky.
Rochester, N . Y
Denver, Colo
Portland, Oreg
St. Paul, Minn

77,734
51,763
173,600
48,222

Columbus. Ohio
Toledo, Ohio
Atlanta. Ga
Oakland, Cal
Worcester, Mass

233,364
47,482
118,743
30,674
212,064

187
1,549
54
61
54

Birmingham, A l a . . . .
Syracuse, N . Y
New Haven, Conn....
Memphis, Tenn
Scranton, P a . . . . . . . . .

100,174
37,820
60,655
59,980
5,883

15

Richmond, Va
Paterson. N. J.
Omaha, Nebr
Fall River. Mass
Dayton, Ohio

5,179
3,853
5,387
29

408

110,635

,

12,905
35,100
47,536
46,188
46,167

Grand Rapids. Mich.
Spokane, Wash
Nashville, Tenn
,
Lowell, Mass....
Cambridge, Mass.

85,972
132,071
29,836
47,615
336,312

Bridgeport, Conn
New Bedford, Mass...
San Antonio, Tex
Hartford, Conn
Albany,N.Y

35,728
56,796
32,950
51,284
9,155




$8,037
50
955
8,942
6,627

$4,057
50
16

22
47
697
1,218
4,016
9,095
224
1,869

106

12
951
360
1,219

197
63

5,531

$16,374
$12,666
174
705

$519
$3,007
23
15,649

92
1,307
3,516
1,962
1,930

4,619
7,584
45,286

652
35
26
82
8,559

5,210
4,798

"*403

864

677
417

2,202
175
13

18

136
90
1,650
8,062

25
9,090
494
1,480

5,854
3,896

47

71
6,338

18

1,543
2,654
3,009

2,683
1,082
5,119
230
3,531

72

128

232
810
"**859"
2,323
2
1,729
97
110
3

5,162

.........

21
2,388
527

It 476

2,914
1,568

281

GENERAL TABLES.

175

PRINCIPAL DIVISIONS OF THE GENERAL DEPARTMENTAL SERVICE: 1911.
assigned to each, see page 20.

For a test discussion of this table, see page 70.]

IV.—SANITATION, OB PROMO
TION O f CLEANLINESS.

Refuse
collec
tion and
disposal. disposal.
Sewers
and

All
other.

$280,344 1764,509 $92,289
44,595
52,724
29,188
81,796
72,041

349,058
47,554
236,447
95,179
36,271

VI.—CHARITIES, HOSPITALS,
AND CORRECTIONS.

V.—HIGHWAYS.

Road General
ways
care of
and other) high*
ways
street,
road.
includ
ing
and alley
street
struc
tures. lighting.

Repair
General Penal in
and con
hospitals stitutions]
struction Charities. and
and
Schools.
for com
reforma
pensation.
hospitals.1 tories.

1668,357 [1162,630 [12,418,233

$633,454

21,615
41,580
63,591
23,450
12,394

241,286
128,779
109,770
97,794
55,825

12,252
4,939
3,919
1,326

VH.—EDUCATION.

620,369
889,613
582,354
208,851
117,046

Libra
ries.

VTA.—RECREATION.

QuasiEduca-| General
produc
tional recrea
tive
tion,
recrea parks,
park
tion. and trees, enter
prises.

IX—
MISCELLA-I
NE*

559,155
442,598
235,276
66,962
86,597

148,936 126,432
133,157 53,695
248,357 102,999
143,098 31,477
177,411 38,957

44,901
673
6,098
246
1,378

210,025
130,546
82,817
36,228
46,214

160,439
119,147
43,199
1,521
T.345

City
num
ber.

ous.

$769,073 [11,390,588 $850,959 [$353,560 [$53,196 $505,830 $328,651
346,568
131,893
114,751
2,902
172,954

X.—GEN
ERAL.

$822,812

161
174

295,694
201,685
106,142
128,286
91,005

GROUP I. --CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER IN 1911.
$1,539
9,709
486
399

$62,101

18,189
14,273

66,238
208,449
2,960

5,910
3,400

$45,894
489
105
8,452
14,913

$11,760
23,9S2
16,735
16,289

$48
14,672

50,993
10,875
92,421
6,208

1,200
5,695

$63,980
327,314

$129,850
2,963
18,753
439

$4,081
250,897
16,142

8,016
179,875
5,218
35,966

74,971
6,617
758
6,930

44,544
13,521
17,383

$217,140
95,825
32,631
37,306
40,387 i
34,241
12,756 1
88,869

$6,936
25,747 $15,714
514
2,463
14,726
8,379
58,803
22,751
19,459

5,926
7,249
86,701

$483
1,612
42,480
221

$89,666
44,675 $i60,439
2,749
8,904
32,766
16,196
11,003
4,066

i05

$12,115
8,635
127,816
4,187

1
2
3
4

141,434
539
377
591

5
0
7
8

$132,352
2,722
8,245
13,153

9
10
U
12
13

GROUP JX-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000 IN 1911.
$1,944
1,297
17,500
4,156
189

$1,744
38,181

$714

2,647
1,245

7,388

15,280
2,179
9,571
166
442

1
3,159
171
406

1,081 j
2,169

$90,676
40,564
580
1,560
6,775

$76
10,545

3,115
414
158
112
2,460

29,225

339
603

539
253

$43,026
496,102
78,846
8,513
132,153

$93,319
17,447
661
829
1,494

9,248
20,828
5,039
61,281
34,577

495
4,653
2,104
6,461
1,316

$313 $199,883 i $15,693
3,026
29,521
3,399
971
3,819
89,544
14,088
53,358
4,661
30,912 ' • 76,256
28,505
2,112
38
3,326

4,737
29,859
890
61,137
28,482

6,043
2,377
1,190
645
12,868 1

$3,099
4,481
3,097
3,815
4,930

$36,205
4,203
1,492
8,803
2,408

$389
184

13,375
5,830
2,685
6,148
7,235

i

11,430
3,681
10,812
3,492
48,010

$9,708

4i,i45

31
44,295 1
886
1

68,294

14
15
16
17
18

GROUP HL—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000 IN 1911.
$2,778
102
4,187
293
10,849
22
63
2,232
12
"2,*344'

$263
$2,207
370
1,230
991

$380
500

150
1,9S1
47
1,530
4,768

77
1,117
9,612
34,621

56,417
285
2,574
16,800
25,457

1,608
1,757
2
864

168

735
1,800

178
2,253

445

89

$6,121
4,263
4,139
265

701

435
14,269
1,136
6,017
1,289
7,358
112
324
25
3,423
1,367

46
137
11,383

1,651
17,061
204
48
455

13,130
72,353
15
5,445
15,846

2,259
3,189




6,512
194
2,689
1,760
8

$5
34,654
15,309
5,759
856

$3,435
11,102
11,945
11,167
16,078

$985
3,972
2,440
2,569

16,374
7,574
3,137
4,452
3,876

25,540

37,277
10,853
76,698
6,225

11,764
9,913
1.226
1,230
8,055

175
2,548
2,274
1,546
1,814

41,177

1,797
2,924
22,711
1,170
2,561

1,487
1,117
2,694
1,163
753

2,000

4,318
10,718
6,680
7,061
4,189

2,063
2,059
666
728

3
8,500

486

5,342
9,403
4,144
7,140
10,640

1,270
1,947
575
537
843
7,365
1,095
1,251

5,396
221

4,194
4,531
2,278
14,5S5
743

$1,211
619
1,021

$18,623
7,248

1,434

1,326

14,787

1,328
1,076
789

312
1,137

" # 5,*7i6

2,209

*15,*976

3,507
185
252

110,618
2,760
18,068
153
43,772

1,974
13,726
9
1,540

7,857
10
4,259
4,852

738

2,331

36

2,559

*7,"fi09

*53,"259

7,398
3,939
9,274

6,882
10,033
3,835
4,604

3,638

354
239

5,274
7,818

270

258,553
3,000

11,730
2,400
163

$35,795

9,459
3,159
40

1,917
6,816

*i4,"346

1,702

"i6*486

1,670
6,242
4,617

6,656

151

31
117
6,352

6,144
7,346
7,262
11,646
6,917

3,219 1
28,299 |

$179

io
18

5,843

$3,141
9,951
9,210
5,522
2,199
3,292
1,450
6,536
750
5,053
159
2,044
4,665
160
1,220

2i,072
248

30

1,671
450
1,824
1,136
3,391
728
111
2,571
430

601

24
25
26
27
28

572

29
30
31
32
33

14,355
$39
i22

25,050
14
160

157
1,344
4,650
3,077
260
2,873
39
1,270
378
796
18

18

4,767
7,202

19
20
21
22
23

$100

$963

314

34
35
36
37
38
i

8,618 1
1,000
3,525

44
45
46
47
48

573
1,290
20,709
15,471
17,219

5,385
37

78

39
40
41
42
43

i

49
60
51
52
53

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

176

TABLE 8 . — R E V E N U E RECEIPTS FROM E A R N I N G S O F G E N E R A L DEPARTMENTS, B Y
I For a list of the cities arranged alphabetically by states, with the number
G R O U P 1 V . - C I T I E S H A V I N G A P O P U L A T I O N O F 50,000 T O 100/JOO I N 1911.
tl.—PROTECTION TO PERSON

I.—GENERAL GOVERNMENT.

Executive branch.
City
num
ber.

54
55
56
57
58

!

827,628
7,502
23,823
23,165
13,032

Rait TftTrftC.itv TTtfth

!
1
'

Vnnkere N. Y

69
70
71
72
73

Norfolk Va
Duluth Minn.
Fort Worth, Tex

74
75
76
77
78

Utica N . Y
Troy N . Y
Elizabeth, N . J

79
80

Akron, Ohio •

81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88

. T ..

O k l a h o m a CAty, Okla T . .
Manchester, J ^ - ' H . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Hoboken, T^. J . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
EvansviUe, I n d „
^
T
Wflkes-Barre, Pa
Erie, Pa
Peoria, 111
Fort W a y n e . I n d

Portland, Me
Charleston, S. C

18,600
13,706
10,815 !
39,167
50,558
14,316
21,441
31,215
159,471
12,564 !
17,335
12,600
22,855
9,582
12,601

Waterbury, Conn.

89 Savannah, Ga
90
91 East S t . Louis, 111
92 Terre Haute, Ind
93
94
95
96
97

........

88,721
81,552
37,934
13,612
14,788

T .,

*

6,146
64,314
9,141
8,077
12,299
4,020
13,515
50,4S1
9,625
1,803
16,465
23,866!
6,763 I
9,374
22,855
45,385 1
2,427
16,658!
117,532

98
99 Bayonne, N . J
100
101 Wichita, Kans.

11,598
5,589
13,610 |
14,906

102
103 1
104 i Pawtucket, R. I
105 i

5,397
3,186
26,731
8,958

106
107
108
109

8,751
18,813
4,370
23,169

Legislative
branch.

General
Fire '
govern^ ] Police i
depart All other.
depart
ment
ment.
build
ment.
ings.

82,281

820
66^
150

327
157
1,241
725
304
34

89
14

87

Elec
tions.

Judicial
branch.

Law and
other
Chief
execu Financial. general
execu
tive.
tive.

$1,384

i

8485
277

82,517

1,964
765

4,469
6,120

11,173 I

194 j
i

13 <

2,351

i,732

503

12
8

4,207
189
1,047
191
2,820
1,077
432

30

!

US!

95
18

3,520

2,334
47

2,126
2,6S5
32
1,0SS
74

320

121 1
244 !
312 1

21

8
162

75

391
4,3S7
2,169
227

663

1,028
3,732

436

2,739
77
469
907
216

593
2,001
550

197

3

498
183

3
16

63

438

13,003 j
104 !

1,212
1,361

349
168

iS

1,410
94

1,799

95

i

10]
5
1,692

804

1,235
2,421

207
4

6

!

3,070
1,696

123

26
2,520 1

395
1,595

387
730
874
475
116

3,128 1
8,564
5,315 j
787
4,097

1,529

2,049

3,807

'
6
645
93
3,603
1,375
39
1,003 1
296 i

1

io

2,147

23

7

|

450
344
418
1>1S9
77
10 ;
53
920

446
30
2,485

36
7
623
2,640 |

233
4,999

3, iii

697

2,549
1

3,364

69
601

6.601
356
336
153

845

303

630

255

691

40
203
3,284

i,3oo

2
349
945

1,069
1,763
500
5,241

74
1,279
75

3,598
54
1,068

177
310
246
302
4,613

i,6o5

\

156
75

57

368
3,075
395
19
25

in

996
i

U

5

m

510
340

3,210
133

11

12

3,946
6,207
1,859
98

346
2,6S9

1,761
797

1,282

696
1,433
1,695
1,121
804

939
6,89ft
9,921!

84
7
10

3704
32
2,727
1,309

219

55
325

19

8
1,245

13,741
77
2,221
4,194

275

4,030 ,
735
90j

1,656
312

8145
10
1,114

2,109

840

|

195
* i25

io
i

1,175
1,246
949
1,163
3,995

3
239

41

TO,—CON*|
8ERVATIONOP
HEALTH.

1

Total.

CRY.

59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68

▲NO PROPERTY.

11,955
71

133
1,700
202

56
2.9S6
7,265
902
368

16
297
441
16
2

2,714
8,034
4,997
449
509

553
167
1

2,109
291
35
480

137
64
780

258

359
985

383
24

64

59i

147

i,50S
257
695

1 ^
2,138
I

2,433

G R O U P V . - C I T I E S H A V I N G A P O P U L A T I O N O F 30,000 TO 50,000 I N 1911.

110
HI
112
113
114

Bmghamton, N . Y
Atlantic City, N . J

311,984
5,215
29,730
11,564
2,727

115
116
117
118
119

26,082
15,934,
39,407
8,548
32,919

120 B a y City, Mich
121 York, P a .
122
123 N e w Britain, Conn
124

3,418
2,812
47,870
28,672
39,993 j




8105
1

$10 1

31,537
8999

iii

315
368
319

10!
127

3,969

8596

22

1,143
85
2,634
36

9

103

27

295
2,784
291
2,484

1,725
392

505
38
800

4

311
530

840 J

293 j
7,497 j

90
87

48

13,633 !
1,194 I 1

$15
499
330
1,418

250

234 !
1,629
243
2,067 1
10

155
43

4

847

265

55

100

$69
825

$62
343
262
12
75

182

r"

ii
383 j
38
999
1,844
215

76
259!
2,822 j
265 j

7,290

1"* 7iil

GENERAL TABLES.

177

PRINCIPAL DIVISIONS OP THE GENERAL DEPARTMENTAL SERVICE: 1911-Contiimed.
assigned to each, see page 20. For a text discussion of this table, see page 70.]
GROUP IV.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 50,000 TO 100,000 IN 1911.
IV.—SANITATION, OS PROMO
TION OF CLEANLINESS.

Refuse
Sewers
collec
and
sewage tion a n d
disposal. disposal.

All
other.

Road
ways
and other
street,
road,
and aliey
struc
tures.

354
6,699
COO
1,921
15S
26

$452
1,169
240
1,017

2Si

444
2,732
572
200
SS
70

2,219 1

33

2,8M
16 1
10,485
10,465 I
116
29,490
7,043 j

43i

1,461

986

40
17,472

755
4,250

195

143

212
25
65

i,6io
2,224
135
1,846
5,784
17
40

317

36
45

3,022
606

402
332
46
90
2,879

•

35
2,126
354
296
1,086

17,6SS
124
99

65
3,213
1
14

5117

1,524

5

923
1,403
• 1,800
9,695
170

93,652
839

5,463
968
40

17,297
2,036
2C9
642
2,304

3,903
14,027
4,383

524
58

U

$225

976
2,496
101

i&

104,049

8,397

6,398
434
313
1,006

213
3,645
935
340
3,303

1

12,663!

6S4
227
1,293
6,500

415
163
275

8S2
2,747

3,039
215

2,i22

i5,773

37
588
54,214

577
89
13,037

1,025

14

m

3,192
232

4,579
175
109
125
5,857

6

m

1,885

9,902

99

9,669

15,584 |

3,301
462

279
11,201

487

2,867
343
930

15

800

612
1,895
6,370

1S6
300

1,999

334
4,736
174
1,856

325
249
70

6,375

3,250
50 |

495

226

620

i,366
897
1,295
2,490

4,501
1,044
2,212
9S2
6,377
1,451
1,369
4,907
6,817
921

Libra*
ries.

Vm.—EECEEATION.
IX.—
HISCity
Quasi 1 CELLA-I X.—OEN- n u m 
General
EducaJ recrea
produc
NEber.
tive
tional I tion,
OV3.
park
recrea
parks,
tion. and trees. enter
prises.

$509'
618
2,005
1,438

$1,136
136
895
1,168
802

eio

788
193
780
1,028

10,063

i43

2,516
1,160
892
460
3,471

54
55
56
57
58

15,142
34,227
7,012

59
60
61
62
63

39

1,887
122

539
1,899
i,255

271
895

392
392
535
1,396
1,474

341
479
1,759
1,373

881

64
65
66
67
68

i f 9i2
25

|

69
70
71
72
73

330
4,494
17,657
37

737
206

i,6i2

74
75
76
77
78

533
$182

1,443
274
636
437
272

1,7

14
!

1

444

40
758
540
793
377

554
28
245

40
83
1,116
5,416
1,244

1,301
1,620
244
874

938
301

405
56

5,673
2,659
33
5,095
1,257
1,128
970
834
2,042

47i
583

503
2,293

381
146

4i7
53
177

2,612
110
2,961
7,0SO

55

246
$246

|•

682

770
155

$4 |

89
90
91
92
93

2,878
5,584

535

M72
1,971

20,207

631
592

56

i93

2,ieo

1,372

1,460

94
95
96
97
!

i

657
170

1>458

1
1

II

II

79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88

16,666

133

i6,500

64
1,053

14,501
993
3,569
5,010 1
2,837

4,557
806
1,036
1,252
4,612

68
3,379

$8,701
1,063
3,679
1,849
2,376

2,768
1,723
1,879
527
M34

1,437
3,516
60S

I

$3,820
1,075

13,297
11,702
13,364

242

26S
129
63

1,018
2,225
535

VH.—EDUCATION. 1

Repair
General Penal in
and con
hospitals stitutions
struction Charities
and
and
Schools.
for com
insane i n reforma- (
pensation.
hospitals. tortes.

$i,597

2,829
43

General
care of
high
ways
includ
ing
street
lighting.
$604

1329
$2,401

XV—CHAEnTES, HOSPITALS,
AND COEEECTIONS.

V.—HIGHWAYS.

::::::::::

98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109

GROUP V.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 30,000 TO 5(1000 IN 1911.

$426

$110
800

$916
225
14
129
396
248
531
30,035

$i70

6

12

103

$1,624

$124
260
17,702
1,946

$483

290

19,507
3,214
95

13

1

9
167
178

4,297
23

6127°—13




1

12

73
977
775
716
136

$1,339
665
2,179
5,860
1,002

'$4,895

17,465

4
50

i2,517

7,eii

294

947

3,457
4,738

414
7,972

$5,444
3,i25 1

3,102
1,003
6,670
1,346
802

251
198]
553
407
4S9

1,895
1,453
1,979
6,632
1,576

295
83!
546

690 1

$253

$1,065

$515
1,836
836 1
1,034

38
826
760
47
$92
1,286

841
2,953
160

16
307
180

1

[
8,967
140 1
17,443 !

110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

178

TABLE 8.—REVENUE RECEIPTS FROM EARNINGS OF GENERAL DEPARTMENTS, B Y
[For a list of the cities arranged alphabetically by statu, with the number
GROUP V.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 30,000 TO 50,000 IN 1911-Continued.
O.—PROTECTION TO PERSON
AND PROPERTY.

I.—GENERAL GOVERNMENT.

Executive branch.

City
num
ber.

Legisla
tive
branch.

137,262
12,928
13,541
20,554
18,599

130
131
132
133
134

11,408
29,053
28,253
25,586
22,621

U

10,504
12,506
11,856
13,165
41,172

U
65

Flint \fioh

WhAellniT W Vfl

123
8

4,178

22,588 1
69,941
2,013
61,260
4,209

155 East Orange, N. J
156 Quincy Hi.....rxx
157 Roanoke, Va.......^ T - T . T
158 | Lexington,nKy
159 Hnntingto , WT Va r T 160
161
162
163
164

..

-.

joliet.Hl
Auburn.N. Y
Charlotte, N. C
Taunton, Mass . . . . . T , r r T T , . . . .

4,018
4,905
13,999
3,673
17,152

175
176
177
178
179

7,995
8,230
5,451
15,934
7,991

180
181
182
183
184

7,533
8,724
6,787
3,927
16,096

185
186
187
188
189

7,023
15,233
8,903
2,862.
2,664

NewBochelle,N.Y

190
191
192
193




0,863
3,368
6,009
10,670

303 j

527
286
00

207
17

7

GO
1,095

905

$48

3

2,255
26
318

329
20
1,683
457

531
39

518
2

75
44
6,722
10

2,061

5,610
1,002

IS
433

$178
228
5,299
2,803
3,551

155
403

7

341
605
5,SS6
1,S2S
410
878

2,376

615
159,
12,995
91

278
132
115
402

145

12
141
98
840

50

498
149
28
1,294

436
80
20

i

324
213

34
31
3,567

1,420

1

2

27
240

240
56
143
935
30

IS
9
325
12S
31

I

48
6

1,878

4,997

i,6l5
2tf
3

4

305

18
17

2,501

561
24

426

555
43

39
35

78

662

409
300

*
1

25
355

310

ii

3,078
52
49

543
1,650
118
45
225
74
2

381
5
3,220
903
347
52
212
2,330
5
774
16
3,164

357
499
177
174

59*
143
181

5 !

74
893

4,502 1
1,054

15

692
47

2,446

178
309

352
297
700
124
10

60
279
262
665

iii
255
149

2,415

463

305
261
620
963

43
271
595
. .A

556 |
40

1,017
35

j,476
1,103

27

415

805
1,435
60

121 1
39

|

440
445
922
209

37
169
379
1,415

101
202

204
531
2
310

55
443

11

1
1,092
457
735

2,8S6

378
892 j
2

2i

465

189
175
33
363
1,657

$2,256
179
38

5,6661

136

28
5

4,028

m.—coN-l
8ERVA-1
TION OF 1
HEALTH. 1

1,655
10 t 995
2,908

2,801

3,084
6,959

451

!

$313
170
85
252

25
706
401
369
2,691

300

113

All other.

V

305
241

275
3
355

2
3,062

3,894
4,147
10.253
39,300
15,862

170
171
172
173
174

1,500

10

$269
471

94

20,624
9,347
10,179 i
1,661
4,842

3,872
14,493
16,075 j
15,005
5,371

4,000

192

10,770
1,993
20,096
2,884
8,806

165
166
167
163 Cedar Rapids, Iowa
169 Oshkosh, w i s

3,222
200
3,541

15

145
146
147
148
149

Knoxvllle Tenn

$00
" 1
325
373
795

$402

Fire
depart
ment

Police
depart
ment.

96

140
141
142
143
144

Elmlra N . Y

$92

$7G0
27
52

2

28,077
45,281
10,744
21,102
4,861

150
151
152
153
154

61
67

Elec
tions.

Judicial
branch.

L a w and
other
Chief
general
Financial.
execu
execu
tive.
tive.
$28

125
126
127
128
129

135
136
137
138
139

General
govern
ment
build
ings.

Total.

CITY.

43

i

1

1

1

i

19
1,310
1,646
891
169

60

92

212

580
26

290

i,926

72
174
40

1,801
255
1,650

54

no

186

31
575
85
130

i

M"
2

2
1,149
25

GENERAL TABLES.

179

PRINCIPAL DIVISIONS OF THE GENERAL DEPARTMENTAL SERVICE: 1911—Continued.
assigned to each, see page 20. For a text discussion of this table, see page 70.]
G R O U P V . - C I T I E S H A V I N G A P O P U L A T I O N O F 30,000 TO 50,000 I N 1911—Continued.
IV.—SANITATIOH, OR PROMO
TION OF CLEANLINESS.

Refuse
Sewers
collec
and
1 sewage tion and
disposal. disposal.

$4,6to
11C

$2,722

4,907
3

3
3,187

VI.—CHARITIES, HOSPITALS,
AND CORRECTIONS.

V.—HIGHWAYS.

Road
ways
and other
street,
road,
and alley
struc
tures.

All
other.

S3
70 1
15

1100
4S5
1,175
1,606
2,058

General
care of
Repair
General | Penal in
high
and con
hospitals stitutions
ways,
struction
Charities.
and
and
includ for com
insane in reforma
ing
hospitals. tories.
street pensation.
lighting.

$48

$3,702

ioo
141

30
505

12,632

1,754

1

732
333

651

1,550
1,257
319
941

56
67

479
4,530

SO
3,180
15
30

i,ii?

4,808
428

100
4,0SS
23

2,493

1,492

59
544

110
57

6

937
1,178

4,832
45G
5

1,798
11
3

949
1,022
2,243
3S7

is

33

330

35
24

1

5
373

940
348
366

2,659

13,513

435

361

u,m
!
|

408
49
6

932
7,522
18
3,869

31
7,064
2,813

276

1

1,991
346




484
33
264
42

37

466
59

389
41
37

1,199
796!
1,804

131
413
1,190
3,303
100
25
1,214
112
445
494
48
94
280
698
1,079
115

304

1,662
2,737

741

i,922

143
408
90

12,227

582

6

m

5,850

372
228

60
110
64
4

197

300
671

89

3,087

isi

i,067 |

2,313

|

919

7,970
2,834
82
4,413
1,747

2,918
2,765
1,020
2,432
3,907
777
856
174

IX.—
City
MISCELLA-1 X.—GEN
ERAL. num
NEber.
OUS.

$17,842
61

621

848
723

553
900

129

502
4
6
97

,

1,047
15,937

2,568
1,601
122

425

23

130
131
132
133
134

40
36

135
136
137
138
139

2,877
38

140
141
142
143
144

109
476
283
248

14
243

1

403
4,984

145
146
147
148
149

2,000

150
151
152
153
154

i,068

2W
136
137

155

1
185
130
162

7,115
655
1,441
998

1,542
249

2,194
1,999
354
5,050
522

650
467
325
395

46
370
199

9,220
6,428

563
2,587
271
2,174
1,054

272
1,627
707

iiS

5,270
4,780
792

316
416

i

1

1,004

2,545
1,525
891 1
1,271
375 I

360
849
1,127
221

731

160
161
162
163
164

ioi

1,320
5
3
38

1 *

165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174

239

487i
11
2,661

175
176

:

1

200
87
184

1,233
703

5
6,490

ISO
369

177

178
179

247
39
149
376

i47

156
157

158
159

273

447
1,517 1
1,969
680
2,384

182
1,061
835
3,063

125
126
127
128

940
1,223

146
157

i,309

1,956
1,653
2,220
1,681
1,490

4,085

|

$1,296

117
3,791
541
294

2,027
3,094
3,413
590
5,762

2,806

2,249
384
5

4,527 j

3,105
2,360
906
388
284

2,266

$440
1,416
951
391
158

$1,?22
5,988 1
3,683
4,849

1,471
162

2,144

Vm.—RECREATION.

Quasi
Educa General produc
recrea
Libra- [ tional
tive
tion,
ries. [ recrea
park
parks,
tion.
enter
and trees. prises.

3,633
675
2,322
2,017
1,107

1,350

4,099
1,240

469
750

267

1

607

580

1,143

604

i»ni
208
38

1,417

2,500

m

1,421

9,750
15,874

15,964

1,018

•

663
2,485
378

38

377

216
690

.

19,186

50

77
68
1,100

45

228

4,293

10
5,904

3S,274

103

125

22
1,220
' 131

i,iis

163
412
1,083
9,235

96
241

38

8

$ii,250

9,785

221

402

49
2,525
12,673

18,367
13,767

146

1,032

7,684

20$
20S
24,00S

215
219

1

177
4
2C2

$1,243

54

8,443

291

Schools.

13,459
1,418

2,892
550

VH.—EDUCATION.

912
90
7,539

185
186
187
188
189

$4,345

580

66
1,572

180
181
182
183
184

10
11

190
191
192
193

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

180

PTS FROM HIGHWAY PRIVILEGES, RENT OF INVEJ
TABLE 9.—REVENUE RECEIPTS
INVESTMENT PROPERTIES, AND
INTEREST:
INTEREST: 1911.
1911.
[For a list of the cities arranged alphabotfcally by states, with the number assigned to each, see page 20. For a text discussion of this table, see page 73.J
RECEIPTS FROM RENT OF INVEST
MENT PROPERTIES.

RECEIPTS FROM HIGHWAY
PRIVILEGES.

City
num
ber.

crrr.
Total.

Grand total.
Group I
Group II
Group III
Group IV
Group V

Major
highway
privileges Minor
(highway high
way
privileges
privi
granted
leges.
public
service cor
porations).

Total.

By sink*
ing funds
and
public
trust
Allother.
funds for
munici
pal
uses.

RECEIPTS FROM INTEREST.

Total.

By
By
invest
public
ment
trust
[On current] funds By sinking funds
funds.
for
and
deposits.
munici
from
pal
invest*
uses.
ments.

All
other.

[311,029,567 [110,134,914 ($894,653 15,662,807 }$2,499,390 [$3,163,417 [123,536,087 '$5,420,760 [1215,004 [115,305,461 ($1,650,03-1 1944,828
5,873,996 807,525 4,072,779 2,385,452 1,687,327 16,092,426 2,829,780 35,113 11,344,7S5 1,053,5S6 829,162
6,681,521
19,730 1,207,330 140,274 43,368
8S7,7S3
2,298,485
53,333 1,365,013
1,334,787 14,859 1,418,346
1,349,646
41,440 l,691,6Si
223,753
27,319
2,880,854
896,661
52,467
57,093
109,560
1,809,493 41,654
1,851,147
59,1S5
546,249 123,711 11,437
1 249,880
509,293
825
26,125
26,950
584,054
9,715
593,769
59,536
515,416 108,710 33,542
1,014,442
297,238
7,313
27,859
35,172
532,5S4 20,900
553,484
GKOUP I.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER IN 1911.

New York, N.Y,
Chicago. Ill
Philadelphia, Pa.
St. Louis, Mo

31,528,400
3,259,432
626,924
437,647

Boston, Mass
Cleveland, Ohio..
Baltimore, Md...
Pittsburgh, Pa...

108,837
6,016

539,258
177,007

$1,138,993 1387,407
2,922,518 336,914
619,411
7,513
437,647
85,087
5,655
516,329
148,356

23,750
361
22,929
28,651

$193,735
593,393
3,068,024
115,551
16,059
30,550
40,391
15,076

$193,735
$497,205
96,188
1,742,496 1,325,523
106,582
8,969

$9,551,873
736,540
1,310,771
429,169

9,413
30,550
7,868
15,076

1,938,557
506,9S7
896,503
722,026

6,646
32,523

$6S6,100 $11,221 $8,005,054
8,235
8,694
610,311
511,777
362,993 12,903
2,092
401,866
105,125
373,683
84,543
202,159

203

1,461,464
101,173
764,318
492,759

$79,925 $769,573
109,300
423,098 '
25,211
335,465
32,126

33,503

47,439
1,022

26,086

GROUP n.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000 IN 1911.
Detroit, Mich
Buffalo, N . Y
San Francisco, Cal,
Milwaukee, Wis...
Cincinnati, Ohio..

$132,107
174,392
51,282
34,273
322,478

$129,255
169,037
51,282
34,273
322,478

Newark, N . J
Los Angeles, Cal..
New Orleans, La..
Washington, D. C.
Minneapolis, Minn

211,796
84,372
202,376
91,288
45,282

211,796
84,367
197,476
90,818
44,005

$2,852
5,355

5
4,900
470
1,277

13,163
74,655
468
1,274,786
44,516
10,216
182

$887
48,646

3,800

$360.
12,276 1
74,655 |
468
1,226,140 "

$272,502
244,655
121,071
63,379
706,888

$85,002
101,353
115,702
49.6SS
290,292

44,516
6,416
182

412,253
144,325
89.766
2.726
240,920

70,247
93,347
46,735
25
35,392

$35
406

$139,496
121,522

2,150

372,546

5,300

329,929
50,978

11,839
192,859

$4,601 $43,3
21,374
5,369
13,691
41,000»|
0,777

31,192
2,701
12,669

GROUP III.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000 IN 1911.
19 Jersey City, N. J..
Seattle, Wash
Kansas City, Mo..
Indianapolis, Ind.
Providence, R. I . .

$118,693
102,223
229,968
102,652
222,183

$109,612
101,640
229,693
102,351
206,187

$9,081
583
275
301
15,996

$4,667
1,171
555
22,227

Louisville Ky
Rochester, N. Y . . .
Denver, Colo
Portland, Oreg....
St. Paul,Minn....

9,623
89,033
123,227
38,568
128,317

9,095
89,033
120,993

528

500

2,229

55,559
171
733

33,746

21,813
171
733

Columbus. Ohio..
Toledo, Ohio
Atlanta. Ga
Oakland, Cal
Worcester, Mass..

44,959
10,079
42,764
13,490
16,369

44,866
9 837
42,759
13,490
16,369

93
242
5

2,660
7,999

1,775

885
7,999

624

624

Birmingham, Ala..
Syracuse, N . Y
New Haven, Conn.
Memphis, Tenn....
Scranton, Pa

34,514
6,810
6,272
7,478

30,914
6,810
5,844
7,478

3,000

541

541

428

520

520

*2,"728

*2,"72S

100,314
55,835
175,377
12,257
14,509

94,870
65,835
173,560
12,257
14,506

5,444

*i,*8i7

4,034
322
2,277

3

1,720

Grand Rapids. Mich.
Spokane, Wash
Nashville, Tenn
Lowell, Mass
Cambridge, Mass

1,364
17,578
62,853
6,467
12,086

1,364
17,578
62,853

4,034
322
2,277
4
1,720
88
222

Bridgeport, Conn...
New' Bedford, Mass.
San Antonio, Tex,
Hartford. Conn,
Albany, N . Y . .

9,590
9,639
1,057
23,236
1,763

9,590
0,639
57
23,236
1,763

Richmond, Va...
Paterson.N. J . . .
Omaha, Nebr
Fall River. Mass.
Dayton, Ohio....




128,317

6,467
12,057

88
222

29

1,000

238

$16,946

$4,667
1,171
555
5,281
500

29,910
983
244,462

$3,823
100
1,504
15,115
17,959

25,701
39,154
27,954
63,576
17,708

1,314
16,139
41,764
880
1,613

3,766

147,063
90,132

194

154,673

2,404
3,082
2,100
618
27,259

$240,460
94,062
71,300
30,819
339,458

$21,029
93,962
39,8S0
14,721
73,532

109,390
103,967
101,017
112,347
30,971

53,625
46,137
31,329
47,891
11,650

182,260
177,812
14,761
24,497
188,234

32,793
80,832
12,661
23,979
6,208

22,278
39,507
37,877
43,351
13,245

21,169
33,615
10,863
37,444
7,712

133,809
31,777
45,301
102,410
36,727

22,011
3,108
7,413

37,493
15,424
31,326
61,903
136,190

17,979
14,092
25,141
10,640
9,930

44,607
124,148

30,665
98,058
1,831
53,622
86,672

10,696
5,311
1,463
20,471
26,245

19,507
75,918
368
24,868
55,703

$215,608

$3,505
28,750
2,537

1,109
358
1,358
5,907
5,483

316
1,333

21,118

145

6,534
25,651

60

93,943
26,739
33,479
98,915
11,594

3,219
1,930
3,079
2,601
4,015

9,788
1,065

2,727
267
185
6,656
2,112
462
16,829
8,138
4,724

$14,320

6,999
6,000

GENERAL TABLES.

181

TABLE 9.—REVENUE RECEIPTS PROM HIGHWAY PRIVILEGES, RENT OF INVESTMENT PROPERTIES, AND
INTEREST: 1911—Continued.
[For a list of cities arranged alphabetically b y states, w i t h the number assigned to each, Bee page 20L For a t e x t discussion of this table, see page 73.1
G R O U P 1 V . - C I T I E S H A V I N G A P O P U L A T I O N O F 50,000 T O 100,000 I N 1911.
EECEIPTS FROM HIGHWAY
PRIVILEGES.

City
num
ber.

CITY.

Total.

Major
highway
privileges
(highway
privileges
granted
public
service cor
porations).

RECEIPTS FROM BENT OF INVEST
MENT PROPERTIES.

Minor
high
way
privi
leges.

$58,057

958,057

9,53i
2,600
27,067

9,446
2,575
26,823

985
25
244

50
60
61
62
63

13,702
6,227
3,029
27,206
15,267

13,442
6,227
3,029
27,206
15,117

260

61
65
66 Yonkers,N.Y
67
6S

33,314
25,797
15,247
6,450
14,435

33,314
25,797
14,076
1,450
13,435

69
70
71 Fort Worth. Tex
72
73

35,374
935 1
779
10,022
625

34,594
935
779
10,001
625

54
55
56
57
58 Camden, N.J*

74 Utfca,N.Y
75 Troy.N.Y
76 Elizabeth, N . J
77
78
79
80
81 Manchester, N . H
82 Hoboken, N. J
83

34,591
3,503

34,491
3,495

4,478
12,549
28,450
15,188

4,478
12,549
28,450
15,188

i6,374
2,762
3,143
18,992

10,374
2,762
3,143
18,992

89
90 Jacksonville, Fla..
91 East St. Louis, 111
92
93 Holyoke, Mass

9,631
20,721

9,631
20,721

94
95
96
97

84
85
86
87
88

Wflkes-Barre, Pa
Erie, P a . . . . . '
Peoria, 111
Harrisburg, Pa

Portland, Me
South Bend.Ind
Charleston, S. C
Brockton, Mass

98 1 Passaic, N. T
99 Bayonno, N. J . .
100 Johnstown. Pa
101

102 Covington, K y . . . . . . . . . . . .
103
104 Pawtucket, K . I . . .
105 ! Springfield, 111
106 1
107 1 Mobile, Ala
108!

109 Saginaw, Mich...

Total.

94,910
7,617
26,110
4,747
4,236

57,272
55,836
11,874
65,000
21,246

24,362
11,859
3,441
50,434
21,197

6,588
18,730
25,895
32,626
4,848

5,623
17,076
3,681
11,627!
4,848

309

41,849
7,658
45,159
3,974
16,285

756
4,201 i
34,026
3,314
11,816

50
366 !
90

50
366
90

21,528
13,878
18,412
30,991
29,894

7,100
7,795
7,177
5,275
14,465

3S9

389

25,043
1,294
30,491
7,629
10,948

11,146
1,294
2,930
5,788
6,311

11,480
27,115
10,571
16,446
23,791

10,600
11,949
4674
12,545
17,742

6,312
13,038
7,500
10,456
59,152 j

1,160
12,091
7,500
7,0(6
11,526

56,407
4,613
35,477
29,008

8,365
2,506
11,216
3,274

3,233
23,060
16,602
7,200

1,680
8,328
7,834
7,200

6,004
51,846
2,400

7,389

44,191

17,955
1,931
14,419
15,729

10,234
452
8,567
10,258

7,721

2,638
831
1,065
237

1,065
237

2,360
898

2,360 1
898

i,m

100
819
380
198

100
819
3S0 !
198 !

780

2,115

ia>
5,000
1,000

2i

ioo
8

1

20,493
16,757
1,000

54

7,528

2,303

2,303
II

50
3,560
100

50
3,560 !
100 1

20,493 i
16,757
1,000

8,398 I

65
198

65
198

9,339

9,300

2,115

309

1,375
500
14,086
0,646

24,736
9,162

By
invest
public
ment
trust
On current funds B y sinking funds
All
funds.
deposits.
for
and
other.
munici-1
from
invest*
pal
merits.
uses.

967,917
17,990
47,020
5,222
35,037

1,375
500
14,056
9,646

0,300

Total.

9440
2,638
831

24

24,737
9,162

B y sink
ing rands
and
public j
trust 1 A l l other.
funds for j
munici
pal
1
uses.

iiio

677
5,289

677 1
5,289 |

RECEIPTS FROM INTEREST.

24
9S25

8,514

54

960,124
10,373
20,310 j

9600

27,988

475

870

475
2,813

32,910
42,882
8,113
14,091

i,095
320

1,394
9,955
6,968

965
260
12,260
14,031

40,768
3,437
5,192

325
20

49

676

95,265
660
697

9,975

20
,

189
4,358
10,136
24,338
2,293

4,264
1,725
1,079
1,378 !
13,136

9,258

4,639

26,242 1
1,255
463

3,H7

880
15,166
53
1,336
4,717

2,534
1,332
5,152

3,772

i,319
586
1,027

3,310
2,565

947

i,64i

31,710

i,769
15,916

868

32,627

14,547
2,107
23,300
3,857

961
21,877

85

.

275

275

i -

92,883

1,553
14,453
8,683

6,661

279

266
i

2»*00

47

1

1» 9
966

2,6ii 1

2.860

4,886

H

G R O U P V . - C I T I E S H A V I N G A P O P U L A T I O N O F 30,000 T O 50,000 I N 1911.

110
HI
112
113
114

Binghamton, N . Y .
Sioux City, I o w a . . .
Atlantic City, N . J .
Rockford,IU.
Lancaster, P a

$13,049
15,137
29,411
13,576
3,000

$13,019
15,137
29,411
13,576
3,000

115
116
117
118
119

Springfield, O h i o . . . ,
Little Rock, A r k . . . .
Sacramento, Cal
Pueblo, Col
Chattanooga, T e n n . ,

5,201
7,575
459
11,000
3,281

2,185
7,575
459
11,000
3,150

120
121
122
123
124

BayCity,Mich
York, P a .
Maiden, Mass
N e w Britain, Conn..
Haverhill, Mass




10,352
7,331

10,352
7,331

11,427

11,427

9251
82
240
103

9251
82
240
103
93,019

131

645

920

9645

920

812,673
1,634
84,510
798!
16,054 |

99,432
1634
14,661
687
14,167

26,072
4,854
2,400
2,052
11,665 I

7,758
1 104
2,400
105
11,022

7,960 1
10,890
41,119
9,976
40,721 ] 1

5,365
4,633
2,531
2,701

8,902

91,662

9424

91,155

69,849
111
1,887
1,134

17,180
93,750

1,947

1,269

631

12

2,595
5,505
22,885
6,981
24,791

752
15,694
294
5,759

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

182

TABLE 9.—REVENUE RECEIPTS FROM HIGHWAY PRIVILEGES, RENT OF INVESTMENT PROPERTIES, AND
INTEREST: 1911—Continued.
[For a list of the cities arranged alphabetically by states, with the number assigned to each, see page 20. For a text discussion of this table, seo page 73.1
GROUP V.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 30,000 TO 50,000 IN 1911—Continued.
RECEIPTS FROM RENT OF INVEST
MENT PROPERTIES.

RECEIPTS FROM HIGHWAY
PRIVILEGES.

City
num
ber.

CITY.

Total.

125
126
127
128
129
130 i Mrf£eesport, Pa.. . . . . . . . .
131 Flint, Mich
132
133
134 El Paso, T e x . . . . . . . . . . ..
135
136
137
138
139

Winding, W. Va*.
Racine, Wis
"Kal»rt*azoo, Mieh .

140
141
142
143
144

Macon, G a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Augusta, Ga...
Butte, Mont
Woonsocket, R . I . .
Chester, P a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Major
1 highway
privileges
(highway
privileges
I granted
public
1 service cor
porations).
S3,419
10,702
13,823
1,787
162

655

655

578
62,277

578
62,277
57

8,648

6,180
21,141
11,657
1,267
14,373

6,180
21,141
11,607
^267
14,373

1,129

23,156
7,000
A fiftl
6,664
411
fl
411
3,637
3,637
2,989 U
2,989
6,094 |
4,263 |

6,094
4,263

2,400 '
1,056

i.£nn
1,056

150 New Castle, Pa
151
152
153
154

2,743
9,463
4,840

2,743
9,463
4,804

155
156
157
158
159

19,243
1,385
9,147
250
412

19,243
1,385
9,147
250
362

160 Joliet,Hl
161 Auburn, N . Y
162 Charlotte, N. C
163
164

4,500
8,000
10,000
7,338
4,787

4,500
8,000
10,000
7,338
4,787

165
166
167
168
169

5,397
4,529
7,031
1,093
1,292

5,052
4,529
7,031
1,098
1,292

170 Perth Amboy, N. J
171
172
173 Amsterdam, N. Y
174

3,657

3,657

3,660 1
6,218

3,660
6,218

180
181 Niagara Falls', N . Y
182
183
184
185
186 NewRochelle,N.Y.
187
188
189
190 Orange, N . J
191
192 I Council Bluffs, Iowa
193 1Lynchburg, Va




Total.

$3,419
10,915
13,823
1,787
162

145 Montgomery, Ala
- 146 Fitchburg, Mass
147
148
149 Elmira, N . Y

175
176 San Jose, Cal
177
178
179

Minor
highway
privi
leges.

18,352
934
6,742
12,869 1

4,666
18,985
6,132
4,608
300

18,352
934
6,742

$213

50

By sink
ing funds
and
public
trust
Allother.
funds for
munici
pal
uses.

$3,044
318

$14,154
12,703
1,417
5,348
9,856

$1,806
5,934
1.417
5.155
5,341
5.056
5,286

8,648

10,316
5,2S6
3,005
2,9S5
1,484

50

345

6,132
4,608
300

11,136

11,136 ,

4,723
19,945

4,728 1
19,945

$8,429
$189
1,052

1,437

87
2S9

1,437
30,900
80
39,557
5,967

3.389
3,032

i,S64
150

1,864
150

5,530
2,791
6,811
7,5S2
3,528

5,530
10
575
6,702
3,52S

185
425

185
425

1,385

1,385

25,412
16,897
12,538
300
6,130

6,351
196
8,067
6,130

887
6,963
2.701
30.066
15,444

763
4,949
2,701
665
1,897

561
4,622
16,606
309
8,285

243
4.622
2,OS2
309
2,527

313

10,175

150

10,025

i,i58

87
289

233

m

1,235,
584

177

233
840
460

i,235
115

220
725

220
725

719

no

35p

* 350

5,111

2,257

304

8,688
16,849
4,119

2,269
10,460
4,119

4,680 j
12.047
7,563
9,728 1
53,881

2,308
11,413
2,149
622
3,757

4,242
12,518
8,768
20,398

11,043
7,242
6,027

27,058
14,008
810
10,804

2,088
8,0*9
810
3,009

301

i i"6
59
3,072

25
3,038

1,170
3,072

59

25
3,038

4,557 1
622
114

4,456

2,925

1,484

3,810
3,724
2
3,215
4,230

215
56
1,227

•6,750

3,005

2,9S5

4.368
10S.302
306
32.130
10,984

215
56
1,227

4
53S

5,260

433
5,516
2,90S
5,226

$1,129

12,869
4,000
18,985

$3,919
19

6.319
6,397
6.696
6,568
4,496

1,335

36

Total.

By
By public
invest
trust
ment
On current funds By sinking funds
All
for
and
funds.
deposits.
munici other.
from
pal
Invest
uses.
ments.

$3,044
318

16,156

900

RECEIPTS FROM INTEREST.

3,740
1,1SS
1.185
414

558
101,120
28.868
6,754

80
31.110
312

16.647
300

15.83S

60
881
457
4,496

2,086
2,600

3,044
304
47
15,062
1.308
2,623

3,750

*
2.781
4,103
660

1.133
220

18,403

658
54

4,471

1,290

124
721

29.361
13,547

40

14,524
5,758
101

ii-i
282

622
2,744

no

1,838
4,932

64
1,457

2,372
5,414
9,077
49,162

634
29
962
3,846

396
1,069

4,235

1 526
13)075
20,985
5,884
7,795

1,475
227
385
35

3,600

GENERAL TABLES.

183

TABLE 10.—REVENUE RECEIPTS FROM EARNINGS OF PUBLIC SERVICE ENTERPRISES: 1911.
[For n Ust of the cities arranged alphabetically by states, with the number assigned to each, see page 20. For a text discussion of this table, see page 75.7

City
num
ber.

Total.

CITY.

Grand total.
Group I . . . .
GroupJI...
Group III..
Group IV.,
Group V...

Water-supply
systems.

Electric
light and
power

Markets
and public
scales.

Docks,
wharves,
and
landings.

Ceme
teries and

systems.

Gassupply
systems.
$969,629

$1,510,119

$5,054,936

$761,003

$79,266

$153,036

$5,537,259

4,802,189
15,645
79,904
64,853
92,345

83,556
1,910
262,228
249,581
163,728

2,250
9,548
47,266
19,476
726

145,322

424,778
417,400
127,451

689,319
364,403
251,857
108,298
96,242

5,067,720
221,529
130,835
39,032
78,143

$85,416,675

$67,774,938

$3,571,3S9

44,944,808
8,347,936
14,059,842
11,076,341
6,087,648

33,356,970
7,731,901
12,050,258
8,729,103
5,906,700

797,482
3,000
812,716
1,443,921
514,270

tories.

Public
halls.

Subways All other
for pipes
and wires. enterprises.

4,677
8,037

GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER IN 1911.
New York, N . Y . .
Chicago, 111
■
Philadelphia, Pa.,
St. Louis, M o . . . .
Boston, Mass
Cleveland, Ohio..
Baltimore, Md...
Pittsburgh, Pa...

$22,341,903
6,529,437
4,773,435
2,281,537

$13,472,244
5,867,849
4,701,367
2,100,791

3,858,998
1,562,965
1,479,546
2,116,987

2,795,406
1,326,451
1,097,505
1,995,357

$657,287

$307,084
4,301
11,482
48,778

140,195

124,304
42,327
52,151
98,892

$4,456,505

$4,106,070

60,586
77,749

54,219
$37,534
46,022

2,293
1S4,568
20,488

$2,250

$145,322

901,751
5,677

9 Detroit, Mich
10 Buffalo, N. Y
San Krancisc*,Cal.,,.T.*i12
13
jl

$966,252
1,076,575
3,545
774,996
1,211,065

--

1,2J>7,361 I
1,183,493
789,077
5S2f5S2
472,990

14 Newark, N . J
15
16
17 Washington, I». C
IS

mm

GROUP n.-C!TIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 600,000 IN 1911.
$7,801
64,165
$3,000

$8,769

3,380
13,571

$5,862

57,380

1,328

189,058
28,926
122

8,455

779
$1,810
100

$221,529

GRMJP m . - C I T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000 IN 1911.
19 Jersey City, N. J
20
21
22
23

$1,263,107
1,534,186
1,051,931
27,S18
824,951

$1,253,220
781,349
1,005,217
35
787,720

24
25 Rochester, N. Y
26
27
28 St Taul Minn

808,244
679,914
36,112
872,8*4
460,430

788,448
£85,763
4,051
773,852
432,897

29
30
31
32
33

574,409
350,8*3
379,639
20,234
432,312

466,743
321,922
376,448

34
35 Syracuse, N. Y
36
37
33

27,172
366,465
2,228
442,762

15,223
858,478

39
40
41
42 Fall Itivpr Mftsa
43

712,751
195
761
244,070
201,037

255,323
225,436
174,089

26,948

2?2,263
507,014 1
304,286!
230,545
407,881

217,20S
605,417
287,732
217, f«2
3S6,093

7,520
1,597
15,388
50
13

44
45
46
47
48
49
£0
51
52
53




.

[

85
311.168
12,439
339,874
379,832

$726, H i

$9,8S7
2,751

$3,383
46,714
25,654
1,875

J 20,589

MO

$35,i86

19,253

543
59,030

i2,7S3
11,678
14,901

20,057
3,048
i5,280

4,954

317'

11,632
7,987
2,228
4,598

9,072

429,092
$424,778

10,960!

20,670
195
761

27,535
1,166

I
j

9,580
2,308

1,020

17,680

954

SB
335,093
376,524

17,685
2,494
84,111

i,450

27,891

404,421

284,862

4,653
17,889
26,i25]

7,408
32,696
7,434
143

74,970

$2,129

7,426
205
1,000

12,893
21,775
i8,880
' 1,857
4,576

1,002

184

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.
TABLE

10.—REVENUE RECEIPTS FROM EARNINGS OF PUBLIC SERVICE ENTERPRISES: 1911—Continued,

[For a list of the cities arranged alphabetically by states, with the number assigned to each, see page 20. For a text discussion of this table, see pago 75.]
GROUP IV.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 50,000 TO 100,000 IN 1911.

City
nam*
ber.

Total.

car.

Electric
Water-supply light and
power
J systems.
systems.

1240,835
244,519
211,791 1
322,822
254,518

54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66 Yonkers N Y
67
68
69 Norfolk, Va
70
71 Fort Worth, Tex
72
73
Utica,N.Y
Troy.N. Y
Elizabeth, N. J
8chenectady,N. Y . . . . . . .

....

Markets
and public
scales.

8240,835
244,519
211,791
303,394
249,772

467,332
338,523
163,404
1,037,570
15,231

457,167
307,474
147,6S6
442,338

245,291
262,572
242,086
176,918
236,516

241,402
262,572
240,240
174,855
216,660

188,031
529,553
234,897
238,417
5,205

161,175
294,888
234,897
238,417

1,674
212,321
1,217
154,628
203,952

154,628
203,952

79
80 OklahomaCHy, Okla.
81
82 Hoboken. N. J
83

3,951
126,335
184,804
217,895
164,110

126,335
170,073
208,912
139,160

84
85
86
87
88

1,058
250,868
3,898
222,209
184,353

89
90
91
92
93

166,484
659,027
76
20,098
565,564

94
95
96
97

385,525]
93,990
20,970
134,395

98
99
100
101

257,983
576
7,197

102
103
104
105

142,698
102,061
287,772
143,298

106
107
108
109

115,275
166,075
98,011
119,962

Docks,
wharves,
and
landings.

$74

8573,651

$234,665

52,765
1,023

18,816

3,089

800

132
2,063
19,631

1,714

210,816

Public
halls.

Subways
for pipes AU other
and wires. enterprises.

$19,428
4,672
$10,165

31,049
15,718
14,208

$50

175
10,460

16,396

1,000
17

$1,674

505
1,200

3,951
349

245,779

iii,is2

105,606

184,353
132,982
154,687

504,340

3,076

5,000
2,918

66
596
2,877
5,421

1,490
297

14,442

7,210

76
122,505

Ceme
teries and
crema
tories.

6,205

260,324

354,594
93,676
127,427
256,075

576
1,508

14,3S2
3,983
18,956
992
724

3,003

11,850
20,093

182,735

23,676
12

302
3,715

1 ¥s n Van

74
75
76
77
78

Gassupply
systems.

7,255
17,255

6,968
1,908
5,659

1,383

4,357
10,145
23,634

1,168
14,171
3,300

22,746

7,856
11,494

5,541
7,472

GROUP V.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 30,000 TO 50,000 IN 1911.

no

Binghamton, N. Y..

111 Sioux City, Iowa....
112 Atlantic City, N. J.,
113 Rockford,Ill
114 Lancaster, Pa

$120,182
105,674
230,761
80,366
147,619

$120,165
101,593
230,761
80,366

115 Springfield, Ohio...,
116 Little Rock, Ark....
117 Sacramento, CaL....
118 Pueblo, Colo
119 Chattanooga, Term..

101,891
4,939
177,059
221,820
2,309

94,250

120 Bay City, Mich
121 York, Pa!
122 Maiden, Mass
,
123 New Britain, Conn...
124 Haverhill, Mass....,.

125,000
284
106,408
131,332
113,600




$17
1,5S6

$1,015

$l,4SO

12,214

4,939
4,402
4,764

7,757
7,641

160,443
217,056

1,583
67,325
96,702
119,089
113,561

$56,746

$720

929
284
*39

9,706
8,973

$3,270

GENERAL TABLES.

185

TABLE 10.-REVENUE RECEIPTS FROM EARNINGS OF PUBLIC SERVICE ENTERPRISES: 1911-Continued.
[For a list of the cities arranged alphabetically by states, with the number assigned to each, see page 20. For a text discussion of this table, see page 75.]
GROUP V.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 30,000 TO 50,000 IN 1911-Continued.
City,
num
ber.

Electric
Water-supply light and
systems.
power
systems.

Total,

CITY.

1120,573
110,084
2,043
1,135
127,913

125
126
127
128
129

Gassupply
systems.

9114,567
109,430
127,666

81,132
654
130 1
247

104,912
66,823

730

130
131
132
133
134

105,077 i
67,906
2,368
240,620
67,834

135
136
137
138
139

221,221 1
12,007 1
64,306

145,323

i67,912

104,583

232

140
141
142
143
144

45,553
155,363

33,779
155,363

6,610

i24,iso
1,029
128,583
89,047
67,352
117,999
10,050

124,180

145
146
147
14$
149 Eimira,N.Y
150
151
152
153
154

47,501
113,735
67,125
172,867
116,897

47,408
105,599
61,882
84,720
103,835

73,810
97,996
135,475
93,267 !
860

97,660
128,466
97,329

170 Perth Amboy N. J
171
172
173
174

111,773
171,644
119,820
81,413
66,501

111,723
62,3S1
110,063
81,413
58,310

175
176
177
178
179

159,575

106,188

50,156

50,156

180 WilUftmsnort PA
181 Niagara Falls, N . Y
182
183
184

13,218
73,900
85,277
72,664
135,232

72,815
82,926
71,104
135,232

185
186 New Rochalta N Y
187
188
189

56,837
2,786
243,849
51,911
63,036

i05,274
45,124
63,280

160
161
162
163
164

Joliet, HI
Auburn, N. Y . . . .

• .

Taunton, Mass
....
Everett,'Mass................... .
Portsmouth,Vft
Pittsfield, Mass
Quincy, Mass
0*hVosh w|$

tt.,

190
191
192
193




509
50

320
11,950
8,536

87

985

3,980

58,127

5,164

22

i 6o7

3,676
861
63

160,532

151,334

467

1,860
7,649
10,050

61,110

i6,ii9
1,293
1,084
6,889
3,757

589

93

2,420
336

67,600

164

7i,574

9,757

10S
1,934
2,351

1,560

55,434

79,056
70,476

8,313
8,032

13,218
1,085

140,744

3,790
860

50

159
53,279

$4,767

7,009

933
100,786

3,562
3,369
5,243
5,001
8,062

83,146

19,037

20,97i

79,056
72,820
559
82,777

8,723

353
2,368
5,420

40
166,893
50,389

East Orange, N. J...
Qulncy iif. .'..*.....
Roanoke, Va
Lexington, Kv
Huntington, w . Va.

84,874

165

740

123,047
81,398
66,024
117,320

i77f3l2
172,031
1,293
151,334
1,0S4
6,S$9
3,757
4,151

165
166
167
168
169

166,341

S4,9$0

Subways AUotfaer
for pines
and wires. enterprises.

12,043
1,005

235,200
67,884

40

155
156
157
158
159

Ceme
Hocks,
wharves, ] teries and Public
cremar 1 halls.
and
tories.
landings.

Markets
and public
scales.

2,786
892
174

559
11,203

1,403
2,83i

225

i

62

2,292

5,895
4,357

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

186

T A B L E 1 1 . — G O V E R N M E N T A L COST P A Y M E N T S F O R E X P E N S E S O F G E N E R A L D E P A R T M E N T S ,

BY

[For a list of the cities arranged alphabetically by states, with the number
I.—GENERAL GOVERNMENT.

Executive branch.

Legislative branch.
City
num-|
ber.

Total.

Chief executive.
Total.

Grand total
Group I
Group II
Group III
Group IV
Group V

Council
and
board of
alder
men.

$474,657,660 $55,734,445 $2,048,29S
213,760,143
70,806,314
76,559,612
46,715,150
36,816,441

32,943,973
8,790,478
6,668,182
4,017,067
3,314,745

804,341
395,955
375,409
236,816
235,777

Clerk of
council.

Legisla
tive in
vestiga
tions.

Mayor.

$914,829 $105,996 i«l,16S,6SS
227,925
175,803
191,802
172,218
147,081

20,99$
35,302
33,834
8,184
7,678

480,464
119,960
222,331
183,632
162,301

Financial.

Executive Auditor, Special Treasurer,
boards
ment and
comp account
ing and or cham
and com ortroller.
levy of
auditing. berlain. revenue.
missions.
$689,945 $2,829,496 $193,536 $ 1 ^ 5 3 1 $4,414,044
117,110
173,925
75,613
161,857
161,440

1,510,663
385,693
455,275
273,787
204,078

40,203
24,341
68,051
30.654
30,587

631,692
343,885
461,601
280,702
2-19,651

2,348,492
788,839
601,595
379,142
292,976

GROUP I.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER IN 1911.
New York. N . Y
Chicago. Ill
Philadelphia, Pa,
St. Louis, Mo....
Boston, Mass
Cleveland, Ohio..
Baltimore, Md...
Pittsburgh, Pa..,

$115,154,040 $15,725,090
39,226,935
6,173,142
29,062,112
3,796,055
12,359,494
1,488,681

$217,711
295,015
82,422
49,709

$63,828
57,847
15,839
12,714

2,053,913
1,108,516
1,014,844
1,583,732

31,0S7
41,921
48,940
37,536

1,800
23,6-14
3,185
49,068

18,559,676
9,045,269
8,298,224
12,054,393

$12,505

3,660

4,833

$243,928
32,357
62,995
12,421

$71,500

$932,717
254,619
75,874
65,467

$10,196
272
3,570

$153,035
195,653
59,119
16,682

$630,393
731,509
346,501
73,973

50,418
18,534
14,545
45,266

19,404

46,157
56,742
15,991
63,096

16,024
8,500
1,641

53,1S6
30,066
15,884
102,067

216,314
133,677
77,740
138,385

$77,940
59,409
25,152
29,791
33,315

$57,691
51,496
105,711
59,124
160,900

16,136
22,744
17,790

73,657
137,164
30,096
86,245
26.755

26,206

GROUP II.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000 IN 1911.
Detroit, Mich
Buffalo, N . Y
San Francisco. Cal.
Milwaukee, w i s . . .
Cincinnati, Ohio..,

$7,892,587
7,841,878
9,264,9S7
6,463,640
7,975,278

$937,338
920,901
1,326,451
723,432
1,057,189

$61,101
50,545
62,297
42,126
42,332

$16,528
14,940

Newark, N . J
.
Los Angeles, Cal..,
New Orleans, La..
Washington, D. C.
Minneapolis, Minn

7,321,524
6,343,002
4,282,285
8,364,346
5,056,7S7

857,016
1,123,028
644,542
660,528
540,053

47,170
15,181
32,727

58,874

42,476

11,098

$10,991
8,6S1
13,907
6,276
16,928

$5,327
62,084

20,547

11,246
21,443
20,029

14,077
13,60S

818

10,459

$331
12,659
947

16,871
21,244

18,240
17,275

33,643
9,621

$47,827
55.535
28,493
15,860
44,839

$5,078
1,378
3,600

26,456
48,341
22,402
33,994
61,946

2,543
5,344

5,769

20
599

8,00S
53,600

GROUP III.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000 IN* 1911.
Jersey City, N. J..
Seattle, wash
Kansas City, Mo..
Indianapobs, Ind„
Providence, R. I.,

$3,311,949
4,284,070
4,284,100
3,091,335
3,546,636

$303,244
443,131
543,049
153,813
253,073

$16,358
32,810
8,390
6,642
26,830

$15,154
IS, 945
18,818
1,778
1,206

Louisville, Ky...
Rochester, N . Y . .
Denver, Colo
Portland, Oreg...
St. Paul, Minn...

3,255,156
3,613,623
4,061,604
2,826,523
2,761,075

277,562
711,162
174,636
176,441

320
26,293
26,888
4,310
29,794

5,134
2,000
11,942

Columbus, Ohio.
Toledo, Ohio
Atlanta, Ga
Oakland, Cal
Worcester, Mass.

2,715,960
1,860,352
1,863,458
2,304,013
2,685,795

191,149
152,298
142,327
255,039
144,509

12,015
10,294
9,411
18,580
4,710

9,600
10,943
10,657
5,861
1,325

Birmingham, Ala...
Syracuse,N.Y
New Haven, Conn..
Memphis, Tenn
Scranton, Pa

1,401,297
2,142,864
2,005,370
1,680,010
1,254,505

121,903
218,830
142,418
99,218
93,886

2,314
15,8S0
1,529

2,205
9,018
1,342

1,870

6,016

7,314

40
41
42
43

Richmond, Va
Paterson.N.J
Omaha, Nebr
Fall River, Mass...
Dayton, Ohio

1,370,335
1,338,209
1,895,731
1,444,946
1,489,247

173,363
86,147
154,869
82,710
130,537

7,765
9,137
18,219
7,492
6,876

2,177
2,739
10,990

4,624
3,218
4,929
4,673
8,557

10.842
5,773
22,135
5,666
8,238

44
45
46
47
48

Grand Rapids. Mich..
Spokane, Wash
Nashville, Tenn
Lowell. Mass
Cambridge, Mass

1,368,981
1,734,608
1,167,793
1,511,974
1,624,314

140,468
170,240
65.802
97,305
111,732

11,978
1,850
3,162
3,830
9,440

7,006
9,782
3,816
300

3,063
1,150
5,702
5,0*1
6,258

8.433
11,125
5,570
5,922
4,763

49
50
51
52
53

Bridgeport, Conn....
New Bedford, Mass..
San Antonio, T e x . . .
Hartford, Conn
AIbany,N.Y

1,242,046
1,512,882
852,762
1,663,975
1,392,109

91,975
114,995
71,551
121.809
167,357

.".437
7,170
3,118
3,521
20,171

6,299
500
4,678
400
5,170




$15,841

1,500

812
6,348
112
2,803

6,001
2,051
1,367

3,000

510,65-1
7,679
8,276
6,5««
8,326
8,840
10,192
10,301
5,862
4,613

$12,284
17,392
42,583
19,953
9,695

$13,550

15,ITS
8,502
15,693
10,515
7,645

6,283
7,206
6,871
5,409
10,122
5.978
7,40S
5,456

4,409
8,316
6,657
3,828
8,482

11,411
18,487
26,751
53,6*8
10,410

12,798
19,784

29,4S1

20,535
12,577
9,128
6,731
7,4S7

4,988
5,831
6,049
3,798
9,492

$-1,592
2,176
1,000
40,943
775
1,216
2.323
67
1,220

3,674 1
2,000
800

1,446

1,490
388
3,461
"*'450'

$6, Ml
34,414
15,793
17,493
33,747

$38,042

5,900
29,761
80,276
13,597
14,129

27,221
22,980
100,834

11,528
6,939
1,420
5,914
8,198
4,440
19,845
1,919
18,269

33,740
21,236
22,976

3,288
2,899
24,010
31,242
23,689
9,375
19,281
12,775
10,284
18,268

10,774
1,537
5,191
5,822
7,346

14,238
11,189
74
12,817

12,926
12,901
5.916
12,723
15,539

13,615
11,053
7,864
15,345
14,226

888
16,980
1,258
8,103
13,139

21,678
20,089
12,145
12,082
16,040

GENERAL TABLES.

187

PRINCIPAL DIVISIONS AND SUBDIVISIONS OF THE GENERAL DEPARTMENTAL SERVICE: 1911.
assigned to each, see page 20. For a text discussion of this table, see page 78.]
I.—GENERAL GOVERNMENT—continued.

Executive branch—Continued.
Financial—Contd.

General government
buildings.

Judicial branch.

City
num*
ber.

Legal.

Other
Collection
of revenue. financial. Solicitor.

Other
legal.

Elections.

Other
General
general municipal Justice
courts.
executive. courts.

Special
courts.

Superior
courts.

Coroner.

Care and
mainte
nance.

Marshal

and sheriff.

Rent of
leased
buildings.

$2,975,839 SI, 294,108 $3,334,571 $1,416,933 $5,057,523 $4,065,526 $325,351 $1,032,638 $7,098,023 $483,072 $1,668,884 $4,840,254 $6,570,138 $1,238,922

m

1,578,817
464,345
343,894
334,100
254,683

999,608 1,918,327
354,811
57,165
602,478
124,955
293,859
69,411
265,096
42,969

2,130,679 3,023,186
813,932
365,684
1,037,662
345,897
635,941
189,627
439,309
141,132

119,904
147,541
35,394
11,046
11,466

721,801 5,549,022
246,034 1,362,227
26,564
159,776
24,162
17,723
14,077 j
9,275

371,097
103,997
5,343
1,570
1,065

1.193,822
427,467
40,760
1,488
5,347

2,927,400
648,917
729,545
287,042
247,350

4,196,437
928,378
736,456
369,749
339,118

1,037,233
110,847
36,273
22,134
32,435

GROUP I.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER IN 1911.
$463,549
379,239
2S9,803
134,142

$515,257
66,073
284,115

$915,920
546,665
187,231
38,375

134,811
46,306
93,917
37,045

37,091
10,402
66,747
19,923

64,271
34,816
40,479
90,570

$603,787
189,852
73,058
37,953
25,211
24,510
35,381

$S98,393 $2,160,055
301,287 1 512,102
294,051
82,320
150,149
20,59S
154,979
85,551
74,002
172,207

162,979
42,126
19,644
23,362

$81,939

$316,592 $2,975,707 $159,892
164,813
75,692
589,892
84,541
700,315
49,943
290,344
30,810
23,700

$262,310
406,881
105,297
94,986

$931,486
669,414
494,903
212,464

$2,435,090
498,660
496,471
127,293

$840,440
111,371
10,980
11,392

22,388
8,841
9,0S3

164,891
47,166
21,986
90,305

167,626
148,149
202,315
101,043

238,382
103,966
121,613
174,962

19,837
2,752
3,540
36,921

43,039
36,035
10,511
35,460

14,613
23,352

440,997
156,570
141,712
253,485

21,558

GROUP II.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000 IN 1911.
$2,526
38,898
80,198
22,252
38,585

$6,554
5,475
12,267
8,219
8,203

$28,027
43,839
43,667
30,219
48,969

$22,012
26,162
60,023
24,629
19,570

$99,0S2
77,994
125,416
77,830
82,338

$20,3S5
62,321
38,144
45,0S7
23,106

$36,663
3S5
29,361
15,231

81,716
31,855

87,709
121,115
41,658
31,404

4,584

35,953
55,361
29,292
18,947
20,537

25,270
90,919
28,992

56,467
71,611
148,525
50,962
23,707

18,300
21,320
60,523
40,246
36,252

24,387
41,2S0

1,421

3,625
7,500
73S

17,853

234

$26,931
22,661

I

60,577 i
20,S?J

$161,046
114,857
246,976
83,855
155,922
122,380
137,618
86,576
170,149
S2,84S

$8,542
6,296
21,808
13,318
12,321

$47,120
27,619
58,243
43,168
51,585

4,972
10,547
12,0S9 1
10,274
3,830

$104,046
64,696
181,339
26,880
101,994

18,463
59,650
62,696
26,613
32,310

72,448 !
90,021
7,489
4

$91,590
112,971
106,258
77,971
119,679 |
134,503
83,482
38,183
80,246
83,495

5,229

9
10
U
12
13

19,424 i
1,850
1,700
!

14
16
16
17
18

$82,644

GROUP III.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000 IN 1911.
$36,427
365
54,577

$30,115
9,515
19,363
11,306
2,000

36,661
34,490
48,647
17,047
53,383

19,805
23,817
42,493
4,559
18,773

31,802
28,617
17,552
40,170
92
' 26,836

10,537
4,177
5,842
12,009

13,654
31,913
25,838
9,448
7,585

10,902
23,382
22,003
6,421
2,000

23,878
11,630
9,953
14,666
29,015

5,750
8,892
3,571
5,497

6,293

18,495
26,014
11,559
13,740
16,577

4,393
4,945
3,293

4,359

$16,030
49,191
54,174
11,249
14,986

37,548
5,714
21,040
165
316

30,652
21,140
28,122
20,290
13,357

3,500
800
29,553

2,931
81
24,984
30,043
10,907

4,089
5,702
2,936
3,776

19,176
14,556
8,889
11,655
6,275

800
1,500

6,152
2,297
15,005
22,395
5,596

3,077
1,554
1,583
2,842
1,344

9,153
13,664
5,657
7,595
11,176

12,771
10,319
20,000
7,410
1,724

900
3,590
1,203
376
2, SSI

8,360
7,859
20,966
3,060
10,307

7,282
1,104
3,439

320
2,700
509

2,752

605

7.2S8
28,573
8,392
6,106
4,928

7,226
638
9,918
14,326
1,241

400
1,393

23,293
4,654
4,037

380




2J613
3,113
4,406
7,406
12,114

$3,720

1,800

7,816
1,660

1,833
1,600

21,595
8,703
26,226
26,503

$8,902
$4,416
108,753

*4,081

$35,928

$2,597

10,798
9,863

628
5,750

1,270

9,774
23,352

1,590

2,746

8,788

SSO

10,240
2,612
9,425
8,255

24,808

$53,318
49,150
47,775
18,694
27,290

2,657
39,058
45,946
27,364
3,375

31,328
37,396
69,420
25,044
21,957

48,682
24,876
3,266
51,358
14,097

6,730 1
3,203
9,079
15,067 !
30,593
14,176
3S,880
10,465
1,236
6,961

$7,887
48,038
165,825

$37,407
158,536
69,3S3
34,673
55,466

$15,027
2,135
625
225

i

1,500
8,904

i
4,693

81

991 !
900

667
21,131
19,969
1,912
1,988
2,031
16,605 1
9,069
29,381

33,603
8,233
19,587
11,659
6,931

12,294
13,529
1,819 !
14,708
17,145

17.789
1QJ03S
4,761
19,097
19,499

11,731
8,485
6,630
14,635
18,579 j

12,272
20,885
5,077
6,275
17,987

$2,600
10,369

19
20
21
22
23

i,800

24
25
26
27
28

1,210

29
30
31
32
33

1,000
9,800
1,650
5,780

34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43

600

44
45
46
47
48

1,164

i
300

49
50
51
52
53

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

188

TABLE ll.-GOVERNMENTAL COST PAYMENTS FOR EXPENSES OF GENERAL DEPARTMENTS, BY
[For a list of the cities arranged alphabetically b y states, w i t h the number

m.—CONSERVATION OF HEALTH.

H.—PBOTECXION TO PERSON AND PROPEBTY.
Fire department.

City
num*
ber.

CTTT.

General
super
vision.

TotaL

Grand total,
Group I .
Group n
Group I I I
Group I V
Group V

Police
depart
ment.

General
conduct
of depart
ment.

Water.

Register
Militia of deeds Inspec
and ar land mort"| tion serv«
ice.»
mories.
gages.

Other
protec
tion t o
person
and
property.

TotaL

PrevcnGeneral tion and
conduct [trcatmentl Conser
of health oT com vation
of child
depart
muni
life.
ment.
cable dis
eases.

$110,822,7531 $117,2011 $56,773,059[ $42,65S,419| $2,578,491! $830,115 $1,806,694 $4,278,525 $1,780,249 $8,916,054; $4,093,7021 $3,847,910| $974,472
56,136,088
16,663,463
18,717,384
11,244,769
8,061,039

68,741 32,065,706 17,863,518
7,868,711 7,095,486
23,507 8,521,901 8,638,175
14,077 4,891,089 5,249,141
10,876 3,425,652 3,812,099J

509,662
253,8S1
685,692
649,892
479,364

3-

582,426 1,332,292 2,774,7201
173,157
414,54S
469,992
39,612]
567,925
22,256
275,96S
1.11Q
12,664
189,920
3,573

AH

939,033 4,650,361,, 2,011,179 2,025,951
531,109
702,929
3S7,6SS 1,336,761
729,354
617,155
185,401 1,473,317)
450,163
334,268
846,862'
141,236
167,61«
371,597
578,7831
126,891

643,231
102,723
126,806
62,434
39,276

G R O U P I . - C I T I E S H A V I N G A P O P U L A T I O N O F 500,000 A N D O V E R I N 1911.
N e w York, N . Y .
Chicago. Hi
Philadelphia, Pa.
St. Louis, H o . . . .

$26,337,471
9,838,815
6,297,917
3,305,783

$14,581,517
6,049,827
4,245,035
1,998,629]

Boston, M a s s . . . .
Cleveland, Ohio..
Baltimore, M d . . .
Pittsburgh, P a . . .

3,885,250
1,631,857
2,250,833
2,588,172

2,098,516
771,217
1,238,941
1,082,024

$68,741

$8,221,350i $509,429 $493,405
3,028,698]
1,397,352
36,802
1,059,756]
16,569
1,484,969
720,988
899,197
1,051,208

233

$528,64 , $1,670,717
234,613
375,742
264,321
143,454
63,977
85,303

19,760

68,827
3S,942

1,1SS
14,702

130,965

205,684
89,596
93,824
110,400

$332,406 $2,518,991 $1,191,205
149,935 1 525,917 1 175.104
426,450
111,879
210,953,
115,471
50,690
79,549]
7,494
10,881
17,6S3
130,132

525,821
142,130
154,590
240,961

$956,136 $371,650
304,465
46,345
238,5S0
76,021
49,609
15,172

206,714
$6,5S9
94,438
94,560]

246,559
11,978
63,535]
135,OSS

72,548
43,562
6,6lH
11,312

G R O U P II.—CITIES H A V I N G A P O P U L A T I O N O F 300,000 TO 500,000 I N 1911.
Detroit, Mich
Buffalo, N . Y
San Francisco, C a l . .
Milwaukee, w i s . . . .
Cincinnati, O h i o . . . .

$1,721,877
1,979,310'
3,163,073,,
1,351,782
1,755,245'

$811,815
924,151
1,430,863
605,363
841,078

Newark, N . J
Los A n g e l e s , C a l . . .
N e w Orleans, L a . . . ,
Washington, D . C .
Minneapolis, M i n n .

1,573,850
1,252,990
959,496
1,918,842'
986,998

879,6701
552,055
418,342
1,017,945
387,429

$821,144
809,72
1,368,58 ,
677,919
806,0-'

$27,964
76,106
133,311
4,080
7,167

606,
419,911
462,47T1
609,541
513,265

5,253
'

$79,751
8,289
9901
139
76,594
7,394

$26,407
38,065
77,873
25,241
24,033
24,487
91,117
41,337
34,355
31,633

$25,650
18,840]
57,602
33,523
55,707

$8,867
32,673
94,842
5,656
12,906j

$39,452
84, OM
71,694
50,179
43,126

$81,922
111,411
21,363
3l,42d
111,257

$12,750
12,100
14,900
2,732
10,157

53, nd

8,679
95,463
6,7CTti
114,816
7,999

73,5»4
76,816
60,907
31,357

206,043
5,303
34,711
75,763
23,731

18,559
12,040
4,560
6,033
8,892

89,191
31,412
65,583
39,278

G R O U P I I I . - C I T I E S H A V I N G A P O P U L A T I O N O F 100,000 TO 300,000 I N 1911.
Jersey City, N . J . .
Seattle, Wash
Kansas City, M o . .
Indianapolis, I n d .
Providence, R . I . .

$968,504
1,053,019
1,096,429
901,527
942,867

Louisville, K y . . .
RochesterjN.Y.
Denver, Colo
Portland, O r e g . . .
St. P a u l / M i n n . . .

759,796
840,897
726,9161
733,965
672,873,'

Columbus, O h i o . . .
Toledo, Ohio
Atlanta. Ga
Oakland, Cal
Worcester, M a s s . . . .

$6,372

$598,528
411,987
602,183
397,557
453,472

$356,879
536,013
$43,024
427,441
354,286 ! 124,051
429,895
20,000

406,897
399,997
290,242
294,514
275,693

334,105
414,852
290,193
399,002
369,925

555,695
484,911
499,211
459,8531
479 371|

215,385
206,624
252,867
201,541
209,757

304,384 !
265,527
218,139
183,893
255,862

Birmingham, A l a . .
Syracuse, N . Y
N e w Haven, Conn.
Memphis, T e n n . . . .
Scranton, P a

469,114,
411,253
501,814!
454,169'
237,445

197,638
193,781
255,112
228,017
111,243

190,208
203,076
233,426
196,465
106,708

Richmond. V a . . . ,
Paterson,N. J . . . ,
Omaha,
ftebr....
Fall River. Mass.
Dayton, O h i o . . . .

397,262'
399,092j
675,147,
369,097
349,170

186,047
171,297
153,588
184,174
168,212]

177,088
182,214
234,820
173,167
173,466!

Grand Rapids. Mich.
Spokane, Wash
Nashville, Tenn.
Lowell. Mass
Cambridge, Mass

322,799,
341,860
284,705
324,855
319,189

121,809
129,921
125,416
146,109
164,744

178,542
185,500
143,361
171,174
127,903

Bridgeport, C o n n . . .
N e w Bedford, Mass.
San Antonio, T e x . . .
Hartford. Conn
Albany, N . Y

355,3561
324,5531
217,134*

133,524
172,699
88,523
185,917
186,886]

192,605
134,563
97,087
203,603
192,803




10,402

4,702

2,031

$3,514

$10,832

75,201

33,064

591
5,750
10,329
12,110
32,277
1,237
46,956
1,068

12,861
43,056
252,iS2

'

515

9,060

539

1,463
1,936

8,694

16,666
2,364

9,775

226
1,500

$8,092
51,994
53, SIS
14,101
23,106

$1,4911
10,001;
12,887,
5,157J
5,562

$35,013
8S,30W
57,1021
55,5-fdj
9S,990j|

$23,106
36,135
51,576
31, 0*0
26,797]

$2,835
42,366
5,526
12,149
68,249

$9,072]
9,80S]

15,682
5,010
35,515
28,462
18,838

3,112]
10,636
2,701
11,396'
2,667;

68,12%
64,817
74,073
24,672
45,651

16,461
37,1291
35,648
16,347
20,140

47,912
21,966
37,656
4,436
21,911

3,750]
5,722
869
3,889]
3,600j

21,647
12,766]
15,375
15,810]
11,716

3,050,
730
26,332

37,16$!
22,331'
61,182]
25,813
' 59,718,'

24,125
10,178
21,746
15,010
14,561

10,042
5,793
32,274
1,698
41,916

2,999
6,360
7,162
9 105
3,241

24,694
10,692
9,961
24,291
8,592

9,61$'
3,704
2,247,
5,3966,200

36,237
83,781
28,751
47,428
8,171!

30,528
35,705
15,416
30,659
7,587

2,8?8
42,624
10,335
10,243
584.

2,831
5,252
3,000
6,496]

17,5451
2,525'
28,795!
4,531
3,963

3,721

31,833
24,268
24,820;
42,65S
1«,727|

15,941
10,356
19,410
12,0SS
11,585J

13,7331
12,365!
5,204
28,976
5,142

2,159

5,431
710
3,5291

7,32S
20,020
7,358
5,525
10,490

6,063
6,419^
S,570|
4*
14,116 !

56,051
32,149|'
25,573
23,699
50,008

12,230
15,092
24,577
16,910
20,532

40,560
14,665
222
3,536
35,815

3,261
2,39a
774
3,253
2,661

9,258
16,713
9,949
8,764
7,005

l,50o|
352
5,575,
939
3,755j

17,534'
42,907,
7,855
21,060
22,301

15,794
17,094
6,440
14,954
16,481

1,740.
19,957
1,158
4,669
5,820.

5,856]
25fl
1,437

1

1 Includes inspection of factories, tenements, boilers, wires, lights, weights and measures, etc,

12,311
3,944

l,o47

20fl
1,594
2,0001

GENERAL TABLES.

189

PRINCIPAL DIVISIONS AND SUBDIVISIONS OF THE GENERAL DEPARTMENTAL SERVICE: 1911—Continued,
assigned to each, see page 20. For a text discussion of this table see page 78.]
IV.—SANITATION, OR PROMOTION Of CLEANLINESS.

Total.

Sewers
and
! sewage
disposal.

Public
laundries,
Refuse col washlection and houses,
disposal. and con
venience
stations.

138,652,451 j $6,270,813 $30,881,431
20,566,929
6,323,576
6,319,212
3,784,517
2,658,220

2,777,626
1,184,959
973,820
770,304
501,104

10,966,026
3,986,783
5,114,239
2,S42,607
1,971,776

1

Other
sanita
tion.

V.—HIGHWAYS.

Total.

General
adminis
tration.

Care and
mainte
nance of
roadways.

Care and
mainte
nance of
other
highway
structures.

Other
care of
streets,
roads,
and
alleys.*

Preven
tion of
street
dust.

Street
lighting.

$250,087| $1,250,123 $55,879,142 $1,389,834 $19,031,815 $6,577,099 $2,794,873 $2,667,725 $21,256,950
114,353
42,10S
51,581
24,311
17,734

708,924
109,726
179,572
147,295
104,606

24,851,575
(P, « M , Mil

10,372,651
5,975,082
5,195,994

728,323
159,819
257,192
121,531
122,969

7,81tf,322
4,124,331
3,384,628
1,870,262
1,834,272

3,877,885
753,934
1,174,572
468,159
302,549

559,214
623,731
830,798
347,124
434,006

1,886,805
173,191
317,564
196,435
93,730

City
Repair num>
andcon- ber.
straction
for com
pensation.

Water
ways.

$456,920 $1,703,926

9,435,618
2,943,061
3,851,999
2,750,363
2,275,909

166 446
93,192
178,412
7,334
11,536

377,962
613,581
377,486
213,874
121,023

GROUP I.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER IN 1911.
$9,580,202 $1,081,159
773,371
3,505,749
91,654
2,205,178
192,630
1,147,944

$8,263,781
2,554,351
2,023,694
£62,863

400,095
64,475
101,613
69,629

1,258,693
666,036
702,916

1,692,149
801,553
850,520
783,634

$16,860
2,671
19,339
29,375
41,26S
4,840

$235,262 $10,238,180
178,027, 2,541,340
69,970
4,841,384
89,780' 1,600,670
14,022!
41,667;
4,693
75,503

2,055,685
1,129,962]
865,649'
1,578,703,

$393,191
63,414
86,501
94,657
76,358
14,202

$3,660,534
$737,457
609,115
530,031
1,208,674 1,530,448
563,310]
56,269
366,56;
249,665
369,497
791,960

422,505
386,337
32,702
182,136

$S6,505
44,847
244,6101

$1,424,708
99,098
47,227
2,615

$4,022,290
1,001,636
1,810,452
639,2091

$36,816
16,502

162,011

282,817

8,211
13,030

4,689
25,651

727,232
336,198
366,234
532,367

45,405
67,723

GROUP II.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000 IN 1911.
$5S3,8S1
485,819,
517,777
775,612'
560,556

$56,952
26,023
229,489
151,405
68,076

$506,575
45S,S39
260,12S!
591,456
455,726

$8,790

$1,374,523
1,203,249
898,495
735,518
1,309,832

$10,114
15,969
20,596

1,210
16,882

$11,561
957
28,160
31,511
19,872

553,017
253,8S2,
643,162'
666,317,
283,553.

102,110
20,135
307,274
153,525
63,970

442,661
227,747
335,8SS
490,457
217,276

5,385

2,861

9,841

12,494
2,307

709,224
823,247
509,810
1,119,180
800,762

41,624
12,319
8,800
16,151
34,246

$971,033!
423,612!
393,824
205,899
589,288

$88,479
112,499
26,828:
145,444
118,709

2S5,55S
328,396
110,577
636,840
178,304

78,906
23,534
34,648
62,219
57,668

$1,360
■ 5,655
34,928
141,098
19,271
5,035
135,457,.
68,088.
28,511
184,328

$66,034
39,844
4,035
14,513

$168,8
358,8 ,
343,473.
203,154
435,898.

$2,050
50,302
27,375

7,130
13,305
12,822'
28,813

160

G R O U P H I . - C I T I E S H A V I N G A P O P U L A T I O N O F 100,000 TO 300,000 I N 1911.
$219,472
356, N l |
310,0871
249,619,
271,572

$26,13S
31,251
19,831
30,997
148,363

$193,334.
292,505
290,256.
213,439
122,202.

300,893
405,975!
166,427
306,792
175,606

27,259
31,025
24,669
49,717
36,916]

260,458
367,802
124,777
253,463
136,5181

302,608
128,880
256,567
149,043
185,722

50,771
16,384
17,493
15,19W
81,7161

242,216.
98,646.
225,634.
123,889.
99,784

87,678
206,263
103,307
199,433
125,170)

5,449
15,4SW
19,201
20,758
19,604

81,963
189,764.
79,706].
159,85ffl
104,726.

186,6121
91,023
99,467
100,064'
130,7851

48,839
11,062
19,638
16,464
17,002

133, MA.
79,961.
75,853.
80,530
109,292

89,515
155,033!
102,275
116,383'
175,478

13,333
8,652
* 4,601
17,658
48,560

67,552.
141,342)
92,007L
98,640.
126,3861.

95,2901
170,576
87,625]
98,313
113,513

10,790
40,460
7,840
11,514
9,186




84,500,
130,116).
67,988.
84,351.
81,233

$4,382

$28,003

3,246

1,937
1,007

4,926
3,6S7'
2,307
2,823

971

23,094

$380
26,453
1,345
23,017
57,002

$4,558

$124,146

44,860
19,05S|

37,222

$156,707^
173,466
205,379
167,826
273,174

12,684

163,299
254,900
175,325
128,439
244,993

530,503
490,796i
493,495,
423,010
475,973

6,300
15,211
13,351

341,262
87,5SS
186,273

16,844

62,510

18,904
58,692
31,678
30,307
46,280

9,621
13,8501
13,440
9,955

534,444
169,320
250,75S
384,003
603,698)

3,500
29,681
14,559

42,543
80,92a
105,300]
147,008
249,631

359,875
67,925
7,563
5,783
26,932)

68,026]
97,062
79,615]
79,308

1,189
44,501
24,302
21,812
2,820l

7,258
36,610
37,419
58,297
84,951

17,619
2,197^
72,182
4,890
10,759

1,711
17,508
954

492
9,110
1,391

1,019
4,400,
17,399
840'
4,226

35
471

2,131

$157,789
42,246j
244,911
129,850|
209,691

$40,117
40,335

8,250
3,461^
14,674f
789
2,172

4,222j

i,4i;

$314,876
452,062
507,280
371,312
600,721

3,976
3,035
4,020
8,630
4,068
5,667
90
532

11,797)
2,448

143,434
291,081
271,306
253,4241
137, $98!
95,535
120,366
215,817
187,919
179,260

5,176
5,903
l,20fl

3,656
10,202

42,022
69,640
31,513
86,782

1,5871

2,441
146,0S3|

34,575
1,2001

16,509
77,948^
58,625]

8,93S|

12,3571
28,893
47,131
43,715

116,327,
123,435
136,238
144,485
89,621
97,808
55,770)

108,491
232,090
177,527
273,392

2,937
5,667
2,820
4,628
8,800

17,483
58,122
74,079^
117,858
53,418

19,131
49,949
944
26,601
34,167j

17,143
28,046
38,160
18,631
36,699

6,194
21,384

200,082
219,870
102,977'
217,913
115,744

4,672
12,984
2,316
?202

70,71«
62,163
23,057
94,01H
24,740

27,318|
24,267
7,902^
14,553
5,303

30,360
25,815
20,965
27,704

500
18,1SS
262
14,364
2,065

* Includes undistributed highway expenses.

$6,422

5,34<M
6,392

50,008
74,447
90,324
87,912
77,567

20,620

40,332
61,103]
60,832
100,334
80,737

5,27*
7,819]
692

63,513
76,394]
34,017]
63,078
83,151

3,000

1,053
59

9,458

44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES:

190
TABLE

11.—GOVERNMENTAL COST PAYMENTS FOR EXPENSES OF GENERAL DEPARTMENTS, BY
[For a list of the cities arranged alphabetically b y states, with the number

VL—CHARITIES, HOSPITALS, AND CORRECTIONS.

City.
Total.

Grand total
Group
Group
Group
Group
Group

I
II....
III
IV
V

01,321,703
19,586,842
5,597,761
3,367,582
1,417,595
1 351,923

General
super
vision.

Outdoor
poor relief.

Poor in
institu
tions.

Care of
children.

Other
charities.

$811,214 |$2f238,494 {$4,902,857 [14,781,682 111,409,032
543,744
87,725
87,546
51,810
40,389

743,065
347,425
460,778
373,406
313,820

2,760,0S3
981,309
639,590
320,434
201,441

Corrections.

Hospitals.

Charities.
City
num-l
ber.

470,999
114,673
150,067
57,088

1,284,475
93,347
13,392
8,976
8,842

Institu
tions for
minors.

Proba
tion
boards
and
officers.

$S,SS2,912 12,004,216 j$4,810,2S3 [11,265,746

$215,267

General
hospitals.

5 , 4 3 s 136
1,246,014
1,330,344
315,746
552,072

Insane in
hospitals.

1,058,183
824,593
85,51$
14,219
21,703

Institu
tions for
adults.

2~$39,190
l.l&5,5tt)
490,135
157,198
13S,194

773,249
318, G23
138,190
18,329
17,355

157,862
41,560
7,416
7,410
1,019

GROUP I.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 500,000 AND OVER IN 1911.
New York, N . Y .
Chicago. HI
Philadelphia, Pa.
St. Louis, M o . . . .

$10,060,130
2,436,253
2,905,711
800,761

1417,159

Boston, Mass
Cleveland, Ohio..
Baltimore, Md...
Pittsburgh, P a . . .

1,525,038
588,727
652,649
617,573

90,101

$142,332
291,713

10,948

11,10S
14,428

122,350
63,310
9,503
47,469

$789,473 1$2,931,192 $1,240,741 $3,206,940
11,803 1
718,806
676,090
6,530
354,329
874,983
374,168
291,819
2,691
127,974
4,459

$42,231
C91.00S
147,249

$1,279,784
424,613
444,499
U S , 462

$52,509
223,163
85,929
83,234

$41,304
20,106
13,226

5S7,404
209,698
67,115
2,025

21,099
152,444
4,152

259,199
80,819
72,451
159,363

95,730
50,464
115,900
66,320

59,037
8,383
6,208
9,598

$207,445
127,048
117,994
103,870
68,280

$14,148
31,244
1.V304

$1,174
6,104

S3,844
56,507
65,839
326,439
2S,300

52,801
27,994
17,109
61,840
8,537

$36,163
118,220

$18,962

208,929
98,188
195,508
289,753

102,288
22,005
20,332
21,793

29,761
2,050
2,672

G R O U P I L - C I T I E S H A V I N G A P O P U L A T I O N O F 300,000 T O 500,000 I N 1911.
Detroit, Mich
Buffalo, N . Y
.
San Francisco, Cal,
Milwaukee, W i s . . . .
Cincinnati, O h i o . .

$527,230
642,635
808,613
509,469
544,464

Newark, N . J
Los Angeles, C a l . .
N e w Orleans, L a . .
Washington, D . C.
Minneapolis, Minn,

717,936
347,370
191,205
1,121,541
187,298

$10,975
28,289
4,506

4,782
1,087
32,516
5,570

$90,873
49,136
9,34S
41,351
50,863
38,743
5,433
21,109

$146,824
287,248
192,372
65,290
119,489

$54,839
195,497
41,972
3,107

31,5SS
37,330
36,452
50,632
14,084

7,528
23,414
22,666
121,784
192

$2S,567

2,309
35,234

$25,132
25,339
272, (*5
87,319
180,384

5,042
4,519
500
4,054
6,214

192,560
152,844
11,333
194,075
104,963

2S9,530
1,237
30,780
301,793

$2,0S7
33,3SS

2,433
154,979
12,268

86,646

7,873
8,430
4,180
4,299
9,500

GROUP UI.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000 IN 1911.

27

Jersey City, N . J . . .
Seattle, Wash
Kansas City, M o . . .
Indianapolis, I n d . .
Providence, R. I . . .

$119,550
78,548
299,905
117,883
127,057

Louisville, Ky
Rochester, N . Y . . .
Denver, Colo
Portland, Oreg
St. Paul, Minn

253,142
215,396
279,998
4,215
113,352

Columbus. Ohio....
Toledo, Ohio
Atlanta, Ga
Oakland, Cal
Worcester, Mass....

50,566
41,771
136,871
3,791
187,870

13,616
940
10,863
3,791
17,152

6,300

1,200

3,300

Birmingham, Ala..
Syracuse, N . Y
New Haven, Conn.
Memphis, Tenn
Scranton, Pa

37,335
159,103
115,751
52,692

3,555
36,158
12,195

775
43,192
54,937

2,925
39,325
5,264

975
4,971

25,084
9,221
250
31,327
7,294

47,536
21,536

2,550
752

Richmond, V a . . .
Paterson, N. J . . .
Omaha, Nebr
Fall River, Mass.
Dayton, Ohio....

53

86,037
53,009
7,761
86,855
83,958

$3,040

$9,324

"i5,*528

7,580
12,793
15,730

12,871
"2*770'

5,710
5,112

4,406

8,229
50,234
48,542
152
9,161

$107,186
23,421
158,577
104,118
58,765

$52,562
23,591
43,749
37,686

$13,565
29,925
215

9,531

I S 590
2,451

39,545
19,761
64,075
36,989
31,855
28,091
34,730

12,000
78,198
128,839

25,334

2,968
8,111
5,149

17,936
17,120

67,265
26,386

2,790
4,336

Bridgeport, Conn...
New Bedford, Mass.
San Antonio, T e x . . .
Hartford, Conn
Albany, N . Y

113,941
72,569
24,474
125,047
44,158

5,464
6,851

26,587
25,202
456
12,880
8,000

37,814
36,253

1,193

65,921

"4,*2*.4

17,456
1,950

715
1,850

1,300
29,747
4,520
52,692
6,450
21,500
1,506
25,4S3
64,000

124

26,803
34,948
48,361
105,183
59,682




80,513
5S,S40
110,936
2,757
52,450

3,730

Grand Rapids. Mich.
Spokane, Wash
Nashville, Tenn
Lowell. Mass
Cambridge, Mass

5,617
3,949

$834
1,853

$972

1,100

270

16

1,306
1,365
740
"2,"2S6
2,657

26,635

1,150
2,173

31,550

999

3,418
*6,005
161
12,664

3,240
4,140
38,956
5,056
4,314
27,341
2,247
18,701
10,952
31,599

86,865

"*8,'ioT

2,424
14,816
9,405

41,092
4,025
2,288

16,735
823
5,317
25,193
610

GENERAL TABLES.

191

PRINCIPAL DIVISIONS AND SUBDIVISIONS OF THE GENERAL DEPARTMENTAL SERVICE: 1911—Continued,
assigned to each, see page 20. For a text discussion of this table, see page 78. J
VII.—EDUCATION.

Total.

$141,455,032 J
~ 65,005,066
19,402,790
25,4S9,022
17,433,598
14,124,556

Schools.

j

VIII.—RECREATION.

Total.

Libraries.

1135,196,241 $6,258,791 j $17,617,447
62,188,154
18,405,825
24,306,048
16,756,313
13,539,901

2,816,912
996,965]
1,182,974
677,285
584,655

10,204,915 |
2,616,651
2,740,780
1,179,766
875,335

General
Educa
tional recre recreation,
parks, and
ation.
trees.

$1,899,922

$15,372,200

1,344,998
403,144
113,700
23,788
14,292

8,653,478
2,115,960
2,591,349
1,155,978
855,435

I.—GENERAL.

Quasi pro-!
ductive
park en- 1
tcrprises.

IX.—MIS
CELLANE
OUS.

$345,325 j $1,808,306
206,439 1
97,547 !
35,731
5,608

914,477~ 1
153,972
244,599
315,670
179,588

Total.

$12,450,294
878697^07
1,437,022
1,166,883
500,224)
476,258

Pensions
and
gratuities.

Judg
ments
and
losses.

Undis
tributed
expenses.

City
num
ber.

$7,624,056 $1,546,040 $3,280,198
5,750,607
943,050
620,577
222,065
87,757

960,859
90,973
224,964
94,200
175,044

2,158,441
402,999
321,342
183,959
213,457

GROUP I.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OP 500,000 AND OVER IN 1911.
$31,203,009
10,149,699
6,314,570
3,365,440
4,968,734
3,018,843
1,974,429
4,010,342

$30,004,783 $1,198,226
9,870,999
278,700
202,771
6,111,799
165,933
3,199,507
4,609,466
2,762f3SS
1,896,929
3,732,283

359,263
256,455
77,500
278,059

$3,912,562
2,679,053
935,482
393,807

$750,157
166,938
273,640
37,797

$3,162,405
2,305,676
661,842
356,010

1,172,613
264,462
392,459
454,477

1,452
6,798
20,384
87,832

1,171,161
257,664
372,075
366,645

$206,439

$46,970
110,694
429,310
21,872
211,706
85,565
1,624
6,736

$3,924,962
$5,531,435
1,266,273
861,376
910,025 '
218,246
119,065
38,872
468,767
273,654
110,627
190,061

$443,061 $1,163,412
176,768
234,129
183,432
508,347
2,664
77,529

384,436
170,853
64,810
87,052

48,362
47,801
6,632
58,139

35,969
55,000
39,185
44,870

$14,020
29,807
4,367
25,262

$144,435
6,085
52,800
21,996
40,206

10
11
12
13

419
2,030
9,786
5,282

42,901
38,865
12,038
41,968
1,705

14
15
16
17
18

GROUP II.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 300,000 TO 500,000 IN 191L
$1,984,259
1,869,066
1,854,458
1,887,378
2,118,911

$1,871,136
1,748,7S6
1,779,200
1,793,645
1,9S6,5U

$113,123
120,250
75,252
93,733
132,400

$359,519
311,6S9
371,728
281,506
206,833

$41,726
65,979
28,209
62,433

$309,0S1
245,710
305,395
219,073

2,290,222
2,140,894
1,087,217
2,250,614
1,913,771

2,175,359
2,037,204
1,047,204
2,195,834
1,770,940

120,863
103,690
40,013
54,780
142,831

262,494
236,675
85,569
303,496
197,142

10,000
102,214
2,113
87,717
2,753

252,494
134,461
83 456
215,779
143,678

$8,712
38,124

50,711

$20,626
26,233
3,287
29,728
49,163

$249,210
195,421
213,148
84,878
208,545

$90,755
159,529
160,348
5S,515
143,077

4,040
6,426
1,440
10,364
2,665

123,123
67,614
43,757
170,761
80,565

80,222
28,330
29,689
119,007
73,578

*

GROUP HI.-C1TIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 100,000 TO 300,000 IN 1911.
$47,612
184,195
285,713
§9,591
107,829

$1,163,093
1,442,0S5
1,104,845
1,040,234
1,046,713

$50,212
133,448
44,844

797,056
993,534
1,237,076
1,048,6S0
872,643

66,268
349
37,SS6
39,570
66,606

92,569
222,289
241,089
52,820
118,838

945,820
760,541
445,029
915,344
908,814

739,207
427,146
868,206
851,690

36,852
21,334
17,883
47,138
57,124

49,212
67,390
59,775
96,485
69,432

426,186
660,892
744,082
435,552
611,706

421,680
618,925
705,712
416,892
591,932

4,506
41,967
38,370
18,660
19,774

11,648
56,504
58,022
130,948
18,990

330,654
612,461
650,802
526,798
558,487

329,654
485,888
624,093
497,506
535,236

1,000
26,573
26,709
29,292
23,251

53,929
20,866
50,695
25,836
16,785

587,531
695,555
377,783
444,203
555,254

£46,903
659,628
358,176
428,954
524,843

40,628
35,927
19,607
15,249
30,411

34,166
44,063
77,477
43,011
73,497

332,276
472,152
313,629
687,446
423,708

313,624
422,564
301,608
$69,946
411,108

18,652
49,5S8
12,021
17,500
12,600

31,766
46,126
16,117
68,128
77,361

$1,213,305
1,575,533
1,149,6S9
1,092,381
1,075,741
863,324
993,8S3
1,274,962
1,088,250
939,249




52,147
29,028

6,962

$47,612
180,765
285,713
89,591
94,439

24,354
5,779
410

92,569
222,289
216,735
47,041
97,850

5,596
7,364
8,700
219

49,212
61,800
52,411
87,785
69,213

$2,649

7,500
15,980

5,344

7,548
5,685

1,348
5,937
1,500

$781
567
2,236
1,107
24,235
14,954
20,678

678
312
2,525

11,648
49,004
58,022
114,968
18,990
53,929
20,866
45,351
25,836
15,960
26,618
35,607
77,477
43,011
73,497
31,766
44,778
16,117
57,018
75,861

1,144

$81,745
13,421
2,996
51 754
46,249

$7,995
37,215
21,754
7,348
6,188

$2,496
9,708

96,064
77,778
78,528
18,163
41,948

48,793
68,856
17,092
1,792
24,562

15,072
2,513
2,869
685
13,894

32,199
6,409
58,567
15,686
3,492

24
25
26
27

48,622
32,592
9,213
14,637
8,380

23,451
32,287
3,662
10,942
1,368

24,702
305
5,551

469

29
30
31
32
33

12,236
2,503

67,762
42,921
37,416
7,146
21,239

15
112
282
21,454
481

15,090
30,865
16,071
7,555
21,057

40,706
27,826

3,154
28,670
8,290
43,232
16,382

2,771

47,491
5,173

$89,740
53,132
34,458
59,102
66,550

133
4,300

3,826
1,643
11,400
21,039
33,218

7,012

14,113

3,695

19
20
21
22
23

15,443
6,796
1,895
1,338

52,319
4,998
8,574
5,808
16,951

34
35
36
37

2,670
25,160
15,952
1,717
11,912

1,196

11,224
5,715
119
1,745

39
40
41
42
43

1,983
8,404

278
1,446
3,308
3,340

18,820
4,982
29,346

44
45
46
47
48

31,127
26,947
4,288

10,546
12,044
.1,155
241
11,145
26,326

4,093
9,145

1,355
1,643
7,483
1,872
6,692

1,316
3,676
8,022

49
50
61
52

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

192

TABLE l l . - ^ O V E E N M E N T A L

COST P A Y M E N T S F O R E X P E N S E S O P G E N E R A L D E P A R T M E N T S ,

BY

(For a list of the cities arranged alphabetically by states, with the number
GROUP I V . - Q T t E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 50,000 TO 100,000 IN 1911.

I.—GENERAL GOVERNMENT.

Executive branch.

Legislative breach.
City
num
ber.

Total.
Council
and
board of
aldermen.

Clerk of
council.

$5,510
3,650

Legisla
tive in*
vestigations.

Mayor.

194,544
41,816
86,183
146,876
87,845

$10,692
9,243
12,103

7,442
3,772

5,436
5,000

Springfield, Mass..
Lynn, Mass
Lawrence, Mass...
Tacoma, Wash
Des Moines, Iowa.

1,820,556
1,165,980
1,202,818
1,371,027
1,277,583

84,374
87,624
62,127
129,285
76,597

730

1,400

*""ioo

5,V30S
191
2,824

Wilmington, D e l . . .
Kansas City, Kans.
Yonkers,N.Y
Youngstown, Ohio.,
Houston, Tex

771,143
809,843
1,630,204
887,194
913,148

90,924
68,093
167,295
63,197
84,890

14,589

1,533

3,176

19,861
2,062

9,462
3,134

5.546
5,999

Norfolk, Va
Duluth, Minn
Fort Worjth, Tex.
SomerviHe, Mass..
St. Joseph, M o . . . .

923,710
1,086,911
711,164
1,244,942
892,579

123,842
112,468
84,227
73,225
75,736

1,316
11,524

US

5,771
1,605

3,265

2,985
3,643
8,543
4,399
4.525

Utica,N.Y
Troy,N.Y
Elizabeth, N . J
Schenectady, N. Y .
Waterbury, Conn...

957,475
1,116,151
695,709
926,217
923,708

93,644
114,491
59,603
106,506
92,713

9,675
12,948
1,595
11,724
1,907

3,8S5
1,420
4,693
4,880
5,962

Akron, Ohio
Oklahoma. City, Okla..
Manchester, N. H
Hoboken, N. J
,
Evansville, Ind

768,550
888,125
706,244
967,384
601,871

81,429
69,696
60,334
77,934
40,159

9,572
7,258
2,812
6,538
2,000

2,279
9,756
100
5,016
3,698

Wflkcs-Barre, Pa.
Erie, Pa
,
Peoria, HI
Fort Wayne. Ind..
Harrisburg, P a . . . .

601,079
568,912
922,660
599,603
665,271

40,999
37,436
75,061
31,994
54,053

962
GSS
5,272
3,000
1,764

5,160
3,385
3,618
2,000
4,115

Savannah, Ga
Jacksonville, F i a . .
East St. Louis, 111.
Terre Haute, Ind..
Holyoke, Mass.....

762,637
708,699
633,573
639,601
804,397

73,488
67,288
74,769
53,206
70,890

4,568
6,344
5,649
3,560
2,371

5,468
7,453
3 , OSS
3,186
600

Portland, Me
South Bend, I n d . .
Charleston, S . C . . .
Brockton, Mass....

941,658
506,379
689,683
815,159

49,920
38,553
51,546
59,842

603
2,000
2,398

4,537
1,201
2,300
655

99
100
101

Passaic, N. J . . . .
Bayonne,N. J..,
Johnstown, P a . .
Wichita, Kans...

514,992
684,458
443,657
610,455

45,215
58,021
22,668
54,204

2,792
6,473
378

3.881
4,432
2,166

102
103
104
105

Covington, K y . . . ,
Allentown, P a . . . .
Pawtucket, R. I . .
Springfield, HI....

534,166
388,712
710,394
568,568

59,555
31,157
71,122
68,867

3,045
8,242
2,367

4,600
1,533
250
4,162

3,900
1.9M
2,011
3,542

106
107
108
109

Altoona, Pa
Mobile, A l a . . . .
Canton, Ohio...
Saginaw, Mich.

420,349
445,212
451,449
600,058

38,627
40,926
48,051
61,882

470
875
2,672
14,237

1,260
2,567
1,120
2,762

2,612
2.933
3.872
1,000

67

$930

Executive] Auditor,
boards
or comp
and com
troller.
missions.

$2,996
3,440

91,080,240
742,493
991,896
1,353,752
1,054,752

Trenton, N . J . . .
Dallas, Tex...
Salt Lake City, Utah.
Camden, N.J

Financial.

Chief executive.
Total.

$13,3S7

18,183

^l™
23,643
*i5*666

102

3,2*1
169

26

2,000
321

1,335

15,088

$5,293
2,100
5,535
11,454
5,526
4,015
4,531
4,109
15,103
7,282

$6,368
4,800
10
11,945
4,264

$11,760
7,961
10,254
5,731
14,132

9,511
5,804
8,282
18,6S5
5,014

14,909
13,626
6,441

3,037
3,665
17,917
4,127
726

2,250
1,230
16,662
1,173
8,563

7,204
7,678
301
10,853
7,359

9,517
20,233
6,752
10,752
5,893

8,792
7,852
2,766
9,254
845

11,378
9,094
13,121
9,2?0
10,397

1,977
3,432
3,496
4,540
4,593

3,242
9,633
14,445
1,400

3,950
3,515
2,769
2,000
6,102

7,334
6,221
5,734
500
4,354

1,777
3,069
4,649

5,086
11,656
10,643
534
9,799

159

10.614
2,488
8,663
5,082

7,905
500
7,090
9,708

590-

1,222
3,241
3,544
2,527

6,494
3,834
1,649

150

5,950
3,343
3,730
2,840

3,829
1,775
7,055
8,255

1,580

2,510
1,828
3,377
6,810

1,197
500
2S6
6,090

$75
493

$2,656
2,790
2,793

$4,383

$5,830
2,8S9
195

2,876
4,749
12,531
5,4S7
5,516
8,123
6.S77
5,450
728
9,756

400
427
3,265
350

7,167
8.793
12,400
8.0.-2
7,178

4.76S
5,697
2,100
6,662
3,240
4.039
5,tfi9
4,5.16
2,021
4,000

Special
account Treasurer, ment and
ing and orcliamlevyol
auditing. berlain.
revenue.

S99

5,843
8,365
4.1S2
2.S72
7,470

150
5,200

2,720
3,900
4.777
3,000
3,000

3,178
3,221
3,892
3,947
4,037

366

6,123
4,434
4,090
3.160
2,979

2,032
3.183
3.601
3,423

1,110
2,224
100
1,300
390

2,901
3,001
4,355
2,293

2.662
5,836

99
2,512
2,058

2,743
3,383
2,423
1,601

5S7

1,906

13,957

2,975
1,990
4,774
3,509
6,497

1,510
1,530
3,293
3,753

798
2,000

1,250

G R O U P V.—CITIES H A V I N G A P O P U L A T I O N O F 30,000 T O 50,000 I N 1911.
110
111
112
113
114

Bmghamton.N. Y . .
Sioux City, Iowa
Atlantic City, N . J . .
Rockford,in
Lancaster, P a

$485,798
496,943
1,143,032
506,026
364,262

$47,114
61,641
90,635
45,860
22,097

$4,402

$5,041

2,664
562

"*4,*i24
300
1,600

"5,"6S6
2,360

115
116
117
118
119

Springfield, O h i o . . . .
Little Rock, A r k . . . .
Sacramento, Cal
Pueblo, Colo
,
Chattanooga, T e n n . .

477,354
391,571
835,625
547,530
545,290

43,163
32,404
81,094
50,798
41,409

2,330
4,903
6,893
4,850
1,708

1,583
1,132
5,501
2,439

3,351
4,133
5,004
2,636
2,476

120
121
122
123
124

B a y City, Mich.
York, P a
Maiden, Mass
N e w Britain, C o n n . .
Haverhill, Mass

409,207
319,846
679,099
428,845
602,605

37,992
25,485
36,629
46,513
50,773

2,838
168
1,956
2,454

2,538
1,150
400
2,345

1,000
2,065
1,089
1,413




$.500

$2,578
$18,436

$2,462
2,124
7,030
5,330
2,875

400
3,016

8,531

3,303
1,143
6,055
2,331
3,002

861
200
300
500
475

2,124
3,321
1,701
3,876
6,044

535
325

11,414

3,240
1,425
2,350
930
3,865

6,705
342
2,903
715
6,293

1,100

11,785
3,991
1,387
335
5,197
1,287
3,830
1,475
6,558
6,309,
9,053

GENERAL TABLES.

193

PRINCIPAL DIVISIONS AND SUBDIVISIONS OP THE GENERAL DEPARTMENTAL SERVICE: 1911.
assigned to each, eee page 20. For a text discussion of this table, see page 78.]
GROUP IV.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 50,000 TO 100,000 IN 1911.
I.—GENERAL GOVERNMENT—continued.

Executive branch—Continued.

General government
buildings.

Judicial branch.

City
num
ber.

Legal.

Financial—Contd.

Elections.
Other
Collection
of revenue. financial. Solicitor.

Other
General
general municipal
Other . executive. courts.
legal.

$12,240
11,214
10,251
21,248
12,313

1503
1,116
1,553
432
237

13,083

10,540
8,071

1,054
2,208
2,592
1,901

4,275
6,619
3,074
13,523
12,797

21,340
11,926
13,556
13,001
8,088

67
2,026
1,767
2,230
152

4,651
6,752
12,090
8,489
13,517

6,621
2,174
2,997

66
1,779
350
95

4,647
8,360
6,945
2,368
10,006

1,763
3,095
1,544
2,657
8,227

291
1,125
616
486
300

6,081
9,870
4,193
6,963
11,720

6,279
702
445
839
1,115
615
458

11,138
4,015
1,300
4,693
2,045

i,ioo
5,550
14,960
2,271
1,780
8,563
14,531

2,604
5,133
8,365
368
4,130
5,020
20,064
7,699

6,372
8,554
5,222

2,211
4,227
2,617
2,839
4,430

8,110

19,864

86,211

13,517
27,896
7,689

2,682
12,301
3,325

Justice
courts.

Special
courts.

Care and
mainte
nance.

Superior Coroner. Marshal
courts. !
and sheriff.

$4,919

$150

$2,912

Bent of
leased
buildings.

54
55
56
57
58

5,678
11,056
540

811,057
3,025
7,541
12,535
9,026

3,010
3,211

8,967
8,529
7,869
13,773
6,506

2,319
6,925
6,889
20,405
5,030

25,564
972
25,276
10,997
12,902

4,083
1,207
16,278
4,159
1,917

7,108
12,446
15,254
11,245
686

7,030
6,538
14,651
2,315
5,030

64
65
66
67
68

34,644
19,034
20,025
19,078
22,355

1,342
18,974
1,600

2,024
4,602
626
6,632
1,188

6,112
4,460
7,232
9,770
4,502

69
70
71
72
73

15,121
18,265
2,874
22,667
8,573

7,025
6,801
6,999
5,448
9,916

8,9S2
16,238
553 I
7,001
10,956

8,614
8,725
6,149
6,292
8,290

74
75
76
77
78

20,980
207
17,236
2,850
8,728

235
1,624
3,934
8,892
1,800

11,141
10,401
132
2,010

1,396
3,678
7,141
9,673
2,937

2,808

2,779
3,898
9,253
4,889

219
5,513
1,975

6,383

10,152
3,717
7,210
3,480
3,053

515

15,585
7,669
3,204
16,615
17,737

3,961
1,120
3,255
1,880

1,686
2,078
9,031

4,i27
1,715

$4,510
900
1,600

11,652
1,739

..,.
660
4,913

778

6,89i

4,951
708

3,857
5,326
5,322
7,119
1,802

2,845
6,075

1,613
120
2
275

1,287
2,554
3,082
1,627

2,018
13,463
12,793
16,102

8,634
6,740
2,478
1,080

607
1,826
1,983
2,336

3,009
4,025
1,055
5,523

2,613
3,153
2,865
6,507

6,219
8,600

1,376
7,804
4,471
11,864

2,932
1,979

4,960
1,183
4,615
3,625

3,930
.0,262
13,074
6,166

8,893

12,423
8,780
172
50

4,180
114
654
3,044

3,105
3,775
4,127
2,475

845

5,110
3,418
16,404
5,179

1266

$14,083

4,719

$1,026

1,500

15,430
8,182
12,691

1,080
911

4,696

4,563
- 3,204

j

3,640

i,338

I

6,545

6,768
6,813
2,409
4,179
198
5,477
i6,897

1,200
2,031
2,933
1,819
2,155
2,469

i,302

1

$3,500

1,500

79
80
81
82
83

50*

'

2,500

8,609
7,641
12,221
4,231
13,773
983
3,260
3,894
11,935

59
60
61
62
63

1,003

!

89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97

7,925

4,874
4,319
2,039
7,731

84
85
86
87
88

[
1

93
99
100
101
102
103
104
105

444

750

i66

8,398
12,063

13,673
1,425
3,913
5,541

947
7,649
6,231

4,250
3,763
2,265
6,480

106
107
10S
109

$6,293
3,558
1,219
5,260

$6,274
13,230
21,487
3,162
1,088

110
HI
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119

|

J

5,651

1 ._: t _; _

GROUP V.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 30,000 TO 50,000 IN 1911.
1241
♦,608
11,972
1,241
274
6,907
13,301
5,503
383
6,533
4,606
4,310

4,954

$3,991
2,473
9,262
3,317
1,607

462
1,008
75
170
345

5,028
1,884
3,331
2,700
4,568

1,437
791
451
402

2,688
6,310
1,591
2,125
1,856

$30
271
3,919

6127°—13




13

$1,181

750
3,237

1,405

$3,223
6,S03
10,264
4,073
167

$4,960
1,458
3,413
1,850

8,453
508
13,500
5,967
70

2,878
1,667
4,754
900
3,165

6,847
578
6,333
11,487
1,443

5,669
"• 3,845
6,907
4,439
8,395

3,474
726
7,276
2,447
7,398

1,535

4,126

6,031

4,883
4,956
4,365

5,100
1429
2,226
11,281
5,027

$5,051

1S6

$25

$2,100
110 i
1

120
121
122
123
124

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

194
TABLE

11.—GOVERNMENTAL COST PAYMENTS FOR EXPENSES OF GENERAL DEPARTMENTS, BY
[For a list of the cities arranged alphabetically by states, with the number
GROUP IV.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 60,000 TO 100,000 IN 1911.
m.—CONSERVATION Of HEALTH.

n.—PROTECTION TO PERSON AND PROPERTY.

Fire department.

City
num
ber.

OTT.

General
super
vision.

Total.

Police
depart*
ment.

General
conduct
of depart
ment.

Trenton, N.J
Reading, Pa.,
Dallas, Tex
Salt Lake City, Utah.
Camden, N.J

122,817
248,141
197,118
311,000

$135,950
68,956
89,748
95,125
159,132

$117,725
50,992
140,535
90,504
140,449

Springfield, MassLynn, Mass
Lawrence, Mass...
Taooma,Wash
Pes Moines, Iowa.

421,568
256,322
230,961
353,272
267,921

156,454
110,818
108,212
99,383
90,565

216,066
128,791
114,044
158,861
125,360

64
65
66
67
68

Wilmington, Del...
Kansas City, Kans..
Yonkers,N.Y
Youngstown, Ohio..
Houston, Tex

173,472
187,435
372,799
218,472
243,621

98,016
77,838
206,838
111,929
105,709

65,950
72,539
146,676
99,189
124,703

69
70
71
72
73

Norfolk, Va
Duluth, Minn
Fort Worth, Tex.,
Somervilie, Mass..
St. Joseph, Mo

275,070
279,586
194,540
198,920
247,781

145,585
94,^08
77,668
94,473
107,530

105,429
135,119
109,816
93,373
95,435

65,745
124,500
98,500
96,931
75,509

118,908
111,535
74,325
106,736
90,353

67,421
112,217
69,434
146,614
73,348

99,806
95,514
106,153
130,243
89,729

63,013
64,163
78,929
51,423
51,317

47,589
84,251

,
74 Utfca,N.Y
75 Troy.N.Y
Elizabeth,
N.J
76
77 Schenectady, N. Y .
78 Waterbury, Conn...

239,701
244,471
183,850
212,682
173,571

Akron, Ohio.
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Manchester,
N .. ,H
jnouutcawiM
Hoboken, N. J..
Evansville, Ind.
Wflkes-Barre, Pa.
Erie, Pa
Peoria, 111
Fort Wayne, Ind.
Harrisburg, Pa....

193,841
219,914
202,811
280,078
165,877

90
91
92
93

Savannah, Ga
Jacksonville, Fla...
East St. Louis, III.,
Terre Haute, Ind..
Holyoke, Mass

249,004
228,969
197,470
205,446
196,159

94
95
96
97

Portland, Me
South Bend, Ind...
Charleston, B.C....
Brockton, Mass

262,741
131,954
232,955
171,659

98
99
100
101

Passaic, N . J . . .
Bayonne, N.J.,
Johnstown, Pa.,
Wichita, Kans..

154,780
119,457
125,929

102
103
104
105

Covington, K y . . .
Allentown, P a . . .
Pawtucket, R . I .
Springfield, 111...

130,970
70,759
150,081
126,597

106
107
108
109

Altoona, Pa
Mobile, Ala
Canton, Ohio
Saginaw, Mich...

106,850
150,600
98,813
104,386

79
80
81
82

119,650
153,704
248,364
146,764
94,215

$4,386

1,200

1,468
2,200

$1,200
$50
34,075

892
322
1,718

48,721

38^857

2,200

102,809
49,356
107,155
73,827

110,717
142,538
72,832
74,152
94,549

36,076
77,006
52,760
45,096

30,463
70,925
63,803
64,930

64,625
30,440
67,426
50,004

59,672
38,971
62,028
70,801

40,145
74,605
34,076
47,881

60,701
67,147
58,838
52,950

111,548
95,150
78,151
80,382

28,372
35,774
65,833
20,111
9,954

9,4S4
11,208
20,667
8,120
7,455

15,691
21,948
45,160
7,582
408

4,409
2,091

5,493

9,630
7,326
37,124
5.015
26,051

7,349
6,064
16,454
3, OSS
24,078

2,281
1,262
18,753
317
1,223

1,917
710
750

12,997
10,669
9,250
14,589
1,931

8,589
8,959
685
17,793
5,596

158

7,560
1,625
3,811
6,240
5,131

1,210
6,811
580
2,775
1,468

8,438
19,917
18,570
14,520
18,842

6,179
10,457
4,159
8,432
14,414

2,259
9,460
11,548
3,421
2,428

6,586
11,209
3379
2,068
1,600

1,505
974
345
1,153

7,238
31,323
15,186
9,200
9,120

4,187
11,211
6,595
6,033
3,918

3,051
20,112
6,765

2,201
4,291
11995
4,151
6,101

1,150
999
6,625
194
3,342

7,393
16,669
12,125
6,449
9,355

6,393
11,850
4,353
4,619
5,616

2,542
7,772
1 470
1,709

5,133
4,759
11,020
6,412
4,546

685
1,980
2,690
1,001

20,390
17,496
9,124
4,248
15,806

17,094
9,390
6,529
2,330
10,068

3,296
8,106
2,417
1,918
4,718

742

2,941
2,975
2,800
2; 061

600
4,591
3,728
450

14,367
3,094
11,621
16,671

10,309
3,020
7,402
8,630

3,258
74
3,728
6,770

300
380

1,509
3,842

799
2,627

16,441
6,411

7,142

9,431

7,852
2,762
2,719
7,548

1,632
1,330
2,544
4,360

25
18
3,063
1,432

6,222
3,094
6,170
4,741

4,322
2,488
2,475
2,975

2,633
1,766

3,294
2,349
3,277
2,096

2,710
6,391
2,622
1,459

3,792
14,040
4,709
30,138

3,792
10,345
2,786
2,558

2,720
1,923
28,614

$5,988
4,394
26,780
3,907
3,057

$4,929
4,357
18,129
1 751
2,404

$1,059
37
6,480

2,572
450

1,050

5,697

3,168
480
178
6,431

*45,"i26'

2,894
24,223

38
1,153
963
2,788

14,043
15,238
6,024
6,217
2,612

5,697
6,036
908

9,941
33,890
7,527

18,523

16,682

$3,781

7,903
4029
7,585

23,707
23,101

$1,110

7,422

$8,119
7,531
1,793
21,084
11,617

$3,330

12,574
2,915
1,903
7,097
1,220

41,892

22,400
23,359
42,419
6,496

$15,016
8,731
7,490
28,954
15,995

$6,047
2,869
8,755
7,460
3,784

6,189
6,177
4,853
3,477
4,557

88,796
34,455

128,450
104,200
80,197
76,232
75,222

Preven
tion and
I treatment!Conser
vation
of com- I of
child
muni- I life.
cable dis-

2,010
300

2,299
500

"22,*450

Total

General
conduct
of health
depart
ment.

6,141
600
8,779

39,039
6,476

Other
protec
tion to
person
and
property.

4,013
2,852
13,144
6,754
4,425

34,206!

61,408

2,023

600

Water.

Inspec
Militia Register
of deeds tion
serv
and ar [and
mort-| ice.mories. gages,

1,650

4,416
"15*020

108

$3,116
1,200
1,834
3,470
3,197
2,618

2,121
3,473
1,508

2,863
2,667
2,000

1,826
3,167

5,208

452
4,433
1,883

1,000
2,277
360
2,030

178

800
491
1,271
1,447
2,197
917
900
606
62

975
"966

GROUP V.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 30,000 TO 50,000 IN 1911.
110
111
112
113
114

Bingbamton, N. Y
Sioux City, Iowa...
Atlantic City, N.J.
Rockford, 111
Lancaster, Pa
,

$90,580
82,319

115
116
117
118
119

Springfield, Ohio...
LittleRock,Ark...
Sacramento, Cal....
Pueblo, Colo
Chattanooga, Term,

85,375
93,169
155,606
158,436
176,494

5,190
6,635
13,496
7,954
4,914

2,618
5,285
12,896
4,162
1,218

3,076
3,696

120
121
122
123
124

Bay City, Mich....
York, Pa.
Maiden, Mass
New Britain, Conn.
Haverhill, Mass....

72,441
43,147
27,333
1,760
201
5,067
55,195
30,084
24,410
1,336
701
110,677
56,100
49,749
204
4,624
20,797
78,422
39,353
31,955
724
$3,573
2,554
263
3,426
103,834
52,882
46,839
302
3,384
13,044
427
1
Includes inspection of factories, tenements, boilers, wires, lights, weights and measures, e t c

4,923
1,050
4,916
3,063
6,471

15,231
13
6,970




108,154
65,265

$478

3,184

$47,643
39,539
153,651
35,960
31,852

$40,089
40,519
170,485
69,606
32,213

28,464
49,713
59,445
50,611
73,975

54,341
41,356
82,954
63,246
89,321

$32,000

33,500
9,684

$5
100

$1,297
804
16,286
1,796
1,200
1,208
1,800
2,800
4,238

$1,546
1,452
20,909

314

1,362
300
10,407
6,841
330

$3,171
2 156

653

144
280

900
600

716

650
350
603

GENERAL TABLES.

195

PRINCIPAL DIVISIONS AND SUBDIVISIONS OF THE GENERAL DEPARTMENTAL SERVICE: 1911—Continued,
assigned to each, see page 20. For a text discussion of this table see page 78.]
GROUP IV.-CITIEB HAVING A POPULATION OF 50,000 TO 100,000 IN 1911.
IV.—SANITATION, OR PROMOTION 0 7 CLEANLINESS.

TotaL

166,064
100,889
67,053
111,675

Public
Sewers Refuse col laundries,]
Other
washand
sanita
Bewage lection and bouses,
tion.
con
disposal. disposal. and
venience
stations.
86,842
64,664
8,774
22,015
6,192

$59,222
34,828
58,279
79,208
43,715

67,773

25,026
13,764
29,763
15,939
21,026

113,380
73,449
83,557
49,893
41,910

81,607
37,620
168,771
75,159
91,733

11,330
5,766
5,506
13,945
26,017

66,497
27,354
147,551
54,734
65,713

143,485
41,463
28,208
138,493
36,810

40,159
19,715
4,588
35,824
0,933

95,982
21,748
23,620
102 471
26,611

104,831
144,973
61,601
77,681

4,508
10,557
7,688
8,679
9,438

98,409
126,893
51,449
63,802
53,065

50,316
141,448
02,118
113,320

$1,397
"i6,*452
$1,409
3,042
4,905
3,869
180
*i6,298

1,184
4,870

TotaL

$119,605
137,426
174,627
147,674
97,028

3,190
1,837

128,624
211,610
235,155
136,415

3,600
4500
5,416
6 480
3

108,817
91,490
207,419
100,280
151,071

7,344

90,955
145,167

198
2,112

250,918
85,682

1,914
2,653
% 464
$200

97,576
109,426
62,050
134,370
109,76?

1,800
791
2,296
1 440
1,600

87,795
63 786
133,853
73,594
62,203
100,688
79 836
102,803
84,890
75,791

79,056
67,937
48,587
29,714

18,575
6609
13,156
7,018
3,714

48,253'
71,656
61,887
38,805
24,500

47,877
27,698
41038
45,184
90,438

15,329
8,296
8,149
8,279
8,738

30,902
15946
30,084
34,422
81,700

1,646
3,356
2,805
2,483

110,465
146,939
49,006
39,493
55,725

17,569
48,531
10,587
3,796
5,520

74,836
83,812
419
129
49,205

t

18,060
14,596

62,437
28,152
63,268
62,725

21,551
1,580
12,851
26,319

40,786
24 772
46,204
35,927

37,606
50,714
25,846
42,985

4,063
4,186
2,780
14,216

65,387
83,062
47,355
29,133
16,880
33,495
35,443
23,829

1,324

V.—HIGHWAYS.

General
adminis
tration.

$5,521
2,748
3,337
7,425
3,912
1,677
19,058

$4,346
18,065
566
160

27,346
26,311

7,738
26,682

94,219
30,225
103,320
58,893
37,529

19,797
9,286
15,559
32,097
6,703

45,519
20,556
20,969

22,021
6,151
8^24
38,627
1,725

104,260
57,051
61,661
102,724
71,383

367

$783

5,400

6,594
29,384

"2,"709

21,994

44,521
49,977
126,374
41,169
43,308

4,281
5269
2,000
3,901

28,315
54,576
27,884
29,423
34,535

20,571
17286
8,061
19,503
8,463

175
25,764
2,698
31,636
3,688

6,681
7,875
4,244
2,795

36,631
36,569
31,142
54,509
32,300

13,088
32,952
6,263
73,929
28,729

22,891
1,627
4,636
4,277
14,213

5,378
4,412
626
12,199

2,267

24,604
18,795
39,840
47,200
9,790

6,875
7065
9 489
'496
932

12,376

6,104
5,659

44,121
14,759
12,263
16,618
23,929

1,328
3,330
24,755
36,809
4,920

50,502
27,486

11,345
7,571

1,440
1,874
3,213
1,519

4,727
2,672
1,418
3,588

1,800
4,213

?'!S2
4,820

108,216

33,543
44,063
21,986
26,849

2,465
1,0S0
1,920

39,955
43,836
71,116
62,031

5,186
90
19,550
5,587

56,291
32,254
26,447
20,333

3,910
718
1,358
3,213

79,739
79,368
137,036
43,123

4,194
691
33,763
3,173

12,686
30,304

2,600
1,680
390

41,173
72 684
50,693
106,755

2,340
2,100
2,000

2,609

514

7,017

2,091

"5tSC8

6,114

445
15,987

*i2,"423

1,506

7,422
56
2,243
5,487

25,827

7,913

1,200

25,758
13,726
50,544
43,371

16,263

2,005

239
5
3,239
11,370

8,854
2,485

487

1,800
3,276
2 320

145
588
8,517
23,919

2,368

24,272
41,951
64,634
2,212

225
6,230
2,389
250

10,601
4,857

2,150

17,997
41,064
11,371
74,091

300
1,227
2,172
22,281

8,000

1,200

62,973
25,291
45,673

29,637
40,000
38,228
41,674
23,537

2,800

*5,492

1,635
$1,443

2,219
2,814
17

3,800

9,575
10
'?£
162
29,490
7,042
1,463
109,603

56,316

*2,*6oo
""776"

$3,652

51,668
69,150
46,426
51,822
49, U l

50,512
56,943
64,367
31,188
41)354

1,718

City
Repair num
and
con
Water struction ber.
ways.
for com
pensation.

$73,444
88,667
53,378
55,813
84,520

$31,770
47,920
65,352
33,330
12,348

*ii,*770

149,363
61,882
92,180

20,266

Street
lighting.

MX
539

3,568
1,000

*479

Other
care of
streets,
roads,
and
alleys.*

49,231
28,348
68,674
23,027
41,234

2,000
1,027

94,459
75057
63,730
50,333
85,388

100

Care and
Care and 'mainte
Preven
tion of
nance of
nance of
street
other
roadways. highway
dust.
structures.]

300

69
70
71
72
73

1,437
3,616
607

79
80
81
82

414
275

84
85
86
87

1,885

89
90
91
92
93

9,668

27,363
38,615
5? 154
24,422

2,867
343

3,301

495
1,369
232

64
65
66
67

74
75
76
77
78

64,760
46,000
31,272
39,890

21,676
29,024
37 350
4 038

59
60
61
62
63

6,398
319
313
1,006

175

55,242
81,187
54,399
35,804

54
55
56
57

621

94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109

GROUP V . - & T I E S HAVING A POPULATION OF 30,000 TO 50,000 IN 1911.
$3,007
11 561
1,036
7,270
200

i!i!

$821

$16,847
26,550
134,277
27,724
19,559
29,471
16,170
123,208
20,876
44,753

3,967
3,587
37 385
7,200
7,798

24,104
10,059
80,601
13,676
36,956

40,900
27,219
57,710
20,338
33,911

13,993
304
14,080
12,124
3,091

26,907
26,205
42,330
8,214
30,819




14,143

$2,200
1,276
1,400
2,524
5,222

710
1,300

$59,028
61,200
122,155
60,566
98,314
56,252
71,675
107,276
60,246
82,095
54,162
44,208 j
111 860
57,888
73,691 II

$1,200
6,109
*4*990
2,380

$10,772
23,018
25,006
14,681
42,254

$4,953
8,519

7,133
11,852
44,802

1,372

100

4,239

1,680

4,500
46,155

116
8,356
4,969

2,000
1 800
6,035
2,765
2,927

6,697
16,515
26,311
14,862
13,219

13,902
2,031
5,299
3,527
9,934

* Includes undistributed highway expenses.

$9

$2,914

11,115
12,658

47,747
55,907
48,167
32,710
30,971

13,926
13; 000
4,722

12,564
12276
10 437

$39,055
29,403
69,535
27,042
51,070

479
1,469

26,841
23,862
33,647
23,979
34,758

$125
260
10,290
1,946

110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119

$265

26,115

947

120
121
122
123
124

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

196
TABLE

11.—GOVERNMENTAL COST PAYMENTS FOR EXPENSES OF GENERAL DEPARTMENTS, BY
[For a list of the cities arranged alphabetically by states, with the number
GROUP IV.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 50,000 TO 100,000 IN 1911.
VI.—GHABiriES, HOSPITALS, AND CORBECTIOKS.

City.
Total.

General
super*

Outdoor Poor in
poor relief. institu
tions.

$4,416
5,231
4,095

12,531
32,607
34,007

69 Norfolk V a
70
71 Fort Worth TPJC
72
73

39,267
11,831
22,459
31,072
18,255

2,860
2,700

2,763
11,280
1,908

39,954
134,281
39,450
38,269 |
52,111

2,582
5,970
1,142
1,982
3,362

14,172
17,651
9,552
18,076
12,720

2,185

7,445
1,409
15,106
7,419
1,008

79
80 Oklahoma City, Olda
81
82 Hoboken, N. J
83
64 Wilkes-Barre, Pa •••
85
86 Peoria, IlL
87
88 Harrisburg, Pa

• ..

...

.

.

13,535

500

* "$12," 166'
10.951

$i20* *""*$i9,"714*

33,094
17,662
36,012

21,319

3,500
2,080
2,626

208
5,220

1,021
297

58
26,810
90

19,540
13

1,350
650.

9,226
17,302
9,812
10,472
17,413

900
1,650

1,525

300

1,000

94
95
96
97

55,932
2,091
79,874
43,160

8,700
65,756

Proba
tion
boards
and
officers.

22
19,669
17,422
2,302
7,150
6,407
7,157
2,681

$304"

$750"
2,250

$832

3,078

4,225

5,356
332
2,5S5
8,244

2,561

6,160
4.009
11,334
3

10,963

6
55

1,852

549
2,408
1,168

12,762

1,784

300
1,246

i,6so
1,469
14,262

13,800
5 9S4
900
17,436
4,200

500
24,325

1,228
30,369
21,702

Institu
tions for
minors.

360
1,841

1,287

21,948
19,618
16.000
6,989
4,049

69,425
1,776
750
725
22

1,200

Institu
tions for
adults.

$1,170

751
9,015

General Insane in
hospitals. hospitals.

24,325

89 (Savannah, fla ,
90
91
92 Terre Haute, lnd
93 Holyoke, Mass
PortfaiKl,Me................* 1 4. .
South Bend, lnd
Charleston, B. C
Brockton, ifass

3,355

Other
charities.

250

3,814

3,814
5,436
90,197
20,007
9,085

27,736
21,655
21,216
24,855
6,208

Care of
children.

36

64
65
66 Yonkers N Y
67
68

74 utica,a^ x.♦.«.».•.«•»••*•..••.•
75 Troy, N . Y
76 Elizknath N Y
77
'78

$15,190

"*"i*567"
15
12,339

34*62l"
13,216
16,089
52,689
59,967
80,355
7,600
1,323

V

$16,309

832,669

54
55 Reading, Fa
56
67 Salt Late City, Utah
58
59
60
61
62
63

Corrections.

Hospitals.

Charities.
City
num
ber.

500

728
3,215

10,909
6,800

1,260

1,285

13,700
6,250

3,666

1,200

27,771

30,331

300
18

7,200
3,376

1,600

7,006
2,091
404
16,283

36,023

5,208

14,110
16,750

31,182
187

4,319

473

4,2i6

98 Passaic, N . J
99 Bayonne,N.J
100
101 WfoMt*, tfRT»S

16,555
18,446

3,219
3,590

7,503

273

102
103
104
105 Springfield, 111

11,163
32,507
5,083

106
107 Mobile, Ala
108
109

i9,089
4,762
13,163

1,200

500
1,348

8,652

594

5,899

196

23,800
4,000

365

4,513

376

8,544
14,856
265

5,115

650

11,163
1,010

17,689

7,722

1,438

6,440
1,666
11,725

1,921

300

3,227

2,859
5,083

10,794

1,555
1,172

GROUP V.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 30,000 TO 50,000 IN 1911.
110
111
112 Atlantic City, N . J
113
114
115
116 Little Rock, Ark.
117 Sacramento, CaL
118
119
120 BayCity,Mich
121 York.Pa.
122
123
124 TTavprhni \fac«




$72,461

$1,122

$10,634

$8,055

$25,270

$246

$25,235

37,684
1,584
1,402

9.7

6,167
84
1,375

500

600
500

4,500

25,000
1,000
27

46,475 i
18,512

1,204

9821
43,002
799
2,300
29,679
35,385
42,664]

6,324
799
731
12,120
8,237
13,551

odd"
2,381
2,769
2,328

$1,240

$129

38,800
11,894

7,675
5,414
6,875

321

321

382*
34,161

100
9.565
12,776
10,992

164
381
166

300
5,085
4,249
14,984

36
6,290

$430

1,169
328
643

$633

GENERAL TABLES.

197

PRINCIPAL DIVISIONS AND SUBDIVISIONS OP THE GENERAL DEPARTMENTAL SERVICE: 1911—Continued,
assigned to each, see page 20. For a text discussion of this table, see page 78.
GROUP IV.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 50,000 TO 100,009 IN 1911.
vn .—EDUCATION.

Vm.—RECREATION.

I.—GENERAL.

EL—MIS-

Total.

J
I

Libraries.

Total.

1440,352
280,390
322,386 |
644,1G9 |
428,800

118,717
22,939
11,447 1
20,445
12,137

$21,853
17.879
36,069
35,266
14,160

$2,520

689,900
384,559 !
385,962
497,914
653,492

635,452
365,632
365,262
464,936
636,317

54,448
18,927
20,700
32,978
17,175

79,015
51,554
30,879
46.599
40,359

7,968

272.387 '
371,160 1
549,9S5
352,121
285,200

259,427
361,693
535,567 1
331,441
275,297

12,960
9,462
14,418
20,680
9,903

25,217
26,670
18,649
20,941
10,747

1,018

195,518
429,918
245,806
422,763
395,497

190,144
417,045
235,183
389,936
379,383

5,374
12,873
10,623
32,827
16,114

20,424
38,448
22,537
45,528
17,017

348,095
298,428
253,805
329,946
392,632

328,260
291,928
240,002
318,946
372,737

19,835
6,500!
13,803
11,000 1
19,895

15,042
22,885
5,528
3,733 !
16,424
7,049
14,624
19,194 j
25,998
7,749
20,849
4,310
49,584
15,494
28,060

$457,069
303,329
333,833
664,614
440,937

f

Schools.

General
Educa
tional recre recreation.
parks, and
ation.
trees.

283,305 1
372,480 !
185,044 I
403,978
273,242

276,755
365,976
177,128
, 377,289
271,484

6,550
6,504
7,916
26,689
1,758

253,781
245,390
360,696 1
260,280
297,684

253,781
232,522
342.940
250,070
297,684

12,868
17,756
10,210

151,346
115,245
222,555
262,813
283,074

145,576
101,578
213,217
254,344
268,074

5,770
13,667
9,338
8,469
15,000

297,945
225,593
114,313
306,931

288,434
219,046
114,213
297,287 j

262.089
339,586
192,098
182,606

250,168
329,560
192,098
178,508

168,784
163,061
251,623
240,027

162,261
163,061
239,405
231,140

208,705
104,063
201,770
248,571

208,705
104,063
196,986
242,270

Quasi pro-1 CEIXANE- I
OU3.
ductive
park en
terprises.

$19,333
17,879
36,069 j
35,2661
14,160

$3
4,823]
191
18,589
59,933
14,174
1,977
275

71,047
51,554
30,879
41,726
40,359

4,873

24,199
26,670
18,649
20,941
10,747

338

TOO

22

20,424
38,448
22,537
45,528
17,017

577
201
1**33
6,880 '
77
7,744
41,492 j
21

14,704
22,885
5,528
3,733
16,424

1,927
2,536
113
389
952

7,049
14,624
18,494
25,998
7,749

356
107
104

!

80

Total.

Pensions
and
gratuities.

$10,365
9,606 1
3,879
3,536
21,191
9,141
9,505
7,597
6,223
23,474

$9,370
1,939
995
9,953
2,336
450 !
4,412
806

Judg
ments
and
losses.

Undis
tributed
I expenses.

$608
765
1,247
414
2,865
3,275
9,974

i2,792
8,171

4,562
4,862
12,773
6,641
8,223

691
2,400

323
1,759
1,096
1,707
2,140

3,548
703
11,677
1,499
4,400

69
70
71
72
73

8,267
24,743
11,139!
8,121
4,198

8,097
22,817
5,344
6,066
2,445

55
5,795

74
75
76
77
78

166
10,799
100
2,576

79
80
81
82
83

5,639
450
3,319
6,683

84
85
86
87
88

1,133
1,689
1,666
851
1,959

89
90
91
92
93

8,035

94
95
96
97

5,435
1,683

8,266 !

11,449
15,591
313
23,003
7,495

20,427
7,234

115
1,926
55
1,753
3,017
4,792
213
26i
2,4i2
850
805

15,143
30,083
10,667
11,574
22,337

15,143
30,083
10,667
11,574
22,337

10,000
4
30
3,941

7,973
5,916
16,252
3,758
5,321

6,324
2,094

516
2,133
14,586

9,511
6.547
100
9,694

26,025
13,3S7
31,175
11,206

26,025
12,249
26.852
11,208

8,310
119
6,298
29,327

14,618
1,554
6,453
5,470

4,871
1,304
2,428

11,921
10,026

10,994
6,886
2,920
20,135

10,994
6 8S6
2,920
20,135
6,045
3,378
11,514
48,574

79
25

229
6.753
1*483
14,031

213
5,908
1,483
3,559

i2,2l8
8,887

6,045
3,378
11,514
48,574

4,784
6,301

1,425
8,203
3,900
7,859

6,523

I

250

So
28

1,425
8,203
3,900
7,859

277

59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68

3,703
1,557
7 261
4,331
7,764

91,600

3,940
5,780
7,597
1,811
12,694

595
5,016
6,576
4,716
1,146

9,342
3,969
8,561
8,455
14,447

4,098

54'
55
56
57
58

131
5,406
10,812
14,293

103
93

M38
4,323

$387
7,667
3,114
1,294
10,824

5,253
14,613
17,388
31,801
9,317

20,849
3,400
49,584
15,494
28,060

oio

City
num
ber.

2,907
2,662

7,051
4,833
3,776
2,395

2,i48
3,690

2,897
2,112
2,831
3,475

1,429
600
1,556
465

700
1,712
250
1,137
2,795

4,527!
4,191

2,*888
2,675

98
99
100
101

16
845
4,366

6,106

1,373

5,678
2,685

102
103
104
105

1,468
900
182
2,985

106
107
108
109

86
2,395
612
1,093 1
25 1

1

II

GROUP V.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 30,000 TO 50,000 IN 1911.
$179,232
248,500
279,112
242,146
148,990

$167,614
238,468
266,742
227,466
146,990

$11,618
10,032
12,370
14,680
2,000

$9,302
17,910
52,605
14,790
1,508

190,973
147,426
310,524
205,324
123,416

186,524
143,170

199,772
116,083

4,449
4,256
22,197
5,552
7,333

9,102
3,682
38,585
31,418
13,022

192,873
152,782
261,564
174,831
227,480

186,295
152,040
240,079
169,331
211,944

6,578
742
21,485
5,500
15,536

3,342
8,542
32,824
9,247
18,245




$220

3,218
2,888
3,824

$9,0S2
17,910
62,605
14,790
1,508
9,102
3,682
35,367
28,530
9,198
3,342
8,542
32,824
9,247
18,245

$1,800
4,050

$4,694
4 401
6,353
1,291
4,070

$2,894
1,923
450
1,875

841
650

8,080

75

276

11,284
1,898
5,836
11,496
10,909

"7,*573*

15,416
140
36,709

1,631
2,779
1,943
2655
2,254

997
1,300
1,175
500

$552

4,206
8,996
3,336
920
215
605
•1,754

$351
4,430
1,545

110
111
112
113
114

3,129
1,898
1,630
2,500

115
116
117
118
119

711
1,782
428
875

120
121
122
123
124

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

198

TABLE l l . - G O V E R N M E N T A L

COST P A Y M E N T S F O R E X P E N S E S O F G E N E R A L D E P A R T M E N T S ,

BY

[For a list of the cities arranged alphabetically by states, with the number
GROUP V.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 30,000 TO 60,000 IN 1911-Continued.

I.—GENERAL GOVERNMENT.

Executive branch.

Legislative branch.
City
num
ber.

Total.
Council
and
board of
aldermen.

Clerk of
council.

Legisla
tive in.
vestigations.

Mayor.

$95
250
653

3,134

3,325

4,184
6,603
2,951

185
1,066

1,685
879
549
2,245
3,817

4,851
2,535
1,553
2,418
4,392

678
500

3,871
4,004
3,500
1,077
1,500

2,426
7,245
2,4*6
1,026

$558,222
430,476
608,888
600,079
508,143

$35,430
40,993
49,737
39,950
41,732

$166
4,469

$350

6,262

1,605

$1,9S6
1,934
3,405
1,613

130 McKeesport,Pa...
131 Flint, Mich.
132 Tampa, Fla.
133 San Diego, C a l . . . .
134 EI Paso, Tex

444,871
302,720
447,772
694,411
582,268

38,445
34,901
37,295
78,503
55,900

411
2,918
6,402

2,721
2,420
1,967

2,000
100
3,137

135 Wheeling, W . V a . .
136 Racine, w i s
137 Kalamazoo, Mien..
,
138 Superior, w i s
139 Augusta, Ga

426,039
397,688
383,771
527,300
551,508

48,103
29,845
31,155
46,352
38,031

227
4,935
4,621
6,012
2,484

1,216
951
2,581
3,908

140 Macon, Ga
141 Newton, Mass
142 Butte, Mont
143 Woonsocket, R. I .
144 Chester, Pa

419,462
981,432
679,706
354,070
283,064

32,256
59,695
50,463
33,070
29,350

2,715
1,477
4,856
3,370

2,641
1,500

Ala...
145 Mom
146 Fitchl „,
147 Dubuque, Iowa.
148 Galveston. Tex.
149 Elmira,N.Y...

423,079
589,182
391,444
426,974
442,658

42,167
34,646
32,417
29,376
49,094

460
877
3,483

2,625

2,902

3,665

2,284

1,659
3,352

1,500
400
1,005
4,471
1,870

1,100
292

Newcastle. Pa
West Hoboken, N. J.
Enoxvflle, Tenn
Hamilton, Ohio
Springfield, Mo

287,483
348,335
353,493
364,258
268,282

21,926
25,275
17,976
32,572
30,581

151
4,232
1,138
4,174
3,847

1,789
5,613

155
156
157
158
159

East
N.J..
Quincy,
Roanoke, Va

645,721
316,400
363,498
412,230
324,994

54,431
33,860
54,785
43,998
27,243

5,626
1,875
288
2,034

5,230
1,815
3,646
2,900

160 Joltet,m
161 Auburn, N . Y . . .
162 Charlotte, N . C . .
163 Taunton, Mass.,
164 Everett, Mass..,
165
166
167,
168.
169

Portsmouth. Va
Pittefleld,Mass
Quincy, Masa
Cedar Rapids, Iowa.
Oshkosh/Wis

401,215
408,837
199,103
431,238
465,131

39,348
18,904
40,034
39,250

235,006
433,560
509,223
378,491
346,823

30,588
36,716
39,281
38,195
28,341

225
1,331
844
11,466
5,684

2,095
400
900
1,200
1,653

2,100
7,940
3,730
569
3,636

1,455
2,001
3,756
1,907
300

29,797
37,967
41,627
16,870
29,055

314,555
472,685
283,126
663,178
255,096

28,409
35,017
23,754
87,098
22,063

180 Wffliamsport, Pa
181 Niagara Falls, N . Y .
182 Muskogee. OWa
183 Lima, Ohio.
184 Chelsea, Mass

289,027
498,224
313,610
263,214
617,821

185 Aurora, III
186 NewRochelle,N.Y.
187 Austin, Tex
188 La Crosse, Wis
189 Newport, Ky.
,

292,324
582,096
259,679
324,886
228,284

190
191
192
193

Orange, N . J
Lorain, Ohio
Council Bluffs, Iowa..
Lynchburg, Va




391,344
288,439
296,272
312,061

517

1,928

155
62

1,573
1,840
1,638
14,795
2,410

1,607
5,566
2,577

29,378
62,903
42,108
26,056
52,380

25
10,294
2,865
2,015

1,227
3,769
5,813
1,079

29,708
78,107
31,102
33,050
30,295

1,790
6,901

1,030
6,009

34,486
34,339
18,368
36,065

1,394

740
2,499
700

318,573
301,638
602,603
241,506
321,619

in

3,440
5,739
5,350
1,235

Perth Amboy , N . J . ,
Lansing, Mic
Pasadena, Col
,
172 Amsterdam, N . Y . ,
173 Jackson, Mich
174
175 Jamestown, N . Y . . . . .
176 San Jose, Cal
177 Decatur.Hl
178 Mount Vernon, N . Y .
179 JopUo,Mo
170

$11,091

'"i4,"S»

22,118
17,568

1,329
2,139
1,410

14,312
"MOO

150
151
152
153
154

Huntfegton, W. Va."

$1,000

Special Treasurer,
Executive] Auditor,
account
boards
or c o m p  ing and or cham m e n t and
l e v y of
and com
berlain.
troller.
auditing.
revenue.
missions.
$1,837
5,269
2,623
1,613
1,410

Salem, Mass
Lincoln, Nebr
Berkeley, Cat
Davenport, Iowa. •
Topeka,Kans

125
126
127
128
129

Financial.

Chief executive.
Total.

2,582
1,790
1,847
4,500
1,991

"305

2,490
3,633

3,075
2,801
2,118
35

3,250
1,210
2,306
620

1,570
1,0-45
1,094
1,000

1,075
1,495
1,750
1,2S6
1,300

1,725
500
2,524

1,320
3,977

350
1,976
1,743

1,023

4,389
'i5,*52S

1,098
2,656

225

"748
3,219
1,727
"50
312
"880

450
25
434

1,436
4,588
1,603
5,*S7
364

129
780

1,318

150
670
1,561

2,372
2,242
1,448

1,098
1,810

2,750
9,860
2,050
1,800
2,265

1,575
3,287
1,920
2,045

1,600
3,795
1,400
1,556

11,570

6,387
3,406

670

3,200
5,394

3,205
1,781
2,067
1,220
1,726

1,200
1,742
3,893
2,844
7

*306

3,299
3,701
6,474
1,345

$5,915
1,487
6,742
3,996
324

195
300
1,216
2,307
2,338

5,604
932
3,062
7,383
7,787

15,882
3,099
3,012
2,743

1,773
2,700
3,564
5,861
3,580

9,031
8,901
2,342
1,552

4,055
14,115
800
3,447
2,968

2,058
4,145
1,200
3,996

510
6,609
4,096
1,800
3,510

1,230

450
2,012

1,726
3,186
1,500
4,233
2,191
906

1,764
1,868
2,332
1,500

269
600
5,900
175

$2,283
8,076
4,829
4,887
1,790

100

200
180
420

1,011
1,548
2,786
1,150
1,050

2,025
3,124

9,925
975
2,253
3,580
11,413

8,552
3,516
5,437
4,150
250

1,671
3,780
2,199
6,213
4,002

1,114
3,313
1,260
4,135
6,116

1,564
2,724
2,902
1,615
1,891

925
8,349
6,148
3,877
1,786

1,223
5,522
3,739
1,471
4,279

2,343
3,825
2,945
1,212
2,942

3,846
1,634
25
1,555
530

3,065

3,085
4,315
1,277
1,292
6,055

4,540
4,125
4527
97
6,616

300
3,225

1,418
8,235
4,411
2,395
2,121

2-222

2,371

5,820
1,107

3,378
302
300

1,025
1 210
3,252

2,982
1256
3,336

GENERAL TABLES.

199

PRINCIPAL DIVISIONS AND SUBDIVISIONS OF THE GENERAL DEPARTMENTAL SERVICE: 1911-ContinuecL
tssigned to each, see page 20. For a text discussion of this table, see page 78.)
GROUP V.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 30,000 TO 50,000 IN 1911—Continued.
I.—GENEIUX GOVERNMENT—Continued.
Executive branch—Continued.
Financial—Contd.

13,001

3200
156

i,266

355

9,041
4,188
4,743
5,065
5,393

513
24
2,435

i,io9
359
432
3,094
7,176
3,344
4,955
6,085
22
36

31,350
3,639
2,100
1,371

$2,452
3,619
7,009
4,626
5,318 |

6,715
10,002
2,236
6,946
4,036

1,146
2,433
3,409
3,635
5,300

2,400
1,637
2,490
2,400

3,522
1,735
8,038
402

1,140
5,662
1,230
9,392
6,725

$1,000
1,000

2,190

224
5,262
1,572
1,551

3,459
4,752
3,478
3,932
2,803

2,164
1,063
3,857
2,765
2,003

4,847
7,278
5,975
5,534
1,071

125
3,229
2,858

4,822
7,634
4,211
3,063
12,196

3,311
2,458
2,545
2,839
3,072

3,125
1,000
4,726
6,033
1,620

1,000

2,719
12,273
7,015
3,052 j

5.777
1,200
1,250
4,657
MOO

13
75
930
1,484
545
46
1,169
223
511
443
130
970
334
280
100
70

544
79
3,240
2,209
173
320
634
10
2,095

272

519
320
809
92




3,460
921
3,083
1 500
1,167

8,799
3,955

,

700
1,500
1,500

1,752
2,017
1509
835
1,505
2,156
1,131
1,474
3,801
3,769

870
11 i
900
1

•

3,375
1,241
2,126
6,187

5,542
1,229
4,194
7,183
14,849

2,880
3,305
1,752

3,388
8,627
11,692
7,116
4,463

50

5,187
2,612
937
1,346
800

1,396
3,036
2,208
8,309
1,318

2,220
4,181
2,000
10,437
2,867 1

1,562
3,342

3,397
4,170
4,955
3,394
2,591
2,254
10,496
1,785
3,045
2,673
2,613
2,600
1,500
1,853

900
1,500 !
900
1,600

8,766
720

1,257
4,672 1
3,190
8,272
9,144

i,690
1,913
59

2,983
5,714
2,800
7,608
3,155

1,203
2,070
2,401
1,000
907

ii,608
4,668
3,600

!
$48

2,193

1,200
132
1,000
3,258

$6,461

$411
100

$608

879
811
5,006
1,535
827
3,582
1,634
78

1,752

4,362

1,100

315
i,975

1,322
1,562
301
800

1,044
4,556
3,116
183
1,828

3,547
3,589
3,714
2,079
3,261

3,035
2,443
4,094
3,595

6,258
3,157
4255
549
829

2,252

730

4,326
3,978
2,395
5,675
550

t
2,584

tii
25

264

329

239
3,864
510

1,144
6,276
1,147
1,587
1,560

6,193
6,083
1,399
2,520
2,132

3,721
4,263

5,176
1,623
1,338
1,680

675

140
141
142
143
144

i
780 !
1,080
2,400

i
2,750
600

i,666
1,649

1

150
151
152
153
154

155
1 156
157
158
159

1,703

4,637
1,015
3,854
5,088
1 918
569
6,051

420

135
136
137
138
139

145
146
147
148
149

3,800
5,136

4,462
3,162
3,696
4,106

i,276

i,i52

3,307
2,199
3,868
2,334
881

5,i33
2,639

130
131
132
133
134

$2,500

1,509
3,596
991
2,431
1,202 [

1,018
5,591
2,202
5,550
1,023

2,417
5,737

1,706

1,750
4,207
6,720 1
1,873
6,365

1

i6,7i3

672

1,324
2,000
7,081
1,414
1,482

900

$1,720

125
126
127
128
129

$3,099
4,047
3,456
5,010
3,038

6,265
U,28S

7,026
8,198
2,639
5,885
30
606
8,832

313,891
5,070
3,898
3,635
8,814

2,933
4,541
8,710
1,790
2,752

643

3,945
31

$250
5,421
2,795
3,940
3,757

135

3,945
117

5,542
3,157
4,677
2,383

Care and 1 Kent of 1
snainte- 1 leased 1
nance. 1 buildings. 1

Marshals 1
Coroner. and
sheriffs.]

2,374
3,717
1,768
4,850
4,549

317
125

458

Superior
courts.

1,657
2,275
5,114
3,914 !
291

0,421
1,474

10,085
655
2,501

Special
courts.

1,684
2,006
2,942
1,682
1,247

820
3,478

10,678
6,W8
4,082

Elections.
Justice
courts.

13,506
4,980
3,171
8,593
8,225

2,126
1,252
7,541

0,62i

Other
legal.

Other
General
general municipal
executive. courts.

1,574
1,218
1,895
4,126
3,672

4,754

5,623
2,307
600

City
num
ber.

996
385
3,499

General government 1
buildings.
1

Judicial branch.

Legal.

Collection Other
bf revenue. financial. Solicitor.

1

I

160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174

1,350
6,700

175
176
177
178
179

2,185
100

180
181
182
183
184

725

185
186
187
188
189

2,240

190
191
192
193

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

200
TABLE

11.—GOVERNMENTAL COST PAYMENTS FOR EXPENSES OF GENERAL DEPARTMENTS, BY
[For a list of the cities arranged alphabetically by states, with the number
GROUP V.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 30,000 TO 60,000 IN 1911-Continued.
m.—COKSZ&VATIOK OF HEALTH.

H.—PEOTECTION TO PEESON AND PEOPEBTY.

Fire department

City
num
ber.

Total.

General
super
vision.

Police
depart
ment.

General
conduct
of depart
ment.

Water.

Inspec
Militia Register
of deeds tion
and ar [and
serv
mortal ice,!
mories. gages.

126
127
128
129

Salem, Mass.......
Lincoln, Nebr
Berkeley, Cal
Davenport, Iowa..
Topeka,Kans

1107,479
63.991
94,816
126,384
113,387

$55,283
16,726
31 927
40,966
30,133

$48,350
46,843
48,297
52,964
62,571

130
131
132
133
134

McKeesport, Pa...
~ t,Mteh
Flint,
1
Tampa, Fla..
San Diego, Cal.
El Paso, Tex...

102,536
51,734
135,729
127,060

54,861
16,336
60,840
69,941
57,168

46,162
24,878
49,726
82,536
48,322

135
136
137
138
139

Wheeling, W.Va.
Radne~Wis
Kalamazoo, Mich.
Superior, Wis.,
Augusta, Ga.

120,007
81,233
81,267
143,151
158,668

49,732
26,634
28,792,
46,015
76,021 *

68,904
38,146
50,918
65,729
75,200

140
141
142
143
144

Macon, Ga
Newton, Mass
Butte, Mont
Woonsocket, R. I .
Chester, Pa

169,135
159,035
188,436
102,404
50,209

70,017
88,819
81,721
40,078
25,424

75,855
62,323
72,136
41,171
16,702

145
146
147
148
149

Montgomery, Ala.,
Fitchburg, Mass...
Dubuque, Iowa...
Galveston, Tex....
Elmira,N.Y

141,851
101,783
83,110
126,317
97,746

68,090
43,187
35,529
57,377
37,320

69,885
53,212
45,036
45,455

14,000

318

160
151
152
153
154

New Castle, Pa
WestHoboken,N.J.
Knoxvftle, Tenn
Hamilton, Ohio
Springfield, Mo

51,607
79,770
122,586
93,049
65,925

23,430
53,423
44,687
47,393
23,113

24,636
24,076
75,676
41,014
29,720

1,954
930

1,033
8S4
2,223
232
635

155
156
157
158
159

. 'range,
Quincy, 111.
Roanoke, Va
Lexington, Ky
,
Huntington, 1V. Va.

116,371
80,095
94,962
108,918
43,421

58,524
25,736
44,000
41,396
21,491

53,697
40,661
44,622
36,615
12,107

160
161
162
163
164

JoIiel,Ill
Auburn, N. Y....
Charlotte, N. C...
Taunton, Mass...
Everett, Mass—

40,547

89,911
40,579
104,573
84,553

42,139
42,613
19,038
46,255
38,819

165
166
167
168
169

Portsmouth, Va..
Pittsfield.Mass..
Quincy, Ma
Cedar Riaplds,
' Iowa.
Oshkosh,/Wis

58,865
73,461
85,386
68,502
73,540

170 Perth Amboy, N . J .
171 Lansing, Mich
172 Pasadena, Cal
173 Amsterdam, N . Y . . .
174 Jackson, Mich

50,556
50,465
79,017
41,832
67,257

93,270

1,270

19,141
50,991
39,994

500
13,410
5,625
29,811
6,225

1,451
160

33,542
46,285
36,307
32,478
53,195

554
22,094

19,704
42,236
35,387
19,982
58,197

185
186
187
188

Aurora, HI
NewRocheIle,N.Y..
Austin, Tex
La Crosse, Wis
Newport, Ky

89,817
39,649
72,621
47,140

25,284
36,800
20,168
23,023
32,046

33,407
16,007
49,298
14,498

47,051
32,506
22,737
39,102

42,090
32,063
24,465
43,486

$29,726
4,210
3,323
5,029
8,094

$21,803
2,191
2,748
4,804
3,182

$7,273
1,659

1,513

5,837
1,400
4,224
6,463
13,427

1,016
85
1,159
3,339
4,188

123

$650
360
575

4,912

1,371
1,623
1,456
1,560
2,250

64
71
2,033
3,126

4,138
2,502
8,823
13,130
16,450

4,136
2,245
4,759
9, SOS
9,162

2
257
3,314
2,894
7,177

2,447
2,902
5,400
1,462
1,567

7,089
4,659
4,042
393
293

4,710
17,079
9,925
2,930
4,612

4,462
5,935
6,844
735
4,052

243
7,844
3,081
1,895

3,300

3,534
2,042
1,155

192
1,062
525
2,272
653

17,292
17,196
3,162
8,185
16,017

14,931
7,182
3,162
4,896
3,929

1,911
9,189

450

554
457

3,216
3,838
8,373
3,545
3,182

2,340
3,088
5,787
3,545
2,418

"*764'

900
2SS
715
596

6,986
311
7,063
5,431
1,127

5,310
311
5,697
2,075
1,610

1,366
3,356
117

3,077
1,340

3,344
4,292
1,940
8,460
7,473

3,344
3,722
1,670
5,966
4,204

570
270
1.C94
2,276

6,205
4,667
16,070
4,546
1,444

5,417
1,890
2,625
3,601
1,260

788
2,318
12,945
332
184

1,023

5,245
1,436
7,359
4,803
2,881

4,645
500
4,683
1,974
1,677

2,829
85

1,020
780
427
3,432
1,190

2,958
3,969
552
9,183
1,147

2,108
2,885
228
6,181
864

702
283

4,114
2,059

45
630
210

10,896

259

3,021
9,014
4,279
1,555
15,626

3,021
4,423
2,993
1,139
3,798

2,051
4,140
1,010
300
342

1,601
1,372
2,464

1,908
3,048
2,062

1,015
240
501
1,988

2,750

2,658
1,400
2,400
1,551
3,992
3,411
3,081
1,200
1,005

645
2,839
1,200
5,845

17,980
12,527

Conservatlon
of child
life.

7,175
765
1,3S2

1,436
35
6,120
900
1,720

14,098

$861
422
2,798
300
944

1,140

4,325
1,5SS
195

17,825

2,666

TotaL

44
U,6S0
7,888

5,108

941

Preven
tion and,
treatment]
of com*
munlcablodis-

General
conduct
of health
depart
ment.

6,903
1,485
5,383
11,365
22,615

500
530

12,160

12,000
4,623

53,845
115,359
73,963
52,460
125,338




11,562

24,025
55,009
33,810
29,225
18,495

Wniiamsport, Pa....
Niagara Falls, N . Y .
Muskogee, Okla
Lima, Ohio
Chelsea, Mass

254

150
2,250
865

20,411
34,787
24,166
59,992
28,512

180
181
182
183
184

2,000
332

25,137
19,300
6,223

15,533
28,&tS
45,077
24,630
42,072

58,101
99,238
59,633
116,474
60,724

92,064
67,857
49,765
84,576

2,071

32,885
21,582
26,570
15,998
22,442

Jamestown, N. Y
San Jose, Cal
,
Decatur, HI
Mount Vernon, N. Y.,
Joplin,Mo

36

27,814
11,727

$1,511
6,934
4,198
2,639

14,766

25,267
33,195
43,330
35,079
32,662

175
176
177
178
179

190 Orange,N.J
191 Lorain, Ohio
192 Council Bluffs, Iowa...
193 I Lynchburg, Va

10,520
17,908
3,115
12,300

28,295
35,914
38,972
30,672

100

1,200

$1,474
$4,860
27,956
17,100

Other
protec
tion to
person
and
property.

1,551
1,062
702
1,250

» Includes inspection of factories, tenements, boilers, wires, lights, weights and measures, etc.

1,319
4977
1,442
4,542
3,373 |

712
3200
1,442
3,911
2,301

6,918
3,977
1,838
5,557

4,318
2,991
1,833
5,190

1,563

750
428
121

300
530

3,289
7,083
621
2,586

255
750

1,676

800
993
459
500
613
600
"1*918

1,084
324
2,300

4,591
956
416

10,928

900

247
1,003

360
769
50
1,000

581
72

2,600
936
*367

GENERAL TABLES.

201

PRINCIPAL DIVISIONS AND SUBDIVISIONS OP THE GENERAL DEPARTMENTAL SERVICE: 1911—Continued,
assigned to each, see page 20. For a text discussion of this table, see page 78.].
GROUP V.-CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 30,000 TO 60,000 IN 1911-Contimied.
T.—HIGHWAYS.

IV.—SANITATION, OB PROMOTION 0 7 CLEANLINESS.

Total.

126,295
22,741
27,657
55,317
22,351 1

Public
Sewers Refuse col laundries,
Other
wash*
and
and houses, sanita
sewage lection
disposal.
tion.
and
con
disposal.
venience
stations.
$11,724
7,268
1930
15 197
1,808

$14,027
13,498
24,227
39,641
17,284

3,767

$238
555

$306
1,420
1,500 i
479
3,259

$74,692
49,660
79,477 1
90,417 I
55,071

1,554

44,133
36,435
83,653
116,368
118,032

2,676

42,036
52,319
30,549
78,909
91,582

1,478

30,142
4,508
78,507
42,960
41,215

4,536
15,990
12,682

24,821
4500
68,403
26,970
28,533

38,834
21,020
20,006
16,921 1
31,083

4,102
3,813
7,034
10,593
4,1S2

33,199
15,589
12,748
6,323
19,623

1,533
1,618
1,124

23,485
82,397
66,792
17,050
18,376

2,045
37,083
4,513
12,171
3,472

16,190
45,314
60,442
4,879
14,539

5,250

32,777
33,131
12,547
49,653
18,189

316
11,308
6,003
10,213
8,129

32,461
21,823
6,532
36,975
10,000

13,045
20,478
23,825
47,533
7,029
64,040
16,769
21,458
29,901
14,520

3,101
1,536
325
2,970
1,715

9,546
18,942
22,420
43,843
5,314

18,479
3,876
3,391
788
1,374

45,561
11,873
21,067
27,433
13,146

26,296
28)248
43,852
21,418
29,356

2,071
5,416
4,639
6,283
13,144

23,015
22,832
13,910
15,025
16,129

36,632
20,782
35,212
27,500
9,582

16,097
12,380
12, GOO
4,839
2,052

19,535
8,402
22,306
22,661
7,254

32,899
32,231
37,739
21,026
12,596

681
7,482
5,514
5,234
2,339

32,218
23,849
31,850
14,892
8,908

10,777
26,406
12,509
60,819 1
21,053

1,635
7,207
912
20,562
7,099

17,422
18,277
11,597
38,457
13,604

10,426
66,404 |
27,209
13,113 1
33,350

565
3,554

9,861
62,850
20,754
9,596
18,060

20,489
62,575
15,050
8,510
19,330
29,690 !
16,633 !
17,204 I
26,134

2,018
13,140
3,191
11,461

i,474
698
7,793
3,683
11,166
3 124




5,563

$8,681
1,434
577
14,513
205

7,705
10,584
25,426
67,856
71,502

317
4,613
11,361

i,750
9,322
4,949
1,872
1,200

28,797
49,941
11,452
34,572 1
4,935!

3,976

1,837 |

55,676
149,942
87,206
68,404
35,173

12
2,610

57,747
141,477
77,274
49,193
66,007

3,726
183

29,881
35,337
35,376
14,726
18,064

398
1,080
720
1,020
1,680
1,210
25,303
50
83

37,624
20,345
62,503
7,822
40,099
120,656
30,715
44,561
55,185
138,181
72,029
74,634
27,793
46,563
48,383

276

37,068
71,492
89,933
42,107
58,223

900
179
900
1,349

30,166
31.30S
99,883
41,775
44)427

1,000
300

196

2,593

$13,738
18,480
29,809
18,225
6,368

1,341
6,962
1 434 I
4,899 1
1,960

365

60

$2,626 1
4,237
12,315
1,388

12,318
9,390
7,252'
39,556
50,497

7,278

55

Total.

Care and
and mainte Preven
General Care
mainte
tion of
adminis nance of nance of
street
other
tration. roadways. highway
dust.
structures.

1,200

1,390
1,950
i,920
.

50

Moo

;
1

2,969
2,149
2,124
1,600

itt !
1,235

4,657
928
1,300

1,800
350

40,516
73,961
32,522
116,243
17,649

2,548
1,500
2,700

645
1,499
2,150

34,630
54,849
26,887
32,192
50,934

1,800
2,963

1,412 1
2,626 1
179

720
922

16,890
51,029
14,524
6 554
18,632

408
85
526
482

44,784
73,930
41,346
39,390
21,199

21,897
11,740
6,038
20144

1,215

48,938
43,600
35,765
41,131

2,866

i,050
[

474

800

3,'479 !
3,299
970
781
17,726
1,941
8,067
5,321

10,020
2,213
27,698
7,050
12,711
51,554
7,587
24,031
10,063 1
119,292 1
34,512
27,785
8,401
22,809
10,926

717
265
3,193
772
718

16,167
26,657
40,015
7,984 j
24,576

1,745
4,726
5,269
7458
5,039

3,706
15,970
37,019
19,448
19,573 1

6,555
3,918 \
8,215
2,091

7,507 '
27,652 j
2,765
53,779
15,475

3,650
2,265
5,793
5,964
1,124

13,288
9,378 I
4,433 [
12,949
13,723

100
5,335
701
469
1,854

17,408
14,780
20,782
16,860
4,894

3,150
1,071
3,293
706
30

12,419
14,305
10,286
14,223

265
2,873
4,206
3,974

1,772
3,976
11
V3
4,464
4,153
7,556
1,331

* Includes undistributed highway expenses.

j
Other
care of
streets, 1 Street
roads,
lighting.
and
alleys.*

$9,943

$3,000

2i,995
4,116
283

1,642
25,775

$39,330
23,661
21,441
39 356
21,052

i2,479
19,611
ii,935

26,736!
23,250
19,168
19,724i
33,385

370
412
671

4,824
3,608
22,972
37,622
6,480 !

7,086
7,147

9,192
12,516

2,843

27,085
35,374
27,003
23,602
39,647

1,956

19,582
5,545
5,304

1,204

i6,287
9)491

957
1,664

i6,432
8,356
881
9,201

3,29i
2,674

2,333 !
8,117
13,316

1,575
666

2,764

920
1,274

8,620

i,868

1,057

4,494
360

i,is7

787
2,485
377
^250
2,500

37,279
38
59
545

22,250

2,500

30,084
34,039
19,044
2,830
23,005

1

130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159

348

160
161
162
163
164

366
1,500

125
126
127
128
129

l

J

1,143

2,371

22,552

3,236 i

9,502

163
412
1,083
9,235

24,878
15,336
31,617

16,513
26,242
33,619
22,178
19,377

935
1,065
3,967
2,399

336

[

30

i

382

48,466
21,197
16,496
39,566
17,716

1,054

$3,459
1,418

8,443

22,903
52,622 1
21,770 i
19,696
27,691

298
990

557

6,765
2,680
3,804

$250

33,435
11,947
46,866
24,997
26,919

9,29i

143
17,428

City
Repair num
and con ber.
Water struction
ways* I for com- I1
pensation.1

165
! 166
167
168
169
1 170
171
172
173
174

39,775
11,452
20,398

1,193
797

21,628
25,116
15,635
41,861

175
176
1,662
177
2,738 j 178
179

19,442
36,253
17,715
18,774
24,260

180
181
182
182
184

22,617
49,208
14,412
16,874
16,275
31,760
22,524
20,473
19,093

1,804

235
480

197
89

3,538
2,3i3

185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193

FINANCIAL STATISTICS OF CITIES.

202

TABLE l l * - G O V E R N M E N T A L COST PAYMENTS FOR EXPENSES OF GENERAL DEPARTMENTS, BY
[For a list of the cities arranged alphabetically by states, with the number
GROUP V.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF 30,000 TO 60,000 IN 1911—Continued.
VI.—CHARITIES, HOSPITALS, A N D CORRECTIONS.

crrf*
Total.

$40,958
1,207
919
171
4,283

125
126
127
128
129
130
131 "Flint Mioh
132
133
134
135
130 Rarfna Win
137
133
139

General
super
vision.

$2,491

Poor in
Outdoor
poor relief. institu
tions.

$11,478
864
199
171

1,631
29,003
33,845

3,252
3,073

10,072

2,795

7,193
17,058
4,013
1,840
71,049

- -1

160 Joliet. Ill
161 1 Auburn, N. Y
162 Charlotte, N. C
163
164

4,343
27,928
97
25,947
14,097

165
166 Pittsfield, Mass
167
168
169 Ofrfikflish, «rfo

8,064
21,376
20,693
358
13,472

170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179

10,492

8,076
7,277
7,193

1,814
232

3,381

653

6,451
3,967
3,350
941
416

331

1,769
3,034
1,131
1,574
1,268

1,125
800
1,313

20,073
21,171
15,497
8,401
27,417

1,200
1,946

185
186 NewRochelle,N.Y
187
188 Lacrosse, Wis
18
Full text of Financial Statistics of Cities : Financial Statistics of Cities Having a Population of Over 30,000 : 1911

FRASER
