The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
STATISTICS 0FCITIEI
HAVING A POPULATIgi
OF OVER
30,000:
iW
(SnUege of AgritttltJire
At Qfornell Iniwraitg
Hatrt
atljara, JT.
f
3 1924 052 144 064
The
original of this
book
is in
the Cornell University Library.
There are no known copyright
restrictions in
the United States on the use of the
text.
http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924052144064
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND LABOR
BUREAU OF THE CENSUS
E.
DANA DURAND, DIRECTOR
SPECIAL REPORTS
STATISTICS OF CITIES HAVING
A POPULATION OF OVER
30,000:
1907
WASHINGTON
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
1910
CONTENTS.
TEXT.
Page.
Introduction
11-15
Objects of the census investigation
11
'
Differences in local governmental organizations
11
General and departmental accounts of governments
Accounts of proprietors and trustees
Differences in general governmental accounts
Modem administrative uses of accounts
New systems of American governmental accounts
Comparable statistics, how secured
Need for uniformity in city accounts and reports
Need for correct methods of conducting municipal busines."
Need for common terminology in accounting
Accounting terminology
Accounts and accounting
Accounts
Accounting
Assets, liabilities, and revenue accumulations
11
11
,
.
..
12
12
13
13
14
14
15
15-35
15
15
15
;
15
Assets
15
Classification of assets
16
Current assets
Invested assets
16
Fixed
16
assets.
17
'.
Asset accounts
17
18
Liabilities
Classification of liabilities
18
Debts
Current debts
18
Funded
18
:
or fixed debts
18
Floating debts
'.
.
19
Trusts
Governmental trust
Nominal liabilities
liabilities
19
.
19
19
Proprietary interests
Classification of proprietary interests
Interests of beneficiaries
Revenue accumulations
Classification of
20
21
.".
,
of goveijiments
21
revenue accumulations
21
Governmental reserves
Expenses, interest, outlays, and revenues
Expenses
22
22
22
22
23
General expenses
Commercial expenses
23
23
23
23
23
23
Interest
Outlays
Investments
Storehouse supplies
Revenue charges and revenue deductions
Revenue expenditures
Revenues in private corporate business
Governmental revenues
Taxes
23
24
24
'
25
Privileges
Fees and charges
18
25
,
25
Revenue
(3)
,
CONTENTS.
4
Accounting terminology
Payments and
Payments
—Continued.
Page.
25
receipts
25
Receipts
25
Real or actual payments
Real or actual receipts
26
26
Nominal payments and receipts
Ordinary and extraordinary payments and receipts
Accounting summaries
Importance of accounting summaries
Summaries in accounts for proprietorship
Summaries in private fiduciary accountinir
Summaries of governmental business
Summaries of governmental expenditures
Summaries of governmental receipts
Summaries of payments and receipts
Summary
27
28
28
28
29
29
30
30
31
32
budgetary expenditures
Summaries of revenues and expenses
Miscellaneous summaries
Summaries of current funds and accounts
Summary of investments, properties, and accumulations
General governmental summaries
Names of governmental summaries
The economic and sanitary supervision of city milk supplies (Moses N. Baker, C. E.)
Need and underlying principles of milk supervision
What Table 56 aims to show
Milk ordinances in general
General and special features of city ordinances and state legislation
Tuberculin-test requirements
of
33.
33
33
34
34
35
35
36-45
36
36
38
38
41
Description of general tables
46-126
Organization and methods of police departments (Richard Sylvester')
96
TEXT TABLES.
—
Table I. Summary of payments to and receipts from the public other than those for meeting governmental costs: 1907
Table II. Summary of service transfers: 1907
Table III. Summary of interest transfers: 1907
Table IV. Summary of investment transfers: 1907
Table V. Summary of payments for revenue expenditures and of receipts from revenues, 1902 to 1907, with per cent of increase
over 1902
Payments to other civil divisions and to private associations on account of the insane 1907
Table VI
Table VII. Estimated payments for expenses of schools in specified cities: 1907
Table VIII. Payments by Massachusetts cities to the state on specified accounts; 1907
Table IX. Payments by Massachusetts cities to the state on account of metropolitan waterworks: 1907
Table X.— Payments for expenses of specified public service enterprises included in the column "all other public service enterprises " in Table 7 1907
:
Payments for outlays, paid or payable from special assessments included in the column "for all other purposes" in
Table
Table 9: 1907
Table XII.— Payments for outlays for public service enterprises included in the column "all other" in Table 9: 1907
Table XIII.— Per cent distribution of receipts from general revenues in cities of specified states: 1907
Table XIV.— Variation in per cent distribution of receipts from general revenues for the cities of specified states: 1907
Table XV. Specified classes of special property and business taxes in Massachusetts cities: 1907
Table XVI.— Specified classes of special property and business taxes in New Jersey cities: 1907
Table XVII. Specified classes of special property and business taxes in New York cities: 1907
Table XVIII.— Receipts from revenues of specified public service enterprises included in the column "all other public service
enterprises " in Table 17 1907
Debts
reported in Table 25 as issued for miscellaneous purposes: 1907
XIX.
Table
—
—
—
—
.
—
—
—
—
:
;
XL—
—
—
:
—
Table XX. —Amount of loans reported at exceptional rates of interest:
1907
XXI.—Assessed
valuations of property subject to general property taxes in divisions of the city government having two or
and amount of levies for each taxing district or class of property: 1907
Table XXII.— Assessed valuations of property subject to special property taxes in cities having two or more rates of levy, with
Table
more
rates of levy, with rates
rates aind
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
XXIII.—Assessed
amount
of levies for
each class of property: 1907
XXVI.— Per cent distribution of receipts from general revenues: 1907
XXVII.—Franchise taxes included in the column "taxes " in Table 40:
XXIX.—Number
52
53
54
55
56
5g
gg.
59
60
61
62
63
63
7q
77
77
79
81
:
82
.'
1907
service corporations in Wisconsin cities, included un,der "licenses" in Table 40: 1907.
of specified police to 100 miles of streets: 1907
XXVIII.—Taxes on earnings of public
49
49
81
bank stock and mortgages in New York cities, with amount of taxes levied 1907
XXIV.— Outlays in 1907 compared with increase in valuation of properties during 1907
XXV.—Comparative statement of per capita payments and receipts for meeting governmental costs: 1905 to 1907
valuation of
48
49
86
89
94
94
99
CONTENTS.
5
Page.
—
—
—
—
Table XXX. Total arrests in specified cities showing decrease in number of arrests: 1907 and 1905
Table XXXI
Arrests for drunkenness in specified cities showing decreases in number of arrests on this ground: 1907 and 1905
Table XXXII. Arrests for drunkenness in specified cities showing increases in number of arrests on this ground: 1907 and 1905.
Table XXXIII. Comparative statement of rank according to population and according to number of arrests in proportion to popu.
.
Group
summary, by
lation for cities of
Table
XXXIV.—Comparative
I:
and geographic
divisions, of arrests per 10,000 inhabitants in cities of over
30,000 population: 1907
Table
Table
Table
XXXV. —Per cent distribution, for groups of cities, of arrests of females by principal offenses:
104
105
1907
XXXVI. —Juveniles appearing before the court in specified cities: 1907 and 1905
XXXVII — General disposition of cases of juveniles appearing before the court during the year,
-
classified
.
according to
106
number
previous appearances before the court, in specified cities: 1907
cent distribution by general disposition of case of juveniles appearing before the court during the year, classified according to number of previous appearances before the court: 1907 and 1905
of
Table
103
103
1907
states
102
102
107
XXXVIII. — Per
—
Table XXXIX. Comparative statement of the number of retail liquor dealers, by groups of cities: 1907 and 1905
Table XL. Increase from 1905 to 1907 in the number of retail liquor dealers in specified cities
Table XLI
Decrease from 1905 to 1907 in the number of retail liquor dealers in specified cities
Table XLII. Comparative statement of the number of retail liquor dealers, by geographic divisions: 1907 and 1905
Table XLIII. Rates of state and county licenses required in specified cities: 1907
Table XLIV. Per cent of increase or decrease in character of paving: 1905 to 1907
Table XLV. Number of cities, by groups, reporting agencies for street sprinkling: 1907
Table XLVI. Number of men employed in street sprinkling and area sprinkled in specified cities: 1907
Table XLVII. Number of cities, by groups, using specified kinds of street lights: 1907
Table XL VIII. —Number of street lights by specified kinds in 154 cities: 1907 and 1905
Table XLIX. Number of permits and proposed expenditures for new buildings in 97 cities: 1907 and 1905
List of city numbers
107
108
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
108
109
.
109
Ill
121
123
123
124
124
126
127
GENERAL TABLES.
Table
Table
Table
1.
2.
3.
— Date of incorporation, population, and area of
cities
having an estimated population
—Payments, receipts, and cash balances, by divisions and funds:
of 30,000 or
over on June
1,
1907.
—Total payments and receipts, classified as payments or receipts to or from the public, and transfer payments and receipts,
together with cash balances and aggregates: 1907
Table 4. Payments and receipts for meeting governmental costs by principal classes, 1907; comparative summary, 1902 to 1907.
Table 5. Payments for general expenses and special service expenses: 1907
Table 6. Payments for expenses of municipal service enterprises: 1907
Payments for expenses of invested funds and of public service enterprises 1907
Table 7
Table 8.— Statistics of interest on debt: 1907,
Table 9 .—Payments for outlays 1907
Table 10. Payments and receipts on account of debt: 1907
Table 11. Receipts from general revenues: 1907
:
Table 12. Receipts from commercial revenues: 1907
Table 13. Receipts from revenues of municipal service enterprises, with value of plant at close of year, and costs of services ren.
131
134
1907
—
—
—
—
'.
:
:
—
—
—
—
dered: 1907
Table
— Receipts from departmental services: 1907
Table 15. — Receipts from special assessments and privileges: 1907
Table 16.— Receipts from interest: 1907
Table 17. — Receipts from revenues of public service enterprises: 1907
together with receipts from sales
other civil divisions and in correction
real
and receipts
Table 18. — Payments
property, from insurance, and on account of depreciation: 1907
Table 19. — Payments, receipts, and balances of private trust funds and accounts: 1907
nonmunicipal uses 1907
Table 20. — Payments, receipts, and balances of public trust funds
municipal uses 1907
Table 21 — Payments, receipts, and balances of public trust funds
Table 22. — Payments, receipts, and balances of investment funds: 1907
Table 23. —Payments, receipts, and balances of sinking funds: 1907
Table 24. —Gross and net debt outstanding at close of year, total and per capita, together with changes during year in debt and
sinking fund assets 1907
year, classified by purpose of issue: 1907
Table 25. — Funded debt and special assessment loans at close
14.
;
of error,
for,
to,
for
for
.
:
:
of
Funded debt and special assessment loans at close of year, classified by year of issue 1907
Table 26
Funded debt and special assessment loans at close of year, classified by year of maturity 1907
Table 27
Table 28. Funded debt, special assessment loans, and revenue loans at close of year, classified by rate of interest: 1907
Table 29. Assessed valuation of property, bases of assessment, and taxes levied: 1907
Table 30. Value at close of year of properties employed or held for specified purposes: 1907
Table 31.— Value of public improvements: 1907
Table 32. Per capita payments and receipts for meeting governmental costs, by principal classes: 1907
Table 33. Per cent distribution, by principal classes, of payments and receipts for meeting governmental costs: 1907
Table 34. Payments for general and special service expenses, total and per capita, 1907; comparative summary, 1902 to 1907
Table 35. Per cent distribution of payments for general and special service expenses: 1907
:
.
:
—
—
220
222
228
234
246
250
256
259
260
272
275
278
of
:
.
158
164
172
284
287
289
290
294
296
302
308
314
320
326
330
336
342
345
348
352
360
CONTENTS.
6
Page.
Table 36.—Payments for outlays, total, and per capita: 1907
Table 37.—Receipts from general revenues, total and per capita, 1907; comparative summary, 1902 to 1907
Table 38. Costs and receipts for schools, total and per capita; 1907
<
Table 39. Statistics of water-supply systems: 1907
Table 40. ^Receipts from public service corporations: 1907
Table 41.—Electric light and power works, and gas works, owned and operated by cities: 1907
Table 42. Number of employees of police department: 1907
Table 43.—Number of police in proportion to population, land area, and length of improved streets, together with pay
363
366
—
—
—
369
372
378
386
—
388
of officers
394
and patrolmen: 1907
Table 44.—Patrolmen classified by grade: 1907
Table 45. Oi^anization of police patrol, relief, and reserve: 1907
Table 46. Equipment of, and appropriation for, police department: 1907
Table 47. ^Arrests classified by offense, together with the per cent distribution of arrests by offenses: 1907
Table 48. ^Arrests for specified offenses per 10,000 inhabitants and per policeman: 1907
Table 49. ^Arrests of females, classified by offense 1907
Table 50.—Arrests of children, classified by offense: 1907
Table 51. Juvenile courts and results of trials of juveniles: 1907
Table 52.—Dealers in, manufacturers of, and bottlers of, intoxicating liquors, classified by type of liquor license held, together with
annual license rate: 1907
Table 53. Employees, appropriations, and expense of fire department, fire alarms, fires, and property losses by fires, and fire
—
—
—
—
—
—
:
—
insurance paid: 1907
Table
purposes: 1907
—Water supply and equipment
Table
—Inspectors and appropriations health department: 1907
Table 56.—Milk and dairy inspection: 1907
Table
—Collection and disposal garbage and other refuse: 1907
Table
—Length and classes sewers: 1907
Table
—^Area and length
and number and character
steam railroad crossings: 1907
—^Payments selected highway expenses and highway outlays,
and average: 1907
Table
'.
407
410
416
419
422
424
428
434
54.
for fire
440
55.
for
446
449
57.
of
58.
of
59.
60.
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
397
400
61.—Street
62.— Street
63.—Street
of streets,
of
total
for
for
cleaning: 1907
452
458
464
470
474
480
484
sprinkling: 1907
lighting: 1907
—Average number of specified kinds of street lights to 100 miles
—^Municipal almshouses and hospitals: 1907...
66.—Public libraries of 5,000 volumes or over: 1907
67. —School and city institutional
1907
68. — Public parks and other public grounds: 1907
69.—Playgrounds: 1907
70. —^Baths, bathing beaches, and zoological parks and collections: 1907
71. —^Building permits issued 1907
64.
of streets:
1907
65.
libraries:
:
492
494
496
498
500
503
505
507
APPENDIX.
UNIFORM SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING FOR WATER-SUPPLY ENTERPRISES.
Introduction and definitions
Technical terms employed in balance sheet accounts
Technical terms employed in revenue and expense accounts
System of uniform accounts
Tentative list of balance sheet accounts
Instructions for asset accounts
Instructions for liability accounts
Instructions for proprietary interest accounts
Balance sheets and their preparation
Tentative list of revenue and expense accounts
Instructions for revenue accounts
Instructions for expense accounts
511
511
515
517
519
521
529
530
532
533
534
536
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND LABOR,
Bureau of the Census,
WasJdngton, D. C, February 11, 1910.
Sir:
I have the honor to transmit herewith the annual report on statistics of cities having a population of
over 30,000 in 1907, this being the sixth 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 are analyzed and so presented as to show the costs of conducting the city's business both
for the whole city and for its important departments, the revenue collected and debt incurred for meeting these
costs, ,and such other transactions as are of interest to students of municipal affairs.
The extension of municipal
activities and the rapid increase in the cost of city government make these statistics of great importance at the
present time. Accompanying the financial statistics, the report presents a thorough 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 financial terms.' An appendix to the main portion of the report contains a
suggested uniform system of accounting for water-supply systems. The desirability of uniform accounts for
these imiportant municipal enterprises is being recognized by an increasing number of public officials. Material
assistance in the preparation of the proposed accounts for water-supply systems was rendered by Mr. Albert H.
Wehr, vice-president of the Baltimore County Water and Electric Company.
In addition to the financial statistics which have been presented annually, this report contains a large
amount of data on the number of employees and on the equipment of the more important city departments,
and on sewers, streets, and other public improvements. Statistics on these subjects have been published
every second year. For this report Dr. Moses N. Baker, associate editor of the Engineering News, has ptepared a discussion of the economic and sanitary supervision of city milk supplies, together with an analysis
of the data on milk inspection collected by the agents of the Bureau of the Census.
This report was prepared under the direction of Mr. Le Grand Powers, chief statistician in chaise of the
compilation of statistics of cities. Acknowledgment is made of the efficient work performed by Mr. Hart
Momsen, former chief of division; Mr. H. P. Childers, in charge of the office review of schedules; Mr. E. H.
Maling, in charge of analysis of tables and text work; and Mr. C. H. Wright, in charge of tabulation.
.
Very
respectfully.
O^yy^A^iXj
Hon. Charles Nagel,
Secretary of Commerce and Labor.
V^ U^JyU/[y\^cl^^
Director.
(7)
STATISTICS OF CITIES:
1907
STATISTICS OF CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF OVER
1907.
30,000:
FINANCIAL STATISTICS.
INTRODUCTION.
Objects of the census investigation.
—In
its financial
Bureau of the Census seeks to
present in a comparable form the following data
relating to the financial transactions and conditions
of municipalities: The total and per capita costs of
government and the similar costs of maintaining specified pubhc services, such as those furnished by the
schools, or by the police or fire department the total
costs of constructing and maintaining sewers, streets,
etc., and the average costs per standard unit of work
performed; the total and per capita revenue derived
from all sources and from each specified source; and
the proportion of the total revenue derived from each
source, and of the total expenditures made for each
statistics of cities, the
;
object or purpose.
To
Differences in local governmental organizations.
attain the objects mentioned, consideration must be
given to the great differences which exist in the organi-
—
zation of American cities for purposes of local
self-
In some cities, practically all municipal
activities are administered by a city government having one executive head and a single set of financial
officers, the various departments of municipal activity
in such cases being subject to one control or supervision and all persons engaged therein receiving their
compensation through the same channel. In other
cities, the administration of municipal functions is distributed among a number of more or less independent
but correlated branches or bodies, of which the one
performing the most important functions is usually
government.
spoken of as the
city corporation.
The
activities of
this "city corporation," however, do not include all
public activities that may properly be said to belong
to the government of the city, or of the community
constituting the city; its payments do not include all
payments authorized by the
citizens for the purpose
of securing exclusive benefits for the people of the city
and at their sole expense; its debts do not include all
public obligations for which the citizens are responsible;
and
its
receipts
do
not
include
all
receipts
derived
from municipal
activities
within the
city
limits.
—
—
The government of the city that is, of the community constituting the city for which data must be
obtained in order to compile comparable statistics of
financial transactions and conditions, is not limited to
the
"city
includes
all
corporation,"
as
above
described,
but
corporations, organizations, commissions,
boards, and other authorities through which the people
of the city exercise any privilege of local self-govern-
ment, or by reason of which they enjoy the exclusive
benefits of any governmental function.
The Census
financial statistics of cities accordingly include data
obtained from all the organizations and authorities
mentioned.
—
General and departmental accounts of governments.
The accounts of American states and of the "city corporation" of the larger municipalities are readily sepa-
rable into two groups: (1) The accounts kept by the
general fiscal officers, such as those called treasurers,
auditors, or comptrollers, for the state or city as a
whole; and (2) those kept by the executive officers of
the several divisions of the government for their
departments, bureaus, or offices. The accounts last
mentioned differ radically from those kept by the fiscal
officers first referred to,
and no description
ment concerning accounts belonging
is
of or state-
to the first group
applicable to those included in the second; hence in
any discussion of governmental accounts the two
groups should be carefully differentiated, and statements concerning governmental accounts should specifically set forth the group to which reference is made.
To facilitate this differentiation accounts kept by the
treasurer, auditor, or comptroller for the state or city
as a whole are here called general accounts, and those
kept solely for or by individual departments, bureaus,
or offices are called departmental accounts.
Accounts of proprietors and trustees. The accounts
ordinarily used in private business at the present time
are of two distinct types, according to the nature of
—
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
12
in others, addi-
the business for which they are devised and installed.
eral accounts are those of the treasurer
The most common type is that employed by corporate
and individual enterprises which are conducted primarily for profit or gain, and whose accounts are rec-
tional general accounts are kept by the comptroller or
by whatever other officer exercises the duties of a
comptroller or auditor: In the great majority of the
and
the latter class, the books of the comptroller
are in some of their essentials the same as those of the
treasurer, and include accounts with the treasurer,
ords of the rights or interests,
losses
liabilities, gains,
the proprietors; while the other type of
of
employed by corporations and individuals
engaged in administering the affairs of others and not
of themselves.
Accounts of the first type are called
by Mr. Charles E. Sprague, in "The Philosophy of
Accounts," proprietorship accounts; and those of the
accounts
is
second, fiduciary accounts. The business of many
individuals and corporations includes transactions
for the benefit of the proprietor
of others.
and
for the benefit
In such cases, the principal accounts are
always proprietorship accounts, while the others are
cities of
which are a check upon his transactions. The accounts of both officers have one feature in common
with the accounts of private enterprises, in that they
always record the flow of cash into and out from the
Moreover, they record this information by
treasury.
methods that are primarily devised to show whether
any of the money received is lost or is applied to purposes other than those contemplated by the legislative
bodies authorizing its collection and expenditure.
in reality fiduciary in character.
All departmental accounts of governments are fidu-
ciary in character
of
disclosing the condition of business at specified times,
and on the other
the expenditures made; (2) the reservations of the
appropriations for contracts, market orders, or other
of the department, bureau, or office,
(1)
purposes; and (3) the free or unencumbered balances
of the appropriations.
our American states and
municipalities are required to keep fiduciary accounts
with appropriations. In addition, they must keep
accounts with other financial data relating to revenues, the receipt and payment of cash, public properties,
and indebtedness.
The general accounts
•lost cities with their appropriations are not
The fundamental differences in the general accounts
American cities have the same origin as the corre-
combined
of
met with either in governmental or in private business. They show on one side
the amounts of money or credit placed at the disposal
fiscal ofiicers of
of
sponding differences in the accounts of private enterprises, in that they arise from the varying uses to
which the accounts are appUed in the administration of
business.
At first governmental as well as private accounts were largely records of debts the amounts
owed to a government or private proprietor and the
amounts owed by it or by him. The accounts were kept
for the administrative purpose of assisting in collecting
all amounts due and of meeting all obligations when
the same matured. A step forward was taken in
private business when accounts were arranged, kept,
and summarized in such a way that in- addition to providing the information already obtained from the
earher records they embodied all the fundamental requirements of modern accounting for proprietorship by
and constitute the best examples
fiduciary accounts to be
The general
—
with, nor even closely associated with, the accounts
and the gains and
mentioned, although in the accounting systems of
few
cities the two classes of accounts are combined
a
under appropriate controlling accounts. The general
appropriation accounts of the cities of the former class
are duplicates of the departmental accounts, and, like
them, are models of fiduciary accounting. Of the
cities which combine the two classes of accounts the
greater number employ fiduciary accounts of a type
that originated in the earlier stages of governmental
business. A smaller number employ fiduciary accounts
so arranged as to make them of greater administrative
progress was
last
value,
and a few are
installing proprietorship accounts.
be required to determine the relative administrative value of the different systems of
accounts mentioned.
In adDifferences in general governmental accounts.
dition to the differences above mentioned, the general
accounts of American cities vary greatly in character,
in methods, and in the bookkeeping devices employed,
of which but few are to any extent common to the different cities, and fewer still are universally used in
private business. In some cities, the only books of gen-
Experience
;
will
—
losses for specified periods.
Similar
made in accounting for constitutional
governments when their general financial records were
so arranged that, in addition to recording all the data
included in the earlier accounts, they introduced all the
requisites of correct fiduciary accounting by exhibiting
the cash and other resources available for expenditure
at any given time, and the fidehty with which expenditures
have been made
in conformity with the terms of
appropriation acts.
—
Modern administrative uses of accounts. Within the
years accounting has become in most countries a distinct profession, and accounts are now appUed as administrative aids both to private and to
governmental business in ways never dreamed of by
former generations. The earher accounts, to which
attention has been called, have not been neglected or
displaced, but have assumed their position in more
comprehensive schemes introduced by the most progressive private and pubHc administrators.
last fifty
The modern innovations
in
accounts
are
those
which provide for the classification and analysis of
financial data and their arrangement in statistical
INTRODUCTION.
forms so as to show, in private business, when and how
money is gained and when and how it is lost; and to
disclose and measure in governmental business the
economy of every branch of servIn private business, an analysis of revenue is
made in order to determine the adequacy of rates for
various services and commodities, and every factor
of business administration is brought under accounting control by means of what the business world now
knows as "cost accounting." It is by such methods
that the leaders in modern private business have made
accounts and accounting of supreme administrative
assistance in avoiding bad and securing good financial
results.
Their accounts are the ideal ones of the business world, and demonstrate the great part that accounting records can play in securing success and
avoiding failure. In hke manner, a few governmental
officials have introduced general and departmental
accounts which accomphsh for nations, states, and
municipaUties what the analytical and statistical accounts above described accomphsh for private enterprises.
Their accounts are so arranged as to provide
adequate accounting control over revenue, to aid in
preventing waste or loss thereof in collection, and to
apply the principles of private cost accounting for the
purpose of testing the efficiency and economy of all
branches of governmental service.
In passing, it should be said that only a limited number of private concerns have developed and applied
accounts of the largest possible administrative value,
and in hke manner only a few governments and governmental officials have shown themselves fulty awake
to the value of accounts as aids to good government.
relative efficiency and
ice.
Hence there
tive uses to
are great differences in the administra-
which governmental accounts are applied,
and, as an inevitable result, great differences in the
This
efficiency of local governments.
economy and
condition will continue until, with other changes and
reforms, the general and departmental accounts of aU
cities are so arranged as to measure and test the
efficiency of governmental administration, as well as
the fiduciary responsibiUty or accountabihty of muTo attain fully the results here men-
nicipal officers.
tioned, the accounts of different governments of the
same class as those of states, counties, cities, and
—
—
towns must be arranged on such bases as will readily
permit the experience of each to be compared with
that of aU the others.
New systems of American governmental accounts.
considerable number of American cities, actuated by a
—
their financial records of as much adas are those of the most proassistance
ministrative
desire to
make
gressive private enterprises, have within the last ten
years introduced new systems of general accounts.
The great majority
of these
systems can best be de-
scribed as experimental or tentative, since they are
being applied to a field hitherto undeveloped by ac-
countants.
13
There
is
no uniformity in the systems
thus introduced, and their value must be measured
by standards other than those of uniformity and the
possibility of comparing the expenses and outlays
of one city with those of others.
The experience of
the several
cities
new accounts has,
been fruitful of much good, and
introducing these
however, on the whole,
out of it no doubt will soon be evolved systems of accounts which will give to governmental officials and
the public interested in governmental affairs the same
aid that the most successful business man secures
from the accounts of his private business.
The general accounts thus far introduced may be
two distinct types One in which the princi-
said to be of
:
pal or controlling accounts, in addition to those with
appropriations, are those with cash receipts and payments, here spoken of as accounts iased on cash transactions; and the other, in which they are accounts with
amounts accruing, as revenue or otherwise, to the
benefit of the city, and with the accruiag expenditures
of the city, here referred to as accounts based on accruals.
Accounts of the former type are the more
numerous. That fact, and the further fact that the
older forms of general accounts, still in use by the
majority of cities, are of the same type, compels the
Bureau of the Census to arrange its statistics upon the
basis of cash receipts and payments.
Comparable statistics, how secured. A limited number of cities employing the older forms of general
accounts, and some of those which have installed improved accounts of the type first mentioned above
that is, accounts based on cash transactions prepare
exhibits of receipts and payments in such a manner as
to permit comparisons of their costs of government
with those of other cities. These cities make use of
accounting for the purpose of measuring the efficiency
and economy of administration to a larger extent than
do any others. The fiunancial statistics contained in
this report are arranged on a basis which, in its essentials, is identical with that employed by such cities.
So far as these statistics realize the object for which
'they are prepared the object set forth in the opening
paragraph of this introduction they become of assistance in providing accounting tests and measures of
the efficiency of the administration of American cities.
—
—
—
They
—
secure this result by employing accounting dewhich have been introduced by many municipal
fiscal officers, and which consist of more or less detailed exhibits of receipts classified by source and of
warrant payments classified by object. The classification of these receipts and payments into real or
actual, and nominal, and the subdivision of real or
actual receipts or payments into those which are and
those which are not available for meeting the costs of
government, furnish an approximate statement of the
cost of operating the government of a city and of
maintaining its several functions; and if all the bills
vices
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
14
are presented
when due and
are settled at once
by the
immediate future,
such a classifieation also shows the relation between
warrant expenditures and receipts.
In some cities, however, large numbers of warrants,
or orders having the authority of warrants, are paid in
a year subsequent to that of issue. In such cities, the
problem of securing from the books of the treasurer or
comptroller a statement of the cost of governmental
operation and maintenance and of expenditures for the
acquisition or construction of permanent properties is
more difficult. Under such conditions the classified
issue of warrants to be paid in the
exhibit of the treasurer's transactions
may show
for
one year no payments for the support of a certain function, as the police or the schools; while. for the next
year it may show disbursements twice as great as the
actual cost of maintenance.
In such cities, the aggregate of warrants drawn in settlement of claims more
nearly represents the cost of governmental operation
and maintenance and the expenditures for permanent
properties than does the aggregate of warrants paid.
Yet a tabulation of warrants drawn, combined with a
statement of receipts, does not furnish a complete
exhibit of the financial transactions of a given year, for
the reason that it does not include a statement of the
warrants or bills payable drawn in previous years but
Uquidated during the current year. Hence, from the
standpoint of governmental accounting, such a presentation is as imperfect as would be a trader's accounts from which were omitted outstanding liabiliTo make an approxities for merchandise purchased.
mately complete exhibit, for a given fiscal year, of the
financial transactions of cities of the class referred to
in this paragraph, not only
must the comptroller's
record of warrants drawn during the year be presented,
but also the treasurer's statement of warrants paid or
liquidated during the year must differentiate the
amounts paid on warrants outstanding at the begin-
ning of the year from the payments made on those
drawn during the year. On this basis the Census
statistics of
payments and
receipts of cities are
com-
piled.
Need for uniformity in city accounts and reports.
of comparable financial statistics
The compilation
—
of
the present time attended with many difficulties and large expense, owing to differences in the
accounting systems and methods of the various cities.
cities is at
The movement toward the uniform classification of
payments and receipts inaugurated by the National
Municipal League gives promise of a reduction of these
difficulties
and
of the
accompanying expense.
The
publication of the Census reports presenting the financial statistics of cities has given the movement a great
impetus, but the pubhcation of these reports will not
alone suffice to render easy of attainment comparable
Before that end can be
financial statistics of cities.
secured, accountants
and governmental
officials
must
reach some
common
outcome
study and inteDigent discussion of these
understanding as to the fundamental principles of governmental business and
accounting, as accountants have already done with
reference to the fundamental principles of commercial
accounting. That result can be secured only as the
of
principles.
methods of conducting municipal
Uniform accounts and reports, if secured as
business.
outUned above, will be of great assistance in compiling
comparable statistics that will measm-e the relative
economy and efficiency of city governments. Such
accounts and reports alone will not, however, provide
the data for the desired statistics. Before such statistics can be compiled, city governments must not only
Need for
correct
—
estabhsh uniform accounts and make uniform reports,
but they must also adopt correct and uniform methods
Mention has
of transacting their financial business.
been made of the difference between exhibits of governmental expenditures based respectively upon warrants or orders issued and upon warrants or orders
paid; that difference is material, but as a factor in
modifjring the comparabihty of the statistics obtained
for the different cities it is eUminated by the method
adopted by the Bureau of the Census and already described.
The same can not be said concerning an
inaccuracy that arises in the Census exhibit for cities
with certain faulty business methods, and with no
proper business system of auditing bills or issuing
warrants. In some of these cities, bills are in reality
audited by approval of the city council, some being
audited promptly when presented, while others are
not approved until a considerable length of time thereafter.
Similar variations in the time elapsing between
the presentation and the audit of claims occur in other
cities having auditors or comptrollers with nominal
powers of adjusting all claims. In neither case are
warrants or audited bills for a given period true
exhibits of the costs of government for that period, so
that whether exhibits of governmental expendittires
are based upon warrants issued, as are those now compiled by the Bureau of the Census, or upon audited
bills, the statistics for such cities will fail to be comparable with those for other cities which have adopted
correct business methods.
This condition of affairs
will continue until cities are compelled by state law
if they will not do so by their own initiative
to
employ business methods of auditing bills when due,
and to pay those bills promptly by the issue of warrants on the treasury.
Such an improved method of
conducting the finances of cities would accomplish
two very important results it would render possible
the compilation of statistics which would measure the
—
—
and economy of n;iunicipal adminissame time ehminate one of the most
factors in governmental graft and dis-
relative efficiency
tration,
and
at the
potent single
honesty.
ACCOUNTING TERMINOLOGY.
—
15
Need for a common terminology in accounting. The
subjects of correct and uniform accounting and of
of those terms which are "best adapted for securing
improved and uniform governmental accounts and
improved business methods for cities and their industries,
and for pubUc service corporations under
national or state supervision and control, are of great
popular interest, and many accountants, economists,
governmental officials, and public writers are giving
them earnest thought. The average accountant is,
however, of necessity devoting most of his attention to
improving the methods of accounting and business
administration in accordance with his own ideas; he
is working out his own schemes without seeking the
reports.
cooperation of others. The result is that, while better
accounting and more efficient business methods are
being introduced both in publicly and privately
owned enterprises and in governmental business as a
whole, the country is not securing uniformity as rapidly as
is
desirable.
Uniformity in systems of accounting must be based
upon a common language of accounts that is, upon
the use of a common terminology. To aid in securing
that uniformity, the schedules and schemes of accounts
should be accompanied with definitions of each
accounting term employed, and the reason for adopting that term, where the usage of the commercial
world and governmental world is not uniform. The
publication and discussion of such definitions and
explanations will open the way for the final selection
—
In arranging
its first
schedule and instructions for
collecting data relating to the financial transactions
and condition of cities, the Bureau of the Census began
a study of the past and present signification of accounting terms. That study has been continued during the
years that have since elapsed, and the definitions which
were first framed have been criticised by many persons
interested in improved and uniform accounting, and
have been tested by practical experience in the collection of comparable data for the Census reports on
Wealth, Debt, and Taxation, and on the Ofiicial Statistics of Cities having a Population of over 30,000.
From time to time the wording of many of the definitions first proposed has been changed as the result
of the criticisms and suggestions received, and the number of definitions prepared has been enlarged. Many
of these definitions in their earlier forms have been
presented in preceding reports on the Official Statistics
of Cities. The publication of these definitions has been
a most important factor in procuring the introduction
of uniform accounts and reports by. many cities and
states.
To further this end, the Bureau of the Census
has included in the present report a revision of
its
earlier definitions.
ACCOUNTING TERMINOLOGY.
ACCOUNTS AND ACCOUNTING.
and payments
receipts
—
—
of
cash,
—
while
in
of
—
the
other
Accounts. ^Accounts are exhibits of financial transactions with individuals natural, corporate, and governmental and of financial data relating to various
subjects, set forth by counter entries called debits and
ing expenditures of the government.
credits.
ing this difference, the two types of accounts,
—
—
Accounting. ^Accounting is the art of applying
accounts as aids in the administration of business, or
the science of analyzing, recording, and summarizing
data relating to business in such a way as to disclose
its condition or state at any given time, to express the
results of its operation for any given period, and to
furnish all other information that such analyzing,
recording, and summarizing can provide for its sys-
tematic and most successful administration.
Attention has already been called to the progressive
development of this science and the application of its
principles in the fields both of private and of governmental business, and to the two dift'erent types of
general governmental accounts employed at the present time by American cities. In general accounts of
tue type most frequently used by governments in the
United States accounts based on cash transactions
accounts supplemental to
the principal or controlling
are
those summarizing the
accounts
the appropriation
—
am QR —1
2
general
type accounts based on
accruals the corresponding controUiag accounts are
those summarizing amounts accruing for the benefit
accounts
of the
government and those summarizing the accruNotwithstandif they
are to be of equal administrative assistance,
must
record and summarize substantially the same facts
and deal with the same accounting entities. Under
such circumstances uniformity in the use of accounting words and phrases will contribute much to the
value of accounts of both types, and render the accounts of each type more intelligible to those employing accounts of the other type. Attention is first called
to the financial data that must be included in a correct
and complete summary of governmental financial conditions and to the definitions of the terms commonly
employed by the Bureau of the Census in speaking of
those data.
ASSETS, LIABILITIES,
—
AND REVENUE ACCUMULATIONS.
The assets of an individual corporation or
Assets.
government are the properties or wealth ^including
rights of action, franchises, good will, and other rights
—
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
16
having a money value
—in
possession or control
its
uncollectible revenues not properly written
off.
All
significance stated in fiduciary accounting as well as
other amounts recorded in such accounts representing
actual wealth in their possession or control constitute
in accounting for proprietorship.
their "current assets."
or at
its
disposal.
The term
employed with the
is
^
Economists, in speaking of wealth used for productive purposes, or of the wealth represented by the
assets recorded in the proprietorship accounts of
-gainful enterprises, always use the word "capital."
The same word is sometimes employed as an accounting term in referring to the wealth last mentioned,
but should never be used in referring to the wealth
in the control or custody of an individual, corporation,
or government as trustee.
—
of assets. In accounts, assets are
always represented by debit entries and balances.
Some of the debit entries and balances in the asset
accounts of corporations and governments represent
Classification
wealth actually in their possession or control, or at
their disposal; and others represent the claims of one
division or branch of the business or service upon
another, or are in other
ways
offsets to the Credit
balances of habihty, capital stock, surplus, revenue
accumulation, or other accounts, being amounts
recorded in so-called asset accounts to assist in. securing accounting control over governmental appropriations or for other purposes.
The amounts represented
by the
first class of
entries are here called actual assets
them from those represented by the
which are here called nominal assets.
Nominal assets which consist of wealth not now in the
possession or control or at the disposal of an individual,
firm, corporation, or government, but which, under
to distinguish
second
class,
certain conditions
may come
into such possession or
control, or be placed at such disposal, are generally
called contingent assets.
When
according to their relation to the
which they are
used, the actual assets of private enterprises, governmental departments, and governments are given the
classified
principal purposes of the business in
specific designations of current, invested,
and fixed
assets.
The
current assets
bureau, or
office
of a governmental department,
are the
amounts
of
money which by
the terms of appropriation acts or ordinances it is
authorized to expend; while the current assets of a
government are the resources or wealth which have
been acquired or provided for meeting the cost of
those materials and services which constitute its
current expenses, interest, outlays, and investinents,
and for meeting all other claims of creditors and trust
beneficiaries that mature or become due during any
given fiscal period. The current assets of government
include cash, materials and supplies, authorized but
uncollected revenues, prepayments, advances, and
accounts and bills receivable. The accounts of most
governments with their current assets include considerable amounts of nominal assets in the form of
Invested assets, or investments, are those resources or
forms of wealth which have been acquired and are
held by private enterprises and by governments for
purposes other than those for which they were organAmong the many purposes
ized and are maintained.
be acquired and held are
may
investments
which
for
their use, of deriving
from
income
an
securing
of
those
gain from their rise in value, of avoiding losses that
otherwise would be suffered, and of securing other
business advantages that may seem possible through
The principal nomtheir acquisition and possession.
assets
inal invested
recorded in American govern-
mental accounts are the debt obhgations of the governsinking funds and other funds with
ment held by
its
investments.
All investments other than the securi-
ties
above mentioned are "actual investments" or
"actual invested assets."
Funds is a common designation of the invested and
current assets of governments. They are the amounts
of money or other forms of wealth devoted to or availGovernmental funds are of
able for specified purposes
.
three classes
—
general, special,
and
trust.
A general fund is
one that is not specifically Mmited
as to the source from which its stock of wealth or
resources is derived, nor as to the object for which
that stock may be disbursed. It is a fund that includes money or other forms of wealth which is derived
from many sources and which is to be expended for
many
objects.
A
special
A
trust
fund is one whose assets or resources are
derived from a specified source or are to be applied to a
designated object.
and accounts is a
vested in a trustee who
holds it subject to the rights of others to enjoy certain
benefits arising therefrom.
In governmental business
and accounts, where all funds may be considered as
"trust funds," as above defined, a trust fund is^a
fund
fund the legal
in private business
title
of
which
is
"special fund "whose assets consist of wealth held for
nongovernmental uses, or wealth obtained by donations or grants for specified governmental uses.
To constitute a governmental special or trust fund,
the resources or assets belonging thereto must be separated from the body of other assets or resources, and
accounts must be kept showing all facts relating to the
acquisition, present status, and disposition of such
resources.
Governmental assets separated from other
assets and held for specified purposes in such manner as
to constitute a special or trust fimd, are said to be "reserved," and are therefore called reserved assets or
asset reserves, and the funds are frequently spoken of as
,
"reserve funds."
Accounts with general,
special,
and trust funds are
ACCOUNTING TERMINOLOGY.
properly spoken of as fund accounts, and each receives
a specific designation according to the character of the
fund and the purposes for which
OasJi.
enterprise or
cash.
its assets
are reserved.
—The money and bank credits belonging to an
government are generally spoken of as
set apart in trust and other special
"Cash"
funds for specified purposes
and special
is
here spoken of as trust
cash, or reserved cash.
All other cash
called general fund cash or general cash.
is
For a statement as to the nature of the current assets
here spoken of as "authorized but uncollected revenues," see a later page under "revenues."
Materials and supplies
the general designation
employed by accountants for all tangible things in the
possession of a government or an enterprise which have
is
been acquired and are held by it for consumption in
operation or construction, or for sale.
Prepayments are amounts of money, or money's
worth, which have been expended in meeting costs
which are properly chargeable as expenses or interest
of the future and not of the present or the past.
Advances are amounts of money, or money's worth,
placed in the hands of fiscal officers or agents to be
disbursed in meeting expenses, outlays, and indebted-
making investnients in the future.
amounts of money, or money's
worth, due from individuals, corporations, or governments for the payment of which formal acknowledgments in writing are held, while accounts receivable are
similar amounts due for which no such acknowledgments are held, and which are represented principally
or solely by entries in current accounting records. In
governmental accounting, bills and accounts receivness, or for
Bills receivable are
able should be carefully distinguished from uncollect^
revenues.
Fixed assets are those resources or forms of wealth
in the accomplishment of the principal purposes of private enterprises or of governments which
have an expectation of life in service of more than one
The fixed assets of governments include those
year.
forms of wealth used for governmental purposes which
are generally called properties, street improvements,
employed
and sewers.
Properties
is
the designation here employed
by the
of the Census in referring to land used for governmental purposes other than for highways, to build-
Bureau
and other more or less permanent structures on
such land, and to furniture, tools, apparatus, and other
equipment having a life in service of more than one
year, other than hand tools and other small portable
tools which may be lost or stolen and of which no
ings
17
All other proper-
ation of public service enterprises.
governments are spoken of as nonproductive.
Street improvements is a designation used by the
Bureau of the Census in speaking of the land employed for highway purposes belonging to governments, and the structures and improvements upon
such land, including the pavements, sidewalks, curbs,
bridges, tunnels, grades, and fills for highway purposes.
Under the term sewers are included not only
the structures bearing that name, but all such structures as manholes, catch basins, etc., forming parts
ties of
of the sewer system.
When
the accounts of governments with "proper-
improvements," and "sewers" are
properly kept, those accounts always record "actual
assets."
When, however, through imperfect accountties,"
"street
ing procedure the accounts assign to the properties,
improvements, sewers, etc., values greater than
street
the actual cost of reproducing
them
in as
good con-
dition as they exist, the excess values recorded are
"nominal
assets."
—
When a government employs the
type of general accounts here designated " accounts
based on accruals, " the controlled accounts, other than
those with appropriations, include, in theory at least,
a record of all the assets above mentioned. It is
quite otherwise with "accounts based on cash transactions."
The controlled accounts on that basis
seldom include a record of any assets other than cash
and investments. All other assets, if recorded, are,
in the great majority of cities using accounts based on
cash transactions, recorded in what are generally
known as "supplementary or uncontrolled accounts."
In both types of accounts the term "asset accounts"
is applied to the controlled accounts in which assets
Asset accounts.
are recorded.
A
study of the asset accounts of a large number of
cities leads the officials in charge of the
census statistics of cities to the conclusion that proper
accounting for assets may be secured with either type
of accounts, and that the use of neither tj^e necessarily does away with faulty accounting.
Very few
cities, whatever the type of accounts which they employ, have any trustworthy record of the cost or
present value of their "properties," and a smaller
gQumber have any intelligible or trustworthy exhibit
American
of the original cost of their "street improvements"
and "sewers," or of the present cost of reproducing
properties include lands, buildings, structures, furniture, tools, and apparatus and other equipment of gov-
them, and few have any definite statement of the
probable amount to be realized from their uncollected
revenues. So long as this state of affairs continues,
the accuracy with which the asset accounts of any
given government record the actual assets of that
government will measure the administrative value
of those accounts far better than the mere fact that
the accounts are kept on the basis of cash transactions'
erimients that are used in connection with the oper-
or of accruals.
accounting record is kept. These properties are further
Productive
as productive or nonproductive.
cliassified
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
18
In passing,
should be noted that considerable
made in this branch of accounting
during the last few years. The Bureau of the Census
has continuously emphasized the importance of having correct information with reference to the value of
it
progress has been
governmental
sewers, etc.
properties,
As the
able each year to
street
improvements and
it has been
result of this action,
make
its statistics of
the value of
governmental properties more trustworthy than those
of any previous year, although even now they are
confessedly far from perfect.
The Bureau of the Census, however, has not included in any preceding report
statistics of the value or cost of street improvements
and sewers, since it has not in previous years deemed
the data obtained with reference to these subjects
sufl&ciently trustworthy to warrant publication.
For
a similar reason it has hitherto omitted all statistics
of uncollected revenues.
A correct statement of cash
and investments can be made without any exhibit of
properties and street improvements and sewers, but
summaries of financial condition, which include on
their debit side only exhibits of the two classes of
assets above mentioned, are not complete statements
of goveminental financial condition.
They are, however, of far greater admim'strative value than more
pretentious summaries of financial condition, which
include incorrect statements of the actual value of
the several classes of governmental resources. The
first
requisite in this field
so far as
all.
The extension
assets
is
any presentation
may
a correct exhibit of assets,
of their value
is
given at
of accounting control over fixed
therefore with profit
be deferred until
correct statements of their value have been prepared.
lAabiUties.
—In
law, liabilities
are
primarily
the
and responsibilities of individuals, corporations, and governments to pay, deliver, hold, use,
or expend money, or money's worth in the form of
land or goods, or to render specified services. The
term is also used in speaking of amounts of money, or
money's, worth in the form of land, goods, or services
which individuals, corporations, and governments are
under obligations to pay, deliver, or render, or for whose
use, payment, or expenditure they are responsible.
obligations
.
—
In accounts, liabilities
Classification of liabilities.
by credit entries and balances. The
are represented
number
of such entries and balances in the
accounts of enterprises and of governments
represent the legal liabilities or actual liabilities above
described, which are in a broad, general way separable
greater
liability
into
two
liabilities
classes
and
called
trust
debts and trusts,
liabilities.
These
or debt
liability
ac-
counts also contain the record of amounts which
represent neither debts nor trusts, but constitute what
are here called nominal liabilities.
Debts.
In law, debts or debt liabilities are primarily
the obligations of individuals, corporations, and governments to pay or deliver money, goods, or other
—
wealth to specified parties, their heirs or assigns, or to
perform or render specified services of a money value
in their behalf or at their behest.
The term
is
also
or money's worth,
applied to amounts of money,
which have been received and must be paid or deThose receiving and owing the
livered as stated.
and those to whom it
"debtors,"
money are called
payable are called "creditors."
Debts or debt liabilities may be classified upon
many different bases, and thus may be given many
Classified according to the
specific designations.
is
provisions
made
for
their
p^ment
or liquidation,
they are called current debts, funded debts, and
fioating debts; classified according to the time when
due or payable, they are called due and demand
liabilities, liabilities not due, and liabilities awaiting
final determination or adjustment; and classified according to the character of the instruments or records
which evidence the debts, they are called bonds,
notes payable, warrants payable, audits payable, and
accounts payable.
Current debts. The current debts or current debt
liabilities of an enterprise for gain are those that
should be met from its current revenues; the current
debts or current debt liabilities of a government are
those debt liabilities for the payment or liquidation
of which provision is fully made by cash on hand, by
revenues accrued or accruing, or by other assets
provided and appropriated for that specific purpose.
Funded or fixed debts. The funded or fixed debts,
or funded or fixed debt liabilitie's, of a private enterprise or of a government are those debts evidenced
by some formal instrument, or in some other manner,
which have a number of years to run or upon which
interest is to be paid in perpetuity, but for the amortization of which no assets other than those of sinking
funds have as yet been specifically authorized or
appropriated.
Originally the term "funded debts"
was applied only to those debts for whose amortization sinking-fund provisions had been made, but at
present the term is used more or less interchangeably
with that of fixed debts in speaking of the debt
obligations specifically mentioned above.
Floating debts. The floating debts or floating debt
liabilities of an enterprise for gain are those liabilities
which it has incurred for meeting current costs of
operation, but for the liquidation of which it has no
available resources the floating debts or floating debt
liabilities of a government are those debts for the
payment or redemption of which there is no money in
—
—
—
;
the treasury specifically designated or appropriated,
nor any provision made for obtaining such money by
taxation or otherwise.
Current,
funded,
due and demand
liabilities
awaiting
and
floating
liabilities,
fijial
debts
liabilities
constitute
not due,
and
determination or adjustment,
according as they are payable on demand, at the
ACCOUNTING TERMINOLOGY.
present time, or at some future time, and according
to whether the amount payable has been determined
or adjusted or is awaiting such determination and
19
is more or less generally applied to
written evidences of governmental indebtedness
given under the seal of the nation, state, or munici-
tions applied to them have "already been presented.
These debts constitute claims or demands upon the
government, but they are not the only claims upon the
government. The other claims and demands upon
the government are those represented by private
trusts and by public trusts for nongovernmental uses.
The most common of the latter class of trusts are those
pality issuing them.
created
adjustment.
The term ionds
all
of indebtedness are
Less formal written evidences
most frequently
the specific designations of
payalle,
Tiotes
referred to
by
payable, warrants
and audits payable, while the amounts
re-
I
j
by the acceptance
of
money by
of specified churches.
classified
as private
whether
payable.
trusts, the creation of the trust for
Trusts.
—In
law,
trusts
or
trust
liabilities
are
other wealth in the interest of specified persons or for
specified purposes or objects.
Those receiving money
or other wealth in such interest or for such purposes
become "trustees" and not "debtors," while the
persons in whose interest or behalf the money is held,
used, or expended are known as "beneficiaries."
Trusts are of many kinds, which may be grouped
two general classes: (1) those obligations or re-
into
sponsibilities
which are
strictly called trusts,
and
(2)
those obligations or responsibilities in the nature of
trusts which are involved in the relations of agents
and principals, of the executors and heirs of an estate,
and
of assignees
etc.
The
and the
creditors of
bankrupt
estates,
trusts belonging to the first class are of
kinds, private
and
two
public.
Private trusts are trusts which concern individuals
and famihes and are limited in duration. They are
obhgations and responsibilities to hold or use specified
amounts of money or other wealth in the interest of
specified individuals, or to expend the same in their
In accounting, private
interest or at their behest.
trusts are amounts of money, or its equivalent in the
form of land or goods, held for the benefit of specified
persons or to be expended in their interest or at their
the
These trusts are by some states
and by others as public. But
corded only in accounts are generally called accounts
primarily the obligations of individuals, corporations,
or governments to hold, use, or expend money or
cities for
care of private lots in cemeteries and for the support
legally
or "public"
one of the purposes
designated "private"
specified, like the
acceptance of
money
poses of private trusts, creates claims
for the pur-
upon the gov-
ernment which, like the claims of creditors, are properly recorded under the legal designation "liabilities."
The several classes of these governmental
trusts creating claims upon the government should be
recorded under descriptive titles which will exhibit
the character or the nature or purpose of the claims
which they represent.
Nominal liabilities. In accomiting, the term "liabih-
—
ties
"
is
universally used, not only as the
common desig-
nation of legal debts and trusts, but also in referring
to (1 ) amotflits of money or other wealth which a private enterprise or government owes to one of its funds,
or which one branch of its business owes to another
branch; (2) amounts recorded in so-called "liability
accounts" which represent accounting offsets to the
debit entries of asset accounts, being amounts recorded
in accounts to assist in securing accounting control
over specified contract obligations, such as those for
maintaining sinking fund reserves, or for other-?ic-
counting purposes; and
prise
(3)
or government may,
amounts which the enterunder specified circum-
stances, or subject to specified conditions, be called
upon
to pay, deliver, or render in the future, but for
the payment, delivery, or rendering of which there is
no present obligation. liabilities such as those men-
from
behest.
tioned above under
Public or charitable trusts are trusts which are constituted for the benefit of the public at large, or of
some particular portion of this public answering to a
particular description, such as the poor, children, etc.
the reception of wealth in any form from others;
neither do they constitute claims upon the wealth in
the possession or control of the enterprise or govern-
They
are obhgations
and
responsibilities to
expend
amounts of money or other wealth for speciand purposes, or to hold the same for such
objects and purposes. In accounting, public trusts
are amounts of money or other wealth which are held
for the benefit or in the interest of an uncertain and
sometimes fluctuating body of persons, such as the
poor, or the children, or all the people of a given town
specified
fied objects
or city.
Governmental
government to
trust liabilities.
its
—The obligations of the
creditors constitute its debts.
classification of those
obligations
The
and the designa-
(1), (2),
and
(3)
do not
arise
whose accounts they are recorded. They are
name only, and are thus properly spoken of as nominal liabilities.
In accounting,
the nominal liabihties mentioned under (3). are gen-
ment
in
therefore liabilities in
erally called contingent liabilities.
—
In the accounts of enterconducted for gain, the claims of creditors and
of the beneficiaries of trusts are recorded, as has
already been stated, by credit entries in the accounts
here called balance sheet accounts, or accounts summed
up in the balance sheet. The property rights of the
owners or proprietors of the same enterprises, or their
equity in their assets, are also recorded in the same
Proprietary interests.
prises
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
20
group
of accounts
by
credit entries.
From
the fact
that these rights are thus recorded on the same side
of the ledger accounts and balance sheets as are UabiUties,
they have been by
many
accountants included
in the balance sheet under the generic designation
" HabiUties."
The objections to this procedure are well
stated
by Mr. Charles E. Sprague,
of Accounts," pages 46
The
and
in
"The Philosophy
rights of others, or the liabilities, differ materially
from the
The
rights of the proprietor involve
to use
does not shrink
is of
an
when
as
the assets shrink, while that of the proprietor
elastic value.
(3) Losses,
and
them
profits,
expenses, and shrinkage
fall
upon the proprietor alone,
revenue, and iacrease of value benefit
him
alone, not
his creditors.
For these reasons the proprietary interest can not be treated like
the liabilities, and the two branches of the right-hand side of the
balance sheet require distinctive treatment.
the claims
of creditors and trust beneficiaries, upon the assets or
properties of an enterprise for gain, and (2) the prop(1)
erty rights of the owners or proprietors of such
an
enterprise in these assets or properties, the Biu-eau of
the Census in its schemes of "accounts" arranges the
claims mentioned in one group of balance sheet accounts under the common term "liabiUties," as has
already been described, and arranges the property
rights of the owners or proprietors in a second group
of accounts to which it gives the specific designation
proprietary interests. In the case of corporate enterprises for gain, the rights last mentioned may also be
—
The proprieClassification of proprietary interests.
tary interests of corporations are vested in their stockholders, and are represented by certificates of ownership called "certificates of stock," which may be of
various kinds and receive different designations, such
as "first preferred stock," "second preferred stock,"
"common stock," etc. The proprietary interests of
a private individual in the property of unincorporated
owned or controlled by him are not evidenced by any formal certificates or other proof of
enterprises
ownership, and may be considered as constituting an
undivided whole as contrasted with the collective
ownership of the stockholders of corporate enterprises.
The proprietary
interests of
surplus
its
is
set aside or appropriated for
it is
any
said to be reserved,
other portions of the surplus are said to be
Reserved surplus is frequently spoken of
as surplus reserves. These reserves may -or may not
be associated with " asset reserves," or reservations of
while
all
When they are thus associated the reservations
assets.
and of surplus for the same objects or purposes give rise to special funds which are frequently
The most common purposes
called "reserve funds."
for which the proprietary interests of corporations for
of assets
gain are reserved are for meeting future losses from
bad debts, depreciation, casualties, and kindred causes.
The
reserves themselves always receive designations
indicating the purpose or object of the reservation, and
In order to distinguish fully between
referred to as corporate capital.
by
unreserved.
dominion over the assets
he pleases even to alienating them; while
the creditor can not interfere with him or them except in extraordinary circumstances.
(2) The right of the creditor is limited to a definite sum which
(1)
other proprietary interests.
When any portion of the proprietary interests of a
corporation organized for gain which are represented
specified purpose or object,
47, as follows:
rights of the proprietor, in the following respects:
and power
portion of the total proprietary interests of the stockholders represented by the par value of their stocks;
while under the designation surplus are included all
stockholders in the
property of corporations and those of individual owners in the property of imincorporated enterprises for
gain controlled by them, when considered from a legal
standpoint, consist of a single and undivided whole.
For accounting purposes these interests, in the case of
corporations, are separated into two principal classes
which are referred to in the accoimts as "stocks" and
"surplus." Under the term stoclcs are included that
separate accounts are always kept with each class of
reserves estabUshed.
Reserves that must be kept intact during the Ufe of
the corporation are called permanent reserves, and all
others are called temporary reserves.
Reserves necessitated by contracts, such as those relating to sinking
funds provided for by mortgages, are called contractual
thus necessitated are referred
reseroes, while reserves not
to as noncontractual reserves.
The proprietary interests of individual owners of
unincorporated enterprises for gain can not be separated
into two portions corresponding to the capital stock
and surplus of corporations. These interests can, however, be separated into two portions designated respectively as reserved and unreserved proprietary interests.
Under the designation
individual owners
reserved proprietary interests of
included that portion of their
property rights in the enterprise controlled by them
which has been set aside or reserved for specified purposes.
All other property rights of the owners mentioned constitute their unreserved proprietary interests.
These
is
latter interests correspond to the interests repre-
by the "capital stock" and "unreserved surplus" of corporate enterprises for gain, while the reserved proprietary interests receive specific designations and call for the same procedure in accounting as
do the surplus reserves of corporations organized for
sented
gain.
Attention has already been called to the fact that
the property rights of the owners of enterprises for
gain, or their proprietary interests, are recorded by
credit
entries
in
interest accounts.
accounts here called proprietary
The proprietary interest accounts
of the average enterprise for gain not only contain
entries representing the actual proprietary interests,
or entries representing the capital of the proprietors
ACCOUNTING TERMINOLOGY.
employed in the enterprise, but they also contain
amounts recorded by credit entries and balances
which represent no actual property rights of the owners,
but accounting offsets to nominal assets. These
entries are referred to by the Bureau of the Census as
nominal proprietary interests. The most common
nominal proprietary interests recorded in the accounts
of enterprises for gain are those entries which represent corporate stock issued by the enterprise and held
in its treasury or
by one
of its funds with investments,
and revenue charges awaiting cancellation. Under
the latter term are included losses charged as expenses
but not written off in the asset accounts in which are
contained the records of the properties affected by the
losses.
—
of ienejiciaries. In the accounting records
churches, and other charitable institutions the claims of creditors upon the assets of those
institutions and the interests of their beneficiaries in
such assets are recorded by credit entries in balancesheet accounts. The property rights represented
Interests
of colleges,
by
these
two
classes of entries are as distinct
and sepa-
rate in character, one from the other, as are the
and proprietary
bUities
lia-
interests similarly recorded
by
credit entries in the accounts of enterprises for gain.
To be
of
these
of
any great administrative value, the accounts
charitable
institutions
should distinguish
21
sent in part claims of creditors and of the beneficiaries
upon the governmental assets, and
and general public
in these assets.
To distinguish the claims first mentioned from the interests last referred to, as must be
done to secure any assistance from accounts in the
of private trusts
in part the interests of the citizens
proper administration of governmental finances, the
interests last referred to should be given some specific
designation. If the state or municipality is considered
as a proprietor and the accounts installed for the guidance of its administration are proprietorship accounts,
the interests may be given the same designation as in
the case of enterprises for gain, that is, "proprietary
interests."
If, however, the accounts of the state or
municipality are fiduciary in character, the interests
here referred to may properly be called interests of
governmental beneficiaries. A designation that is
apphcable for both classes of accounts, and which is,
therefore, better in most respects than either of those
given above, is one which recognizes the origin and
character of these interests. That designation is
The term calls attention to
the fact that the interest of the citizens or general
public in the Assets of a government represent the
revenue accumulations.
revenues of the past that have not been expended in
meeting the current costs of governmental maintenance.
and the other property
Fully to distinguish between the financial interests
Fully to accomplish this result,
the property rights of beneficiaries in the assets of
these institutions are here called interests of heneficiaries, and the claims of creditors against the institutions are given the designation "liabilities," although in a strict legal sense of the word all the inter-
or equities of the citizens of a nation, state, or munici-
between the claims
of creditors
rights mentioned.
ests of beneficiaries
may
be called
from conditioned gifts, that is, gifts of money or other
wealth to be expended, used, or held for specified purposes or objects, or to be expended, used, or held
to
beneficiaries
the
The interests
represented by the unexpended gifts
specified
first class
conditions.
of others
and public improveupon such assets, etc.,
the claims referred to should be recorded in one group
of accounts receiving the name "liabilities," and the
group
"revenue accumulations," or otherwise. In
the first group should be recorded the claims of creditors and those of the beneficiaries of private trusts
and of public trusts for nongovernmental tises, and in
the second the interests of the citizens, classified
interests or equities of the citizens in a second
according to character.
Classification of revenue accumulations.
mental accoimting, some credit entries are
—In governmade in
the
of
balance-sheet accounts for "revenue accumulations"
of
which are employed for the purpose of seciu-ing accounting control over specified classes of transactions, or
second class are called
for other pm-poses, and represent no accumulations of
imexpended revenues, but accoimting offsets to actual
or nominal assets. All such credit entries are her6
called nominal revenue accumulations, to distinguish
them from amounts of actual accumulations of revenue
for governmental pxu'poses.
The revenue accumulations inost frequently met with in governmental
accounts are of two distinct classes: (1) Those which
are to be held, used, or expended for specified govern-
of beneficiaries. Some charitable
institutions call the reserved interests last mentioned
"funds," or "special funds." The reserved interinterests
ests of beneficiaries here referred to
many
assets, properties,
are here called unreserved interests oj
beneficiaries, while those of the
reserved
its
ments and the claims
called
liabilities.
Some of the interests of beneficiaries of colleges,
churches, and other charitable institutions result from
unconditioned gifts, that is, gifts for the general purpose of the institution receiving; while others arise
subject
pality in
may
also receive
specific designations, according to the special
purposes for which the property received by gift has
been reserved or the conditions which constitute the
reservation.
—
The amounts
of governright-hand
side
the
on
recorded by
summaries
repreand
accounts
balance-sheet
mental
Revenue accumulations ofgovernments.
entries
mental purposes or subject to specified conditions;
and (2) those which are to be held, used, or expended
in the discretion of the government.
The former
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
22
may be called reserve, special, or unconvertible
revenue accumulations, or governmental reserves; while
the second class may be called unreserved, general, or
ing the expenditures of so-called governmental public
convertihle revenue accumulations.
properties and public improvements, have but one
account for the interests or equities of the cities in
class
Governmental
reserves.
—The
governments of states
and mimicipalities have no capital stock as have
private corporations, and hence no surplus. The
amoimts of revenue accumulations held for future
expendittires, or employed for the acquisition or construction of the more permanent public improvements,
or for the purpose of investment, must from one point
of view be considered as an undivided whole; and
yet these revenue accumulations may have been set
aside or designated for specified governmental pur-
poses by the terms of donations or of grants from other
civil divisions, or by conditions stated in general or
special appropriation acts.
While in origin these
reservations differ
somewhat from those
of private
trust fiinds for governmental uses.
Most American governments, in accounts with their
such properties and public improvements, and that is
an. account recording a summary of the amount of
such equities. A few cities, introducing improved
accounts in the last few years, have separated those
equities or interests into two groups corresponding
to the reserved and unreserved revenue accumulations
The interests in these
of the governmental funds.
to
the reserved revenue
properties, etc., corresponding
accumulation of the governmental funds, are those
which represent the gifts or other voluntary contributions which the government has received and has
expended in the acquisition or construction of its
properties
and public improvements
as called for
by
enterprises, they are,
from the standpoint of the accountant, analogous, and therefore can with propriety
be given similar designations to those applied to reser-
the terms of the givers. These governmental reserves
may all be called permanent, and will in accounts be
shown
vations of corporate siu-plus.
piu-poses to
Accordingly they are
here spoken of as "governmental reserves," or simply
under specified heads disclosing the
which the money or other wealth received
in detail
has been devoted.
as "reserves."
Governmental reserves,
private
enterprises,
like the surplus reserves of
receive
designations
and are
with reference to the object or
purpose for which they are reserved, or the conditions
under which certain funds are received and are held.
The only reservations that are usually recorded in
governmental transactions are, however, those shown
in the accounts of governmental funds general,
special, and trust.
These reserves, like the surplus
classified primarily
—
two
which are here called permanent
•reserves of private corporations for gain, are of
distinct classes, those
and temporary.
Permanent governmental
reserves are those recorded
in governmental accounts with revenue accumulations
which represent the principal of special or trust funds
that has been received with the understanding or
obligation that such principal must be kept intact
forever, and only its income expended for general or
special governmental purposes.
Temporary governmental reserves are those recorded
in governmental accounts with revenue accumulations
which represent that portion of general, special, and
trust funds that is at once available for meeting current
expenses and has, by the terms of general and special
appropriation acts, been reserved for specified expenditures.
The reserves of the general funds are those
represented by the credit balances that record the
provisions and limitations of the general appropriation
acts, while the reserves of the special and trust funds
are those representing the limitations and conditions
imposed by the terms of special appropriation acts,
such as those accompanying bond issues and those
representing the limitations and conditions surround-
EXPENSES, INTEREST, OUTLAYS, AND REVENUES.
Expenses.
—In
governmental accounting, expenses
are (1) the accrued costs, paid or payable, of services,
and materials, exclusive of those for permanent
and improvements, utilized by nations,
states, and municipalities for the maintenance and
operation of their governments and for the conduct of
their business undertakings for which they have constitutional or statutory authority; and (2) the losses
by depreciation of permanent properties and otherwise.
Expenses are the costs and losses for which no
permanent or subsequently convertible value is rerents,
properties
ceived or receivable.
The expenses of governments
may be classified in
ways. Classified with reference to the objects
for which they are incurred they are readily arranged
under the heads of "salaries and wages," "rents,"
"materials," and "depreciation," all of which classes
may be subdivided into a large number of minor
groups, to which may be given specific names, as in the
case of the expenses of private concerns.
Governmental expenses are further separable into two principal groups, here called general expenses and commermany
cial
expenses.
General expenses.
—The general expenses of the gov-
ernments of nations,
those incurred
and municipalities are
in connection with the exer-
states,
by them
governmental functions. These
of the Census, subdivided
into eight principal groups, corresponding to the following division of governmental activities: I. General
government; II. Protection of life and property; III,
Health conservation and sanitation; IV. Highways;
cise of their general
expenses
are,
by the Bureau
ACCOUNTING TERMINOLOGY.
and corrections; VI. Education; VII.
Recreation; VIII. Miscellaneous. The expenses included in each of these subdivisions are further classified by the ofl&ces, departments, or otherwise, into- a
v. Charities
number
of groups, fully illustrated
by the
tables of
this report.
—
Commercial expenses. The commercial expenses of
the governments of nations, states, and municipalities
are those incurred by them in connection with commercial functions. They are divided into four groups,
corresponding to the subdivisions of commercial transactions, as follows:
Expenses of municipal service enterprises are the
total costs of the operation and maintenance of municipal service enterprises, or the expenses of those departments or offices of a city which are organized mainly
for the purpose of furnishing the city with some public
utility or with some service which most cities obtain
from or through private enterprises.
(2) Expenses of public service enterprises are the total
costs of operation and maintenance of the public service
enterprises of a nation, state, or municipality, or the
expenses of those departments or offices of a city which
are organized for the purpose of providing the public,
or the public and the city, with some public utility or
(1)
service.
(3) Investment expenses are the total costs of the
administration of sinking, investment, and public trust
funds of nations, states, or municipalities.
(4) Special service expenses are the expenses incurred
by nations, states, and municipalities in connection
with special services performed or provided by any of
their departments or offices other than the public
service
and municipal
service enterprises.
—
In governmental accounting, the term inInterest.
terest is used as the designation of the accrued costs,
paid or payable, incurred by nations, states, and
municipalities for the use of credit capital utilized by
them. These costs are separable into a number of
groups, according as they are classified with reference
to the purpose for which the credit capital was utilized,
or according to the character of the governmental
obligations evidencing the indebtedness on which the
interest
is
payable.
—
In governmental accounting, outlays are
Outlays.
paid or payable, of lands and other
costs,
the accrued
properties more or less permanent in character, and
thus available for more than a single use, which are
owned or used by nations, states, and municipalities in
the exercise of their governmental functions or in connection with the business undertakings conducted by
them. The outlays of governments are separable into
the same groups as are their general expenses and the
expenses of public utihty enterprises.
For a statement of the nature of inInvestments.
—
vestments see a former page under "invested assets."
Storehouse supplies.
23
—Und* the designation "store-
house suppHes" are included all costs, paid or payable,
of suppUes purchased by governments in bulk for
cities, which are to be distributed or assigned upon
requisition to the departments, or are to be appfied
to current uses or to the construction of public improvements. They are acquired under conditions
which preclude the assignment of their costs at the
time of purchase to the purposes for which they are
finally apphed.
In practice, these costs are referred
to under a number of more specific designations.
Revenue charges and revenue deductions. In private corporation accounting many business men and
accountants employ the terms "revenue charges" and
"revenue deductions " in referring to all costs and losses
that must be met from or charged to revenue, in order
to ascertain the income or net profits accruing from
the management of the enterprise as compensation in
the form of dividends or otherwise for the corporate
—
capital or capital of the proprietor
The
costs
and
employed
therein.
losses of private business thus charge-
able to or to be deducted from revenue are those here
and interest. In accounting for governmental service or municipal service enterprises,
where such accounting is made on the basis of securing comparability with corresponding private enterprises, the terms "revenue charges" and "revenue deductions" have the same significance as stated above.
In accounting for the governments of nations, states,
and municipafities, it is to be noted that all the costs
and losses referred to above as expenses, interest,
called expenses
outlays, investments,
and storehouse
suppfies, are in
one sense charges against revenue, since they are met
from accumulations of past revenues or present rev-
from future revenues by anticipation. The
and losses included under expenses, interest,
and outlays are the current costs of government, and
may with propriety be included under the designation
enues, or
costs
current revenue charges or current revenue deductions.
.
—
The term revenue expendiby many pubHc and private accountants em-
Revenue expenditures.
tures is
ployed with the significance given above to revenue
charges and revenue deductions, and the word "expenditures"
is
including
also
all
employed as a general descriptive term,
is signified by the words expenses,
that
outlays, investments, storehouse suppfies,
disbursements, and payments. It is sometimes employed in the present report with the general significance last referred to.
interest,
—
Revenues in private corporate business. In private
corporate business the word revenues is the designation most frequently employed at the present time in
referring to amounts of money, or money's worth,
which corporations and enterprises, other than those
engaged in trade, receive or become lawfully entitled
to receive as the result of business transactions, the
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
24
sale of property, or the rendering of services,
and
as
upon property or interests in property.
Many accountants use the word income with the significance here assigned to the word revenues, but the
word revenues is at the present time employed by the
larger number of accountants, many of whom employ
the word income in referring to the excess of revenues
returns
over expenses.
Governmental revenues. The revenues of nations,
states, and municipahties are the amounts of money,
or money's worth, provided or obtained by them for
meeting those costs of government called expenses,
—
and outlays, and are derived from the follow-
interest,
ing sources
powers
:
(1)
From the
of taxation
exercise of the governmental
and pohce
control; (2)
receipt of donations, gifts, grants,
from the
and subventions
—
Taxes.
Taxes are compulsory contributions of
wealth levied, or levied and collected, in the general
commimity, from individuals and
the
of
interest
corporations without reference to special benefits which
the individual contributors may derive from the pub-
he purposes for which the revenue
which
it is
is
required or to
applied.
Property taxes, which constitute the most important
American municipal revenues, are
single source of
direct taxes
upon property or upon persons, natural or
corporate, in proportion to their property.
Property
taxes are, by the Bureau of the Census, divided into
two subclasses designated, respectively, general and
special property taxes.
General property taxes are those direct taxes which
are assessed
and collected by methods practically
for governmental uses; (3) from the performance of
services for compensation, and the furnishing of mate-
identical for all kinds of property, while special prop~
valuable considerations; and (4) from
the operation or management of the productive enterprises, investments, and properties of the government.
The revenues or revenue of a fiscal year are the
upon
rial objects for
amounts
of "revenues or revenue which have been provided or obtained, or made applicable, for that year.
To distinguish between the revenues, or revenue,
received and those receivable to the credit of a given
fiscal year, the former may be called realized and the
latter authorized but unrealized.
Classified with reference to their character, the revenues or revenue of
nations, states, and municipalities are, like governmental expenses, readily separable into two classes,
called respectively by the Bureau of the Census general
and conmiercial revenues or revenue.
The
general revenues, or the general revenue, of a
amounts of
wealth unconditioned upon the performance of any
nation, state, or municipality are the
specific service to thef individual contributor,
provided
or obtained as the compulsory or voluntary contributions of private individuals, corporations, or other civil
divisions, for defraying the general costs of^Qj:ern-
The greater portion of these revenues are
derived from taxes; the remainder are obtained from
donations, grants, and
fines and forfeits, gifts,
ment.
subventions.
The commercial revenues, or revenue, of a nation,
state, or municipality are the compulsory or voluntary contributions of private individuals and corpolevied and collected as compensation for
services rendered, material objects furnished, or
rations
assmned
special benefits conferred
upon those from
whom
erty taxes are those
assessment and collection of taxes upon property in
All general and most special property taxes
are apportioned according to the value of the property
subject thereto, and so far as they are thus apportioned are properly spoken of as ad valorem taxes.
General property taxes levied at the same rates upon
all property within the territory of the taxing power
are here called general levies of the general property tax.
Similar taxes levied upon the property of specified
portions of the territory of the taxing power, or at
varying rates in different parts of that territory, are
here called local levies of the general property, tax. Both
general and local levies may be for a variety of objects
and may be authorized by any civil division, and all
general.
may
receive specific designations according to
object or purpose of the tax,
whose revenue they
Poll taxes (also called capitation taxes) are taxes
upon persons without regard to their property.
They may be levied uniformly upon all males of speci-
against
and
sales,
and those which are
or operation of productive
governmental enterprises, investments, and properties.
constitute.
assessed
called, or here designated, special assessments, privi-
management
the
civil divisions
business.
fied ages, or
leges, fees, charges,
and the
Business taxes are taxes collected from persons,
natural or corporate, by reason of their business, where
such collection is not associated with the granting of
a license or permit to carry on such business.
Licenses or permit taxes are taxes collected from persons, natural or corporate, by reason of their business,
where such collection is associated with the granting
of a hcense or permit to carry on such business, or
where without such hcense or permit the individual
or corporation has no legal right to engage in the
such revenues or revenue are obtained.
Included in commercial revenues are those properly
secured by the
which are assessed and collected
by methods not applied to the
specified property
wise.
Some
graded according to occupation, or otherof
them
are levied in specified
amounts
persons subject thereto, and others are
guasi property taxes based upon an arbitrary valuation of polls.
Poll taxes graded according to occupation may also be called occupation taxes.
all
ACCOUNTING TERMINOLOGY.
25
Fines avdforfeits are amounts accruing to the benefit
o£ nations, states, and municipalities as part of the
punishment of individuals and corporations for failure
to observe civil or criminal laws, or to perform the
terms of specified agreements.
Gifts and donations are designations for amounts of
voluntary contributions received by governments
from private individuals, while grants and subventions
are the terms generally apphed in speaking of amounts
received by one government from another. Amounts
received as above, from private individuals or from
"fees" are receipts for services where the costs of the
same are so well known that they are estabhshed by
statute and are generally collected in advance; while
"charges" can be definitely determined only upon
completion of the work, and advance payments are
only to guarantee the payment of costs when determined.
may be accepted either with or without
specified conditions as to their use or investment.
Governmental revenues obtained or secured from
the operation of productive enterprises, investments,
Special assessments, hke taxes, are compulsory contributions levied under the taxing or pohce power of
nations, states, and municipalities to defray the costs
sales of
.governments,
of specified pubhc improvements or pubhc services
undertaken primarily in the interest of the public.
They differ from taxes in that they are apportioned
according to the assumed benefits to the individuals or
corporations for whom the services are performed, or
according to the assumed increase in the value of the
property affected by the improvement. They are, by
reason of the difference here stated, classified as commercial rather than as general revenues.
Privileges.
The designation privileges is apphed
(1) to the special contract rights, in and upon highTvays, granted by special or general laws and ordi-
—
nances to specified individuals and corporations; and
(2) to the amounts that are paid or payable to the
general treasury as compensation for such rights.
The rights which are enjoyed are of the same legal
nature as those which in private business are called
^'easements." These privileges are, by the Bureau of
the Census, divided into two classes called, respectively, major and minor.
The major privileges are
those which are exclusively enjoyed by pubhc service
corporations, and which such corporations must
possess in order to carry on their operations while the
minor privileges are those granted to pubhc service
ments; while charges are atnounts of money paid or
payable for services performed by governments which
are similar in character to those performed by one
individual for another.
The greater portion
of all
and properties include .rents, interest, receipts from
manufactured products, etc., the same as in
private business management. The classification of
such revenues and the terminology thereof are identical with those employed in connection with the revenues from similar sources of private productive enterprises, investments, and properties.
Revenue. The revenue of a nation, state, or municipality is the aggregate amount of money or other form
of wealth provided or obtained by it for the objects
and from the sources previously mentioned under
—
" goverimaental revenues."
The word "revenue" is also used as a part of many
compound terms, such as "revenue expenditures,"
"revenue loans," "revenue tariff," "revenue law,"
"revenue producing law," "revenue account," etc., in
most of which it retains its significance as here defined.
For other legal and accounting terms in which the
word "revenue" is employed with a different meaning,
substitutes should be adopted in order to avoid complexity and to obtain simplicity of terminology and
clearness of statement.
A
revenue law is a law made either for the direct or
the avowed purpose of creating or procuring revenue
for the support and use of the government, while a
noted that revenues derived from minor privileges
granted in connection with the management of municipal markets, and the regulation of market sales of
is one from the operation of
which revenue accrues to the benefit of the government.
A revenue account is an account showing the source,
amount, and disposition of moneys received from
revenue. All revenue accounts are treasury accounts,
the latter term being a common or generic designation
of all accounts showing the amounts of money received
into the treasury from specified sources, and the dis-
merchandise by its producers in the streets, are in all
cases to be considered as parts of the revenues of
position of the same. All moneys so received are
spoken of as public moneys, or public funds.
;
and other corporations and to private individuals for
the privilege of utihzing for business purposes specified portions of the street or sidewalk, or the spaces
above or below the same. It should, however, be
markets.
Fees and charges.
revenue producing law
PAYMENTS AND RECEIPTS.
—Fees and charges, as distinguished
from taxes, are compulsory contributions of wealth
which are exacted from persons, natural or corporate,
to defray a part or all of the costs involved in some
specified service rendered by the government.
Fees are amounts of money paid or payable for services which are never performed except by govern-
Payments.
amounts
—In accounting, payments
money, or
are primarily
equivalent, delivered or
disbursed in financial transactions either in the interest
of
its
of or for the satisfaction of claims against the payer.
Receipts.
amounts
—In
of
accounting, receipts
money, or
its
are
primarily
equivalent, taken in in
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
26
financial transactions, either for the benefit of the
according to the objects of their payments into /four
Payments for expenses, (2) payments for
recipient or for the benefit of another.
classes: (1)
has aheady been noted that the statistics of the
by the Bureau
of the Census are primarily statistics of governmental
payments and receipts. These payments and receipts
may be classified in many ways. The most important
classification is one based upon the fact that some
amounts of money paid or received lessen or add to the
cash in the treasury, while others do not lessen or add
to such cash. A classification of the payments and
interest, (3)
It
financial transactions of cities compiled
receipts of
two
governments upon
this basis gives rise to
classes here called real or actual,
transfer,
payments and
and nominal or
receipts.
Real or actual payments.
—The
real or actual
pay-
ments of a nation, state, or municipality are the
amounts of money, or money's worth, which its
officials deliver
ments
to the public, including the govern-
and which lessen the
of other civil divisions,
designations
interest,
Real or actual payments and receipts, being in aU
cases
payments to and
receipts
from the
public,
may
with propriety be called -payments to artd receipts from
The terms last mentioned are by the
the pvhlic.
Bureau of the Census employed interchangeably with
le terms real or actual payments and receipts.
The real or actual payments and receipts of a govempayments to and receipts from the public,
ent, or its
many
ways, the most
which separates
le payments and receipts for meeting the costs of
jvernment from all other actual governmental payments and receipts. Thus separated, the payments
and receipts of nations, states, and municipalities are
readily arranged in two groups, here called payments
and receipts for meeting governmental cogts, and
payments and receipts other than those for meeting
governmental costs.
Payments and receipts for meeting govern/mental costs
are the net amounts of money, or other wealth expressed in terms of money, which nations, states, and
municipahties pay or expend for meeting costs of
government, or its expenses, interest, and outlays, and
which they receive from aU sources. The Bureau of
the Census has in its previous reports given the name
"corporate" to such payments and receipts, for lack
It
of a more comprehensive and brief designation.
is hoped that a more descriptive designation may be
.ay in
turn be classified in
gnificant classification being that
suggested.
Payments
of
states, and municipahties
government are readily separable
nations,
for meeting costs of
(4)
payments
and purposes mentioned, after amounts received to correct erroneous payments for these purposes and other counterbalancing payments have been
deducted. The payments for the Uquidation of
indebtedness which are to be included among payments for costs of government are the net payments
for this purpose, or the excess of payments for this
purpose over the amounts received for debt obligaThe
tions assumed or issued during a given period.
different classes of payments for meeting costs of
government are frequently spoken of in this report
as the net paym,ents for expenses, interest, and outlays,
and^r the liquidation ofindebtedness. These payments
are readily separable into the same classes and given
Real or actual receipts. The real or actual receipts
of a nation, state, or municipality are the amounts of
money, or money's worth, which its officials take from
the public, including the governments of other civil
divisions, and which add to the total cash in its
possession or control.
and
for outlays,
objects
total cash in its possession or control.
—
payments
the Mquidation of indebtedness. These classes
include the net amounts paid by governments for the
for
corresponding
outlays,
etc.,
of
to
those
for
expeiises,
which mention has pre-
viously been made.
The
receipts of nations, states,
and municipalities
meeting costs of government are from two sources
revenue and pubhc creditors. The receipts from
revenue here mentioned are the net amounts obtained
from revenue, as above defined, after deducting all
amounts received in error and returned or to be returned in correction thereof. They are readilyxlassifor
from which defoUow the classification of revenues already presented.
Receipts from
creditors, included as receipts for meeting governmental costs, are the net amounts obtained from loans
and other credit transactions. They are the excess
of the receipts which result from the transactions mentioned over payments for the hquidation of loans and
other debt Uabihties during any fiscal period.
In private business, amounts received from loans
and other credit transactions are recorded by entries
only in the cash account and in the habiUty accounts.
The amounts received are generally considered as
belonging to "capital," and not to "revenue." The
corresponding amounts received by governments are
by writers on pubhc finance such as Henry C. Adams,
professor of pohtical economy and finance in the University of Michigan; Richard T. Ely, professor of
pohtical economy in the University of Wisconsin; and
man}'- others
recognized as being resources for meeting the costs of government, and thus to be included
in the same general class as "governmental revenue."
To distinguish receipts from loans and other credit
transactions from those obtained from what has here
fied according to the specific source
rived,
and when thus
classified Avill
—
—
been defined as "revenue," the latter are called, by the
writers mentioned, receipts from "permanent" and
"final" revenues; while those obtained from loans
are designated receipts from "anticipatory" or "tern-
ACCOUNTING TERMINOLOGY.
porary" revenues.
The statutes of many American
states recognize the principles underlying the classification and terminology employed by Professors
Adams and Ely by calling
short term loans "anticipatory loans," "anticipatory tax loans," "anticipatory
revenue loans," "anticipatory warrants," etc.
Receipts from revenues should, as a rule, be arranged
same
and under the same designations
as the revenues from which they are obtained; and
receipts from loans and other credit transactions should
in the
classes
be classified according to the nature of the instruments
evidencing indebtedness, or of the credit transactions
giving rise thereto.
them to the public, which do not lessen the amount of
resources available for meeting the costs of the government. The actual receipts of cities other than those
for m,eeting governmental costs are those which do not
add to the resources available for meeting the costs of
government.
These payments and receipts are of
three distinct classes, called
by the Btu-eau
of the
Census counterbalancing payments and receipts, payments for and receipts from investments, and payments and receipts as agent or trustee.
Oounterialancing payments and receipts of a nation,
state, or municipality are amounts paid to and received
from the same individual, or paid and received for the
same object. They are of four distinct classes: (1)
Payments and receipts in error, balanced by receipts
and payments for the correction of error; (2) payments and receipts for accrued interest on bonds and
on securities purchased by invested funds, balanced
by later receipts and payments of the government or
of the fimds originally paying or receiving; (3) receipts
from debt obligations issued and assumed, balanced
by amounts paid for the redemption or liquidation of
indebtedness during the same fiscal period; and (4)
payments for outlays, balanced by receipts from sales
of real property, and receipts from insurance com-
panies on ^.ccount of losses by fire. Amounts paid
and received in correction of error are given the
specific designation of refunds.
Investment payments of a nation, state, or miuiicipality are the payments for the purchase of securities
and other investments by its invested fimds, such as
those designated sinking, public trust, and investment
funds; and its investment receipts are the amounts
received by its government from the sale of securities
or other properties belonging to the same funds.
Trust and agency payments, and receipts of a nation,
state, or municipality are amounts of money which its
government disburses and receives for the government
of another civil division, or disburses and receives as a
quasi trustee for private individuals, or for public trusts
for
nongovernmental
—
Nominal payments and r^eipts. The nominal payments and receipts of a government are amounts of
money, or money's worth, which one of its divisions,
branches, offices, or accounts pays and another receives, but which do not lessen or add to the total cash
in the possession or control of the government.
Nominal payments and receipts are by the compNew York city called inter se transactions;
by the Bureau of the Census they are most frequently
called transfer payments and receipts, or simply transtroller of
fers.
Nominal payments and
when
The actual fayments of cities other than those for
meeting governmental costs are amounts of monej'^, or
other wealth expressed in terms of money, paid by
uses.
27
receipts of governments,
classified according to the character of the trans-
actions involved in a transfer, are designated as "gen-
payments and receipts," "service transfer
payments and receipts," "interest transfer payments
and receipts," "investment transfer payments and
receipts," and "accoimting transfer payments and
receipts;" and when classified with reference to the
divisions, departments, or offices between which the
transfer is made, as "major" and "minor" transfer
payments and receipts.
General transfer payments and receipts are amounts
of money, materials, or credits set over by accounts or
delivered from one division, fund, enterprise, office,
eral transfer
class of assets or liabilities, object of expenditure, or
som-ce of revenue to another.
and receipts are public utilifurnished by a governmental enterprise; or the
Service transfer payments
ties
service
performed
by one governmental
division,
through one governmental fundj
object of expenditmre, or source of revenue, for another
governmental division, fund, enterprise, office, object
enterprise, or office; or
of expenditure, or source of revenue.
Interest transfer payments and receipts are amoimts
paid to a governmental fund or received by it from a
division of a government as interest on governmental
securities or debt obligations held by the fund.
Investment transfer payments and receipts are amoimts
of securities or other investments paid or delivered by
one fund and received by another fimd, or amounts of
governmental obligations delivered by a division of a
government to a fund, or received by it for a fund, and
the receipt or delivery of cash in return therefor.
Accounting transfer payments and receipts are
amounts of money, or money's worth, which are set
over by credit and debit entries from one class of
accounts to another, as from an asset to a revenue
account, or from an expense to a habiUty account.
Major transfer payments and receipts are amounts
money, or its equivalent, transferred by one independent division or fund of a government to another.
Minor transfer payments and receipts are amounts
of money, or other wealth expressed in terms of
money, paid by one office to another, or set over in
the accounts of a division of a government from one
of
object of expenditure, or source of revenue, to another.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
28
—
Ordinary and extraordinary payments and receipts.
A classification and terminology that have been in
use longer than any of those above mentioned are
those that separate governmental payments and
receipts into two groups, called respectively ordinary
and extraordinary. This classification and terminology originated in governmental finance and grew out
of a policy once observed by aU nations, states, and
municipahties in meeting the costs of their governments. This pohcy has now been abandoned by the
greater
number
of nations, states,
and municipahties,
and in governmental accounting the names ordinary
and extraordinary represent survivals from past
methods without administrative or other significance
at the present time, although they have been adopted
and are generally used in private corporation accounting with their earHer signifleance in governmental
administration. To understand the earher governmental use of these words in the classification and
terminology of payments and receipts, it is necessary
to consider their present administrative use in the
modem
corporation accounting.
One of the objects of private accounting for proprieCorship is to ascertain for each fiscal year the outfield of
come or
results of business operations expressed in
terms of profit and loss. Another object is to equalfrom year to year. To assist in the
ize dividends
accompKshment
of these
two
results,
all
regularly
occurring expenses and all other small expenses are
each year charged against or deducted from revenue
before dividends are declared. The amounts thus
\arged are called ordinary expenses, or expenses that
dinarily occur.
When, however,
exceptionally large
or losses occur, such costs or losses are called
rtraordinary, and are distributed as revenue charges
)sts
'
deductions over a series of years, so that they
not disturb the regularity of dividends. Two
lay
lethods are
sults.
One
losses in
is
employed
for
accomphshing these
to provide for extraordinary costs
re-
and
advance by setting aside reserves from sur-
plus for the exigencies that involve these expenditures;
and the other is to charge them temporarily to a
suspense account, and
later,
when
it
may
be found
most advantageous from an administrative point
view, to charge
them
of
to revenue.
Modem governments, unhke private corporations,
can seldom accumulate large and effective reserve
funds for meeting extraordinary governmental costs.
But few American cities hold funds of this character,
and they are principally for insurance purposes, and
the only funds of the kind that are now held by
national governments are those included in "war
chests" or hoards of the precious metals to meet the
possible
exigencies
of
war.
At the present
time,
therefore, the average nation, state, or municipality
employs but one method for meeting extraordinary
or abnormal costs and losses, and that
is
by loans
which enable it to do what a private corporation
accomphshes through a suspense account or reserve
fund. These loans permit the government to distribute the burden of the extraordinary costs and
losses
upon the taxpayers over a series of years, in
way that the amounts charged or held in
the same
suspense are deducted with regularity from revenues
by the private corporation. The extraordinary governmental costs to be thus distributed are those
which, Hke the expenses of war, or costs of a city
hall, occur but seldom, and may weU be distributed
through a series of years; while the ordinary govern-
mental costs are those which regularly occur, and
which should therefore, hke the regularly recurring
expenses and interest charges of a private corporaThe application, be met every year from revenue.
tion of the principles embodied in this administrative
pohcy makes the costs of a village schoolhouse extraordinary, since they occur only once in twenty or fifty
years; while similar costs for schoolhouses in cities
needing ten new schoolhouses each year would be ordinary, because recurring in the same way that the
ordinary expenses of a private business recur.
Few American governments employ the words ordinary and extraordinary in the manner described,
which corresponds to the use of the word in private
business and accounts, and is identical with the earlier
governmental usage which gives rise to the admirable
method here referred to as adopted in private accounting.
If any large number of govermnents so employed
these words, the classification would admirably serve
statistical purposes and would be of large administrative value for governments.
Unfortunately the average American city, as the average European government, has departed widely from the earher adminis-
pohcy followed in financing costs and losses,
and of the cities using the terms "ordinary" and
"extraordinary" no two assign them the same significance.
As a result, no comparative statistical compilation can be based upon local classifications of
payments and receipts as ordinary and extraordinary.
By reason of this fact, the Bureau of the Census
makes no attempt to employ the words in its terminology of payments and receipts, or to predicate any
of its classifications upon the usage with which these
words are employed by any given city.
trative
ACCOUNTING SUMMARIES.
—
Importance of accounting summaries. In both governmental and private business, accounts are made of
administrative assistance mainly through the instrumentality of summaries, or condensed statements of
the facts recorded in or derived from accounts. Without such summaries it is impossible for an administrative officer or other person to gather from his accounts any comprehensive knowledge of his business.
The number
as well as the character of the
summaries
ACCOUNTING TERMINOLOGY.
that are employed
by any
enterprise or
government
determines the extent to which accounts are
assistance in its administration.
made
of
The summaries em-
ployed in accounting are readily separable into two
groups, here spoken of as general or principal, and
29
and those at? the close of the period
which the summary of results is prepared, plus or
minus the changes made therein during that period.
The proper administration by a city of a public or
at the beginning
for
municipal service enterprise, such as a water-supply
electric light and power station, can be
departmental, functional, or subordinate, according to
whether they relate to a business in its entirety or to
system or an
the various subdivisions thereof. Consideration is first
given to the summaries employed in the accounts of
ness methods as are used
private business.
entirety involves also, a similar
—
Summaries in accounts for proprietorship. Private
undertakings conducted for gain, as has been pointed
out, make use of proprietorship accounts.
To be of
administrative assistance, they must disclose the property rights of the owners, and exhibit the relation of
those rights to the assets or possessions of the undertaking, and to the claims of creditors and trust beneficiaries thereupon.
They must also disclose the
upon
effect or result of current financial transactions
the property rights of the owners.
ment
The accomplish-
of these ends in accounting for proprietorship
—
two principal summaries one a statement of
business condition and the other of business results.
requires
The statement of business condition is most commonly called, in the case of a solvent concern, a balsheet, and in the case of an insolvent one, a statement of affairs. The summary of results is called a
profit and loss account or statement, or a revenue and
expense summary, or is given some other descriptive
designation, depending somewhat upon the nature of
ance
the business.
These summaries assume many forms, depending to
a large extent upon the magnitude and character of the
data to be summarized, and upon the facts or details
desired to present. With all details eliminated,
the form assumed by the balance sheet of an enterprise for gain is as follows
it is
concerns.
net expenses or in providing revenues from the
enterprise for other municipal purposes, may be shown.
ing
in the preceding paragraph.
Summaries such as those described above are all
that are employed by enterprises for gain whose only
use of accounts is to disclose the amount of assets, liabihties, and proprietary interests, and to measure the
Such enterprofit and loss for given fiscal periods.
passage of
in
number,
are.
with
the
prises, though many
decreasing
prorepresent
a
constantly
years coming to
portion of the total; while an ever-increasing nimiber,
whether publicly or privately owned, are striving to
arrange their accounts and provide summaries thereof
in such a way as to enable the accountants and administrative officers to demonstrate when and how gains
are realized or losses suffered, and also to measure the
amount of such gains and losses. To accomphsh these
the accounts of this class of enterprises are
divided and subdivided so as to record separately the
revenues obtained from every source, the costs of every
functional activity, and the value of the property emresults,
ployed in connection with each activity.
are
In this statement, the total liabilities and proprietary
must equal the assets, and the amount of pro-
interests
ties
from the
assets.
disclosed
by deducting. the
In like manner, the
service enterprise,
may
be
summed up
liabili-
results of the
transactions of a nontrading concern, such as a
pubHc
or stated in a
simple form, as follows:
Revenues
Expenses
its
The accounts of such mimicipal enterprises, therefore,
must be proprietorship accounts, and the summary
statements called for must be similar to those described
for,
is
methods in their
manner of keeping
of these
accounts, in order that the effect or results of the operation of the enterprise upon the city, either in increas-
Proprietary interests.
prietary interests
The employment
Further,
these various divisions and subdivisions of accounts
Liabilities.
Assets.
secured only by adopting substantially the same busiby private owners of similar
$
$
Interest
Profit
The profit, in this case, is always the excess of revenues over expenses and interest. In case the expenses and interest are greater than the revenues, the
But whatever the result is, the amount
result is a loss.
of profit or loss shown in the statement should agree
with the difference between the proprietary interests
summarized in accoimts especially arranged therewhich are given many specific designations, but are
referred to in a general
way
as "controlling accounts,"
summaries subordinate to the principal or general summaries described
The number and characin the preceding paragraph.
ter of these controlling accounts will depend upon the
nature of the business in which they are employed and
the simplicity or complexity, or the varying number of
the accounts utilized for administrative purposes.
Swmmaries in private fiduciary accounting. Neither
the balance sheet nor the profit and loss account above
described is of importance in the accounts of trustees
or agents, except where the agency or trusteeship
involves primarily the care of productive properties
or enterprises, and the trustee is required to show how
much the owners have gained or lost by his management of the property or enterprise. In the case of
productive properties, the business is conducted by
and which are in
fact accounting
—
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
30
the agent or trustee solely with reference to the property rights of the owners, and hence his accounts are
But when the agent
intrusted with the expenditure of money
proprietorship
trustee
accounts.
or
is
or
the disposal of or acquisition of property in specified
ways, the accounting summaries must reflect the
nature of the agency or trust, and the extent to which
the duties and obhgations under the same have been
fulfilled.
The summary
mates in form the
of such accounts approxi-
and loss, statement rather than
the balance sheet of an enterprise for gain. The
profit
essential entries in such a
summary
are as follows:
Amount received in trust, or trust to be discharged
Amount paid in trust, or trust diseliarged
Amount on hand,
$
or trust not yet discharged....
When an
individual holds a fiduciary position, such
as that of executor of an estate from which an income
or revenue is derived, he generally accounts separately
and income, and each summary
embodies the essential fact called for by the condensed
statement or scheme of reporting given above.
for the principal
Summaries of fiduciary accounts exhibit the extent
which special fiduciary obligations have been met
or discharged. They do not provide the data for
to
measuring the efiiciency of an agent or trustee. To
accomplish such a result, the summaries described
must be accompanied with supplementary exhibits,
generally called by accountants "schedules," which
must present all the data necessary for the purpose
mentioned. Such exhibits, which may be given any
form that will best present the facts needed for demonstrating the efiiciency of an agent or trustee, bear the
same
relation to the principal or general
summary
above described that the controlling accounts of various orders do to the general summaries of the enterprise conducted.
—
Summaries of governmental business. ^As the accounts of a commission merchant diifer from those
of a manufacturing or transportation company, and
as the accounts of all three differ from those kept by
the executor of an estate, so governmental accounts
though embodying the same fundamental principles
differ from
In hke manner, governmental sumthese accounts.
maries must differ from those employed by all other
classes of business, whether involving the idea of proprietorship or that of responsibihty.
In each case, the
summaries, to be significant, must present data that
are of administrative importance, and in forms that
throw Ught upon administrative problems. These
problems of governmental business are greater in
number and more complex in character than those of
any private business, and for that reason governmenas the accounts of the classes mentioned
—
data require for their proper presentation
either the use of a larger number
of simple statements or summaries, or the employtal financial
in
summary form
ment
first
complex statements. Consideration is
some of the simple summaries of govern-
of very
given to
mental business.
—
No ac1. Summaries of governmental expenditures.
counts of nations, states, and mimicipalities having
responsible representative governments are of greater
administrative importance than the accounts which
summarize expenditures and show their relations to
appropriations. Such accounting summaries measure
the fidelity with which the executive officers have
complied with the instructions given them by the legAll cities in the
islative branches of the government.
United States with proper accounting systems prepare monthly and annual summaries of this character.
These summaries are prepared not only by the
responsible heads of the several administrative departments, but also by the general fiscal officers of the
cities
the comptroller or auditor, and the treasurer.
The departmental and general summaries of expenditures should be arranged so as to present the following
facts: (1) The balance brought forward from the
appropriations of preceding years formally reappropriated for the current year; (2) the annual appropriation or appropriations included in the budget;
(3) the appropriations made after the preparation of
the budget or in addition thereto (4) the total appropriations; (5) the matured bills, paid or payable, for
costs of government; (6) the miexpended or free balance; and (7) the amount of this balance at the close
of the year which under the terms of the appropriation
acts is available for the succeeding fiscal period.
—
;
Very many American cities prepare monthly and
annual summaries that include the greater portion of
the data mentioned in the foregoing descriptive statement; such summaries, if statements of facts, are
exhibits which
show how
far the executive officers of
governments have compUed with the instructions
given them by the legislative branch of the government. But they do not provide any data or means of
measuring the economy or efiiciency of governmental
administration any more than the simplest form of a
profit and loss account presents data showing when
and how profits are made and losses sustained. Governmental accounting summaries, to be of as much
administrative assistance as the best accounts for
must provide the means for measuring
the economy and efficiency of every branch of service
proprietorship,
and the work of every administrative office or officer.
This can be done by methods that are substantially
the same as those utilized by private enterprises for
gain for disclosing when and how gains are made and
The expenditures must be classified,
according to character, into those for expenses, interest,
and outlays. They must further be divided and
arranged in accounts which wiU show the costs of
government for each and every branch of service or
class of outlays.
The accounts in which these expendilosses sustained.
ACCOUNTING TERMINOLOGY.
tures are reported should be arranged, however, in a
of general and subgeneral groups according to
2
.
31
Summaries ofgovernmental receipts.
—The expendi-
number
tures of responsible, representative governments
the functional activity which they represent, in the
same way as the asset and expense accounts of private
always conform to conditions stated in appropriation
acts,.and in well-governed states and municipalities appropriations are always based upon estimates of receipts.
To disclose the wisdom of the legislative branch
of the government and its advisers in making appropriations, and to make past estimates of governmental
receipts an aid in the preparation of future estimates,
nations, states, and municipalities should prepare
monthly and yearly summaries of estimated and realized receipts, classified in detail according to source of
gainful enterprises, and the accounts of each group
should be summarized in controlling accounts of such
orders as may be found most convenient, according to
the size of the city and the volume of
its
business
activities.
To make these accounts of the largest practical
administrative assistance, and true measures of governmental efficiency and economy, governmental
budgets should be prepared along lines that will permit the accounts with expenditures as above described
to be fully articulated with the accounts with appropriations.
Laws should be provided and strictly
enforced to compel aU bihs for expenses to be presented and audited before the close of the year, and all
accounts with outlays to be so kept as to show approxim^-tely the value of the work performed upon all
public -properties and improvements. With these and
kindred regulations in force, requiring governmental
business to be transacted by business-like methods,
governmental accounts and summaries of expenditures and appropriations wiU not only provide measures of the fidelity with which executive officers have
compHed with the instructions of the legislative branch,
but will become the basis of measuring the economy
and efficiency of every branch of governmental service.
The end here described, however, can net be fully
attained until the accounts of governmental expenditures are so arranged on common or uniform lines as
to provide the means of ready comparisons of the
expenses of each city with those of its neighbors of the
same size and operating under similar conditions.
A number of American cities keep accounts with
,
'
i
appropriations and expenditures in detail, as described
above. In addition, they prepare monthly and yearly
summaries of their appropriations and expenditures,
which are at once exhibits of fiduciary accountability
and measures of executive efficiency and economy.
Such detailed summaries provide the information
under the eight heads stated above not only for the
city as a whole, but also for each object of expenditure
or appropriation. They further show the amount
transferred from one appropriation to another.
Of the cities providing exhibits of expenditures and
appropriations arranged on standard functional lines,
mention may here be made of Cambridge, Mass. The
monthly statements of that city, arranged on the basis
here described, have the great merit of being understood by the average city official and taxpayer, and of
presenting facts relating to the subject in a form that
shows their legal and administrative relations and
provides a basis for testing the economy and efficiency
of administration.
90196—10
3
receipt.
To make
must
these summaries of the greatest
value, they should be prepared
on standard lines which
the arrangement of receipts in groups, according to the character of the revenue and the other
som-ces from which or through which money is obcall for
This standard grouping of receipts must be
based upon a classification devised by the leading
economists and students of governmental finance
throughout the world. There is already a general
agreement among these economists and students, which
is in substance reflected in the classification of governmental revenue receipts made use of by the Biureau'of
the Census in this publication, and presented in previous pages. In form, the city of Cambridge, Mass.,
presents a most comprehensive and intelligible statement of the estimated and realized receipts correspondtained.
ing to the exhibits of appropriations and expendittu-es
previously referred to.
Hitherto the controlling accoimts with receipts kept
great majority of American governments have
been records of the amounts of cash passing into the
treasury, substantially as has been described in preceding paragraphs. Such accounts are measures of
the good judgment of the governmental officials in
making advance estimates of governmental receipts.
They provide, however, no measure or test of the
efficiency of executive officers in. collecting the amounts
that should be received by the treasm-y. To provide
the means of testing that efficiency, accounts must be
kept and detailed summaries prepared such as are provided by the controlling accounts of a private business,
showing for each source of revenue the amounts that
ought to be received and the amounts that actually are
received.
To this end, accoimts should be kept with
"revenue" as well as with "receipts" by methods approximating those employed by the most progressive
private enterprises for gain. Monthly and yearly comparisons in detail of the revenue debits and revenue
receipts, with explanations of the reason for all varia-
by the
and communities with good revenue laws, provide the data for demonstrating the efficiency or inefficiency of fiscal officers, and for other
states and communities will demonstrate the need of
tions, will, for states
better systems of revenue laws.
32
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
3.
Summaries of payments and
receipts.
—The
ac-
counts of a governmental treasiu-er were originally kept
to demonstrate the fact that none of the money received by him had been converted to personal uses,
but that all of it had either been expended for public
purposes as required by law, or that all or a part of it
was still in his custody. The accounts of auditors and
comptrollers were in the beginning kept primarily as a
check upon the accounts of the treasurer. Siunmaries
of the payments and receipts of the treasurer were prepared at an early date by that ofl&cer and also by the
comptroller and auditor, and such summaries in their
earliest form are still necessary in the administration
of governmental finances.
In their simplest form
these summaries show the amounts of money on hand
at the beginning and at the close of each fiscal period.
The progress made in accounting methods, however,
requires that modern governmental summaries of payments and receipts shall be something more than statements, such as those just described, and in particular
that they should state separately the amount of cash
at the beginning and close of the year in the principal
administrative funds, such as the general funds and
special funds for different purposes requiring the reservation of cash and expenditures for specified purposes
only.
To be
of the greatest administrative assistance, as
well as of the greatest value to the general public,
summaries should classify payments and receipts as
described on precedingi pages, at least to the extent
shown in the analysis of Tables 3 and 4 of the present
The receipts thus summarized should include
amounts taken in by the treasurer or treasurers for
any purpose and from any source, and should be classified so as to show the amounts received, respectively,
from the public and from departments of the government. The amounts received from the public should
be further separated so as to show those received for
meeting costs of government and those received for
other purposes; and the amounts received for meeting costs of government should be arranged in groups
which will show the amounts obtained from specified
principal sources of revenue and the amounts received
from credit transactions which increase the net indebt-
report.
all
edness of the nation, state, or municipahty.
On the other side of this summary the payments
including all amounts paid out or disbursed by the
fiscal officers for any purpose and to any person,'
should be classified as described above for receipts,
into those paid to the pubhc and those paid to the
departments of the government; and in tmn, those
paid to the pubHc should be separated into those for
meeting costs of government and those for other pur-
poses or objects. Payments for meeting costs of government should include all amounts paid out by the
preparation and delivery, or the preparation only, of
audited bills or vouchers, or warrants by the comp-
troller or auditor, for the principal classes of expenses,
and outlays, and all amounts disbursed by
the treasurer under circumstances or conditions which
interest,
lessen the aggregate of public indebtedness.
Such a summary
will disclose at
a glance the rela-
tion of. correct administration to public indebtedness.
The nation, state, or municipahty which has an excess
of
revenue over
all
current
costs
of government,
including expenses, interest, and outlays, is, for the
time being at least, decreasing its indebtedness. Such
a decrease may be the result of conservative and economical administration which uses public credit only
for meeting exceptional, nonrecurring, or "extraordinary" costs of government; or it may result from the
fact that the government has reached the limit of its
debt-incurring power, and as a result of necessity,
must pursue a saner administration that in some
respects is along the same lines as an administration
The nation, state,
of the character just mentioned.
or municipality, whose expenses and interest exceed
or even approximate the' amount of its revenue, has
entered upon a course which if not changed will, even
with the greatest increase in local wealth, sooner or
later bring it to the limit of its borrowing power.
•Governmental officials and writers on public finance
are not agreed as to what should be the true pohcy of
nations, states, and municipalities with reference to
public indebtedness; and at the present time definite
facts relating to the amount of public indebtedness
and the relation
governmental transactions
needed even more than discussion of the true policy of governmental administration.
Under such circumstances, nothing can be
done by governmental fiscal officers and accountants
to assist in opening the way for the final determination of the true policy of governments with reference
to pubhc debt that would prove to be of as much
value as the presentation of summaries such as those
above described, which show clearly and exactly aU
the facts about revenues and costs of government as
outhned, and disclose the present drift of the nation,
state, or municipality with reference to pubhc indebtof current
to that indebtedness are
edness.
To be of the greatest value, a summary of payments
and.receipts such as that described must be based upon
accurate accounts, and be associated with promptness and dispatch in the conduct of business.
The
payments to be included in the summary of expenses,
mterest,
audited
and outlays are those represented by the
bills
comptroller
or warrants
upon the
drawn by the auditor
treasurer.
If
such
bills
or
or
warrants are always issued promptly after presentation
of just claims, they represent the current costs of
government as perfectly as the expense account of the
best-managed private corporations represent current
costs of operation.
If, however, claims are not presented when they accrue, or are not audited and paid
ACCOUNTING TERMINOLOGY.
by warrant promptly upon
presentation, neither the
accounts nor the summaries are records or statements
of the current costs of government, and such accounts
and summaries will continue to have a considerable
margin of error until the government corrects its
method
of
transacting business.
This
is
far
more
than changes in methods of accounting, which
are to be considered factors for good only so far as
they assist in stimulating and enforcing correct
methods of administering business.
vital
4.
Summary
of hudgetary expenditures.
—The
gov-
ernments of most American cities prepare more or less
elaborate budgets or statements of expenditures to be
met from current revenue. Some of these cities
include all their costs of government in such a budget,
and thus meet from revenues not only their current
operating expenses but all amounts required for outlays and those to be transferred to sinking funds
or employed for other specified purposes. Summaries
and payments arranged as stated in the'
preceding section will show the relation of revenue
receipts to costs of government, and the formal payments for the liquidation of indebtedness. These
of receipts
summaries, however, will not exhibit the relation between the revenue receipts, or revenue, and the payments other than those for current expenses and interest made specially payable from current revenue by
the terms of the appropriation or revenue acts. A
complete summary of revenue, or revenue receipts,
and budgetary expenditures or the expenses and other
made
specifically chargeable to current reveof considerable administrative
statement
nue, is a
Such statements are at
assistance.
significance ani
frequently
presented under the
very
time
the present
revenue
and
expense," a term
of
term "summary
since the desapplicable
to
them,
strictly
which is not
proper
use in referone
to
not
a
"expense"
is
ignation
charges
ring to
amounts transferred
to sinking funds,
dis-
meeting the costs of outlays, or for similar
though paid from revenue. A better,
even
purposes,
designation for referring to
descriptive,
more
because
from revenue by the
payable
made
amounts
all these
is "budgetary
appropriations
of
the
terms
specific
bursed for
expenditures."
—
Summaries of revenues and expenses. ^A governmental summary of revenues and expenses is a statement which shows on the one side, either in a single
entry or in a number of specific entries, the amount
of accruing revenues for a given fiscal year, and on the
other side the accruing expenses for the same period.
By accruing revenues is meant the amount of revenue
5.
entered in the accounts to the credit of that
year.
In practice, it is the amount charged in revenue
accounts as that which ought to be collected from
various sources for governmental uses. By accruing
that
is
expenses are meant those which have been approved
33
and audited by the proper accounting officer. In all
the best managed cities the accruing expenses here
mentioned are identical with the warrant payments
They
for expenses by the comptroller or auditor.
correspond to the amounts that would be charged to
expenses in any well managed corporation. With
poor governmental management the warrant payments are more or less defective measures or statements of the costs of government, but no more trustworthy or accurate exhibit of such costs can be obtained by any system of accounting until or unless
the business administration of the city is improved.
In theory, at least, accrued governmental revenues
correspond to the accrued revenues of a private business, which are always employed to measure the curThe accrued reverent profit or loss of an enterprise.
always
tend
to increase the
nues of a private business
For administhe
current
losses.
profit or decrease
must
these
accruals
be
placed over
trative purposes
the
business of
accruals
of
expenses.
In
against the
governments considered as the agents of the nation,
state, or municipality, accrued revenues never become factors in any important administrative problem
other than that which concerns their collection, to
which attention has previously been called. Appro-
made on the basis of estimates of revenue receipts, and not revenue charged or to be charged
on the books; and in this and in other ways revenue
receipts and warrant, expenses, and other costs of
government met by warrants, become the essential
factors in the important administrative problems of
government. For this reason, such summaries of receipts and payments as those already described
become of supreme administrative value and importance, and summaries of revenues and expenses are only
statements of academic or theoretical significance notwithstanding their vital importance in private acpriations are
counting.
—
In addition to the
6. Miscellaneous summaries.
foregoing summaries which, with the exception of the
type last mentioned, are prepared in one form or
another by most American cities, there are many
other kinds of summary statements employed in connection with the financial administration of municipalities.
The great majority of such statements are
arranged for the purpose of summarizing data that
are of special administrative significance to the city
preparing them, by reason of the operation of state
laws or specific local regulations. In the present
connection, however, it will be sufficient to mention
only two of these summaries.
In cities where general property taxes are never
collected in the year when levied, or.ki the fiscal year
on whose accounts they are carried, some account
must be kept which, like a summary statement, will
disclose the relation between the tax levies and the
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
34
revenue loans issued in anticipation of their collection.
Such summaries may never be included in
formal printed reports, but they constitute important
memoranda for the guidance of fiscal officers issuing
and of bankers providing governmental loans.
A summary of the same general nature is prepared
by cities showing that their sinking fund assets and
their method of accumulating such assets suffice to
provide the funds for liquidating all loans when due.
7. Summaries of current funds and, accounts.
^All
the summaries hitherto described are simple ia form
and easily understood by all. With" few exceptions
each, directly or iadirectly, shows the relation of two
—
classes of financial data.
The most
vital
facts in
each case may be summed up in a balance-sheet form,
although some of them may be presented better in a
form that approximates that of a private profit and
loss account.
Many cities content themselves with
keeping accounts and printing separate summaries
such as those already described while others endeavor
to include part or all of the data included in summaries of the types described under 1, 2, and 3, together with certain other data, in a single statement
which may be called a statement of condition, corresponding in governmental business to that section of
the balance sheet of a private business which includes
;
and proprietary interests.
different names, and
may best be described by calling them summaries of
current funds and accounts.
Such a summary will
show at the beginning of a fiscal year on the debit side
(1) the cash on hand, as indicated in the outline of
"summaries of receipts and payments," and (2) the
current assets,
Such summaries
liabilities,
are given
many
estimated receipts for meeting governmental costs,
ks described under "sununaries of governmental receipts;" and on the credit side (3) the debt liabilities
to be met during the current fiscal period or directly
from the assets credited to that period and (4) the
expenditures authorized for the fiscal period by genThe balance
eral and special appropriation acts.
between the two sides, if on the credit side, represents
current resources available for future appropriation
or for meeting indebtedness, or for making investments; while a debit balance marks a prospective
deficiency which must be met by the creation of a
permanent or floating debt.
The amounts to be included in a summary such as is
here outlined for any date subsequent to the opening of the fiscal year will be for (1) and (3), respectively, the cash in the treasury and the outstanding
The correliabiHties at the date of the summary.
sponding amounts to be included under (2) will be
those of the original estimated receipts less the cash
obtained from sources that have not created a liability
to be included under (3) and the amounts to be similarly included under (4) will be those of the original
;
appropriations less the expenditures previously
made
in consonance with the terms of the appropriation
acts.
is not a statement of a
accounts, but of
proprietorship
employing
It shows on the
accounts.
ploying fiduciary
for
government
the
the cash intrusted to
Such a summary
business
one emone side
govern-
mental uses, and the amounts which the government
is expected to realize from specified sources for those
uses, or the failure to realize, which it is expected to
explain. It exhibits on the other side the debts and
expenditures to be met or authorized to be met from
the amounts first mentioned, and thus the specific uses
to which the amounts first mentioned are applied.
Such a summary, therefore, brings into one statement
an exhibit of the current administrative problems of
the executive officers, including the fiscal and other
officials.
On
previous pages mention has been
fact that in recent years
made
some American
of the
cities
have
installed proprietorship accounts to take the place of
the earlier fiduciary accounts. The great majority
of accountants who are engaged in installing these
accounts insist that in such a scheme it is improper to
include in a summary of condition such as the one here
referred to any such exhibit as that mentioned under
These accountants contend that from the stand(2).
point of proprietorship it is inadmissible to include in
the summary any revenues that have not accrued and
become charges against definite persons. If this contention is sound in theory and law, as it appears to be,
these accounts should show in the summary of current
funds and accounts only the revenues which have
actually accrued. The summary as thus prepared
would show a greatly fluctuaJting proprietary interest
through the year, as if the cit^cfedit or basis of credit
were fluctuating with the forpal levying of taxes and
the collection of revenue. .As stated on previous
pages, the test of all accounts is in the administrative
assistance which they render the officials responsible,
for good government, and time alone can decide
which of the two systems of accounts is more desirable
those first described, whose summaries show each
—
month what the executive
officers are authorized to do
and the resources on which the authorizations are
based, or those of the latter type, whose summaries
disclose not what is to be done and how it is to be
done, but what has been formally charged as amounts
owed by or owed to the city.
8. Summary of investments, properties, and accumulations.
The summaries heretofore described are
primarily exhibits of official responsibihty and pubhc
obUgations to be met and the resources provided or
expended for meeting them during a limited fiscal
period, principally in the future; but governmental
accounts should not only look to the future but be
records of the past. They should summarize the outcome of past transactions so far as their results provide
—
ACCOUNTING TERMINOLOGY.
properties and public improvements for the use of the
present and future, or lay burdens of debt and taxation
upon the present and future. The accounts in which
these records are kept may be made an essential part
of the circle of accounts
from^which are obtained the
data for the summary last described, or they may be
recorded in an independent circle of accounts, as may
seem most convenient.
—
all governmental properties
producand nonproductive and pubhc improvements;
and on the other side (3) the fixed or funded debts
incurred in the past; (4) the amounts of the funds and
tive
along this line has yet been prepared that has been
more than a limited number of those
satisfactory to
has either been so complex as to be
by only a few, or it has omitted
some facts of administrative importance, and thus has
been an imperfect and often misleading exhibit. Until
interested, since
it
readily understood
some more simple method oi summariziag
the financial data of administrative importance is
devised than has yet been presented to the public, the
or unless
all
A governmental summary which will provide the
information outhned above must show on the one side
(1) all funds with investments which are held for governmental uses, such as sinking funds, pubUc trust
funds for governmental uses, and general investment
funds, and (2)
35
—
properties acquired as the result of free contribution
from the pubhc, either with or without specified conditions, and those set aside for specified purposes; and
(5) the amounts acquired from compulsory revenues.
All amounts included under (4) and (5) constitute
revenue accumulations for the more or less permanent
uses of the government, and correspond to the prointerests of an enterprise conducted for
and employing proprietorship accounts. Of
these amounts, those included under (4) correspond to
those amounts which, in the case of a private enter-
prietary
profit
prise, are reserved or constitute its surplus reserves.
—
9. General governmental summaries,
A few governmental accountants and governmental ofiicers are
giving thought to the preparation of general summaThey would
ries of governmental financial condition.
include in such summaries aU data presented in the
summaries outlined under (7) and (8). No summary
official and the average private citizen
more of interest and of administrative
the summaries previously described than in
average city
will find far
value in
the one here referred to.
Names of governmental summaries. The average
commercial accountant knows of but two business
summaries the one which he calls "balance sheet"
and the one called "revenue and expense" or "profit
and loss" account. When he is called in as an expert
to arrange governmental accounts, he applies these
names with but little discrimination to governmental
statements, and hence we find American cities referring
to aU the sunmiaries mentioned, respectively, under
(1), (2), (3), (7), (8), and (9) as balance sheets, or trial
balances, although no one city applies the designation
mentioned to more than one of these statements. None
of these governmental sunomaries above referred to,
and none of the others which have been described, is a
true balance sheet in the sense in which that term is
employed in private business for gain. They are all
governmental statements, and should be given designations which are as little as possible associated with
summaries of private enterprises for gain, in the same
way that those summaries are distinct in name and in
form from those for private fiduciary accounting.
—
—
THE ECONOMIC AND SANITARY SUPERVISION OF CITY MILK SUPPLIES.
By Moses
N. Bakee, C. E.
More or less complete information regarding the
sanitary and economic supervision of milk supplies
during the year 1907 is presented in Table 56 for all
of the 158 cities covered by this report.
In addition,
milk ordinances from about 65
fully
cities have been careexamined by the writer and are considered in the
latter part of this discussion.
—
Need and underlying principles of milk supervision.
Adequate public supervision of milk supplies is yet
so relatively recent in origin as well as infrequent, as
eloquently witnessed by the blanks and by the
standards shown in Table 56, that a statement of the underlying principles seems desirable.
is
many low
all, it may be noted in passing that no other
food or drink, except water, has so vital a
relation to health as milk and that few have greater
significance in domestic or family economics.
The
economic importance of milk and the evils of robbing
it of its nutritive value by skimming or by diluting it
with water were recognized long ago and laws against
adulteration, in this early and limited sense, have
been on the statute books of many states for years;
but pubUc enforcement of these laws has generally
been very lax in character and inadequate in extent.
Such attempts at public control of the milk supply
as have been made, although generally classed as
sanitary measures, have been economic in character,
while really vital sanitary regulations of the milk supply have, until quite recently, been almost entirely
First of
article of
overlooked.
There
skimmed
is
nothing
unhealthful
or watered milk, in
or
and
dangerous
of itself.
in
Such
adulteration is a matter of economics and fraud, except
by deceiving the ignorant or uninformed
in so far as
robs infants, children, and invalids of their chief
or only source of nutrition. jFrom the viewpoint of
health, the real and very grave dangers in milk lie in
its possible and unfortunately too common dirtiness,
and in its possible infection by the germs of speciiic
it
typhoid fever, tuberculosis,
Dirt is not only a frescarlet fever, and diphtheria.
quent carrier (not originator) of disease germs, but it
is also, when combined with high temperatures, a
sure cause of rapid increase of fermentative bacteria
diseases,
particularly
(36)
liable to produce stomach
and particularly the sunomer
diarrhea and other illnesses so common and so fatal
to infants and young children.
Typhoid and scarlet fever and diphtheria do not
get into milk through the cows, but are introduced by
milkers or by handlers of milk or milk containers or
other dairy utensils. Typhoid fever is frequently
in milk.
and
These bacteria are
intestinal troubles,
introduced into milk by the use of polluted well water
or other water used in washing milk cans or bottles.
Tuberculosis infection, alone of the four diseases mentioned, may come from the cows which give the milk,
as well as from the milkers who draw it or the persons
who prepare it for market or who wash or otherwise
handle milk cans and bottles.
Cattle diseases other than tuberculosis sometimes
spread through milk to man, but it is believed that
this happens only rarely.
Various disturbances of
the normal conditions of milch cows, particularly if
they cause fever, may give rise to injurious substances
in milk.
Brief as is the foregoing statement of the principles
underlying the sanitary and economic supervision of
milk supplies, it will suffice to show the great importance of a continuous, efficient public supervision of
everything pertaining to the production of milk, its
preparation for market, and its transportation, storage, sale, and dehvery to the consumer.
This includes
public oversight of the health, food, care, and shelter
of the cow; the health and carefulness of all milkers
and handlers of milk and milk containers the temperature of the milk and the general cleanliness of its
handling from the time it is drawn from the cow until
it reaches the consumer
and finally, the bacterial and
nutritive contents of the milk.
;
;
—
What Table 66 aims to show. On turning to the
headings of Table 56, it will be seen that they deal,
first of all, with the number of inspections of various
sorts made by each city in 1907.
These include, following their order in the table: (1) Inspections of
cows, stables, and dairy houses, or inspections at the
source of the milk supply; (2) inspections of milk
depots and stores, or centers of distribution and sale
(3) inspections of milk in order to determine the
SUPERVISION OF CITY MILK SUPPLIES.
37
amount
of fats and other solids contained in the milk
other contents being the natural water which
makes up about 88 per cent of average normal milk)
(4) inspections of milk to ascertain its bacterial contents, 'which are generally enumerated by totals only,
entire or general lack of one or
(all
classes of inspections, the
regardless of kind; (5) inspections to ascertain the
milk, once or oftener a year.
temperature of the milk at delivery to consumers.
The statistics included under these heads are mere
statements of the number of times per year which
these five classes of inspection were made. They are
followed by a column showing the temperature to
which the milk must be cooled
(a low temperature
being essential to prevent the multiplication of bacteria and the souring of milk) and by another column
showing the time withiri which the milk must be
cooled.
The latter is of the utmost importance, for
at high temperatures bacteria multiply with great rapidity in a few hours' time, and most of the milk delivered to cities of any size is from twelve to twentyfour hours old before delivery, while much is stiU
older.
Consequently, market milk, unless treated
with preservatives, which is generally unlawful, must
be cooled as soon as possible after it is drawn from the
cow and must be kept at the desired temperature
until it is delivered to the consumer.
Following the cnl nmn last referred to is a column
showing whether or not the tuberculin test is applied
to milch cows to determine whether they are free from
The final column gives
tuberculosis or consumption.
bacterial contents of
limit
set
to
the
the numerical
the milk, or else states that such a limit is "not fixed."
By way of explanation of the great range in the bacterial limits reported in Table 56, it may be said that
the total bacterial contents of milk, even more than
of water, are only a presumptive and not an absolute
index of sanitary quality. A high number of bacteria
indicates that the milk contains dirt, or was not properly cooled and kept so, or is older than it should be.
low number gives reason for believing the contrary.
Neither affords absolute proof of what has just been
It does not follow, moreover, that milk with
stated.
bacterial
content is teeming with disease germs
high
a
milk
with
few bacteria is free from such germs.
that
or
however, is unfavorable or favorpresumption,
The
number of bacteria is high or
as
the
according
able
in accordance with all
modified
should
be
but
low,
In the present state
conditions.
local
known
other
;
,
A
milk industry, more latitude in respect to the
number of bacteria must be allowed in New York and
Boston, for instance, each of which draws its milk
supply from many states and from distances of 300
miles and more, than is needed for a city like Lynn
or New Bedford, Mass., the dairies supplying which
are doubtless within a few miles of its doors.
Considering now, in a general way, what Table 56 disof the
perhaps its most striking feature is its negative
character that is, the number of cities that report an
closes,
—
more
of the various
temperature and bacterial
standards, and the application of the tuberculin test.
Only 10
of the 158 cities report that all five of the
inspections are periodically
made
for all dairies
and
Nearly 100 report regular inspections of cows, stables, and dairy houses;
about the same number make a similar report for
mUk depots and stores; and nearly as many report
inspections (tests) of fats and solids; but in each class
there are many cities which make but a few periodic
inspections a year.
Only about a fourth of the cities
report bacterial counts as having been regularly made
in 1907.
About one-tenth of the cities report that the temperature of mUk delivered to consumers was regularly
taken once or oftener during the year, although nearly
one-half report a temperature limit as having been set.
The general range of the temperature limit is from
There
45 ° to 50 ° F. (about 45 cities report it as 50 °)
are a few cities reporting a limit as low as 40° on the
one hand and as high as 70° on the other. The time
within which milk must be cooled was reported for
about 70 cities, and in some 50 of the 70 it must be
cooled'"at once." The original reports indicate some
confusion and possible misstatement of the time allowed for cooling, probably owing to a diversity of
practice, both in the ordinance requirements and in
their enforcement.
At best the phrase "at once"
must be interpreted with some latitude, since practical
considerations make a period of a half hour to an hour
almost a necessity. Moreover, an examination of the
ordinances collected shows that many of them merely
provide that the mUk on reaching the city, or while on
sale in a store or milk depot, must not exceed a speciAs already explained, milk should
fied temperature.
be cooled as soon as practicable after it is drawn from
the cow and kept at the specified temperature until
delivered to the consumer properly until it is consumed but public supervision must necessarily stop
with the receipt of milk by the consumer, unless it be
in the case of restaurants, boarding houses, and hotels.
The tuberculin test is reported as required, either
wholly or in part, by about 30 cities. This is onesixth of the number of cities covered by the investiga.
—
—
tion.
The number
is
surprisingly large,
all
things
considered.
Finally, according to the table, about one-fourth of
the cities report a bacterial hmit.
on
this point,
limit
is
"not
A number are
silent
but at least 90 report that a bacterial
fixed."
As sanitary measures, public
control of both bacand temperature are of infinitely more importance than limits and tests for fats and other solids,
yet the table shows that factors which are chiefly economic in character are given far more attention than
are the vitally important factors which concern pubteria
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
38
colonies per cubic centimeter (about a teaspoonful).
There seems to be good reason for believing
that this restriction of control to operations within the
city is generally due more to timidity than to real lack
The extremes named
of legislative authority, real or implied.
lie
health,
The
which
have a large economic value.
from 50,000 to 1,000,000
also
bacterial Umits range
to be
are rare; in fact, there appears
but one city reporting each extreme.
It would
really give a better representation of actual conditions
to say that the range is from 100,000 to 1,000,000,
while the most general figure (reported for about 25 of
some 45 cities making this test) is a round half million.
few cities have a summer limit double that for win-
A
ter, owing to the far greater difficulty of maintaining
low temperatures in summer.
Milk ordinances in general. The original authority
for municipal supervision of the milk supply lies in
state legislation, either in the form of the city charter
—
or special or general statutes.
more or
On
this authorization,
less general in terms, either the city council or
limits.
Otherwise a great mass of state legislation would be
required to cover all the many details of local health
work, and repeated amendments would be required to
bring such legislation into line with the many and
rapid changes in the science and art of sanitation and
the work of health administration. But however this
may be, the effective control of the public milk supply
is impossible unless it covers the production of the milk,
including the cows and their care, and all its subsequent handling, and unless such supervision recognizes
no
city Unes.
the board of health bases a milk ordinance <or a section
relating to milk, which is incorporated in a general
sanitary code. Of 61 ordinances examined, in which
the authority for the municipal legislation was noted,
islation collected
37 were enacted by the city council and 24 by the local
board of health. As a rule, however, the supervision
of the milk supply is vested in the health department,
ally
regardless of
what body passes the ordinance.
General and specialfeatures of city ordinances and state
legislation.
To make this discussion more concrete, ab-
—
some
and city legby the Census Bureau and examined
by the writer will be given. The citations are chosen
for convenience and force of illustration and are generstracts of
of the features of the state
but a very small part of the whole ordinance
—
New York, N. Y. The milk legislation of the city rests largely
on its general prohibition of the sale or bringing into the city, or
keeping for sale, any unwholesome, adulterated, skimmed, or
watered milk, or milk from sick, diseased, or unwholesomely fed
cows. Adulterated milk is defined xmder nine heads, as follows:
,
The comparative recency
of the city milk ordinances
under examination is remarkable. Of about 50, the
dates of which were given, 19 were passed or took
effect in 1907, 10 in 1908, and 1 in 1909, so that practically three-fifths of the whole number were passed
and took
effect in 1907
course, were
and 1908.
amendments
Many
of these, of
(3)
days
only
within a comparatively recent period that attention
has been given to the subject of local milk control, especially in its
^1^
(2)
to or revisions of earlier or-
dinances, but even this fact indicates that
more adequate
it is
Progressive
and aggressive health departments generally base much
of their work on implied as well as on specified powers.
(4)
Milk
Milk
Milk
Milk
containing more than 88 per cent of water or fluids.
containing less than 12 per cent of milk solids.
containing less than 3 per cent of fats.
drawn from animals within fifteen days before or five
after parturition.
Milk drawn from animals fed on distillery waste, or any substance in a state of fermentation or putrefaction, or on any unwhole(5)
some food.
(6) Milk drawn from cows kept in a crowded
or unhealthy condi-
tion.
features.
Nearly 50 of the 60 or 65 ordinances examined made
either a license or a permit a condition of selling milk.
In many of the ordinances the license clauses, with
their detailed provisions about how the Ucense must
be obtained and in what size and style of letters it
should be painted on all milk wagons, took up a large
part of the whole ordinance.
One reason, apparently, why milk licenses or permits are so generally required and why so much attention has been ^ven to the conditions under which
they will be granted and which must be observed subsequently to avoid forfeiture, is that the whole basis of
control of the production and sale of milk has been so
generally based on the power of the city to grant and
revoke such licenses. Oftentimes the control is based
on a general exclusion of all milk and cream not produced under stipulated conditions, quite regardless of
whether a Hcense is or is not required.
Some cities appear to make little or no attempt to
control milk unless it is produced in the city; or, if
produced elsewhere, then not until it is within the city
(7^
(8)
Milk from which any part of the cream has been removed.
Milk which has been diluted with water or any other fluid
which has been added, or into which has been introduced, any
or to
foreign substance whatever.
(9)
Milk, the temperature of which
is
higher than 50° F.
The
foregoing definitions are significant, both because they cover
BO much that is essential to a safe milk supply and because they
or others
much
them are found in a considerable percentage
examined in connection with this review. They
like
of the ordinances
omit, nor does the ordinance elsewhere contain, a bacterial limit and
a provision for tuberculin tests. The rules recognize, and by indirection sanction, the emptying of milk into consumers' receptacles
on the public streets. Such pouring exposes milk to contamination
by
dirt
and
to possible infection
by
disease germs.
The
best prac-
milk to be placed in closed and sealed receptacles as soon as feasible after it is drawn from the cow and to keep
the receptacles sealed until they are delivered to the consimier.
tice is to require all
—
Chicago, III.
Under ordinances passed by the city council in
1908 and rules adopted by the health department in the same year,
the city of Chicago put itself in the forefront of reform in the methods
of milk control.
Taken together, the ordinances and rules contain
comprehensive and detailed provisions for the production and
care of milk, the health and care of the cows, the health of all
who handle milk and milk utensils, and for the storage, distribution,
and sale of milk.
Milk that is unclean must not be brought into the city, and all
milk must be
free
from disease germs.
Unclean milk
is
defined
SUPERVISION OF CITY MILK SUPPLIES.
any milk not produced in accordance with the milk rules
Feeding cows any slops or any refuse from breweries
or distilleries, or feeding them any fermented or putrefactive or
putrescible matter is prohibited. Cow bams and yards must be
kept clean, and no manure may be kept within 25 feet of any stable
door or window between December 1 and April 1, nor within 300
feet during the other months of the year.
Each cow must have at least 400 cubic feet of air space and at
least 2 square feet of unobstructed window glass, and ample provision for ventilating stables must be made. Stables niust be
kept reasonably free from flies, and cats and dogs must be kept out.
as being
of the city.
The rules contain elaborate provisions against allowing persons,
suffering from or in contact with consumption, typhoid and scarlet
fever,
diphtheria, measles, and chicken pox from milking and
from handling milk and milk utensils.
Elaborate rules are laid down for the observance of milkers and
for the care of milk utensils, in order to exclude dirt and possible
infection from the milk.
All water used on dairy farms must be free from dangerous pollution, animal matter, and refuse. An unusual rule is that all
water used for washing cans and utensils must be free from nitrites
and must not contain over 0.009 part of free or of albuminoid ammonia, nor over 1,000 bacteria per cubic centimeter, nor any pathogenic bacteria or colon bacilli. When typhoid fever occurs on a
dairy farm the use of the farm water for washing milk cans or utensils must be discontinued until it has been passed upon by the
laboratory of the department of health.
All milk sold must be free from dirt and must not leave a perceptible amount of sediment on a piece of white linen cloth four
inches square when one quart of well-mixed milk is strained
through it.
Within two hours after it is drawn from the cow all milk should be
strained through clean linen or cotton cloth, then cooled to 50° F.
It should be kept at that temperature until delivered to consumers.
A bacterial limit of not over 1,000,000 per cubic centimeter from
May 1 to September 30, and 500,000 for the balance of the year, is
set for all milk on its arrival in the city.
On delivery to consumers
milk must not contain "an excessive number of bacteria." This
vague prohibition is evidently designed to leave the actual number
largely to the discretion of the health authorities, but it is definitely
provided that milk containing over 3,000,000 bacteria shall not be
sold, and that any dealer who sells milk with this number of germs
on three successive days shall have his milk excluded from the city
until his
methods have been investigated and properly regulated by
the department of health. The sale of milk containing tubercles,
typhoid, diphtheria, and other pathogenic germs or gas-producing
micro-organisms is prohibited.
Separate rules governing milk stations and milk stores have been
promulgated. These cover much the same ground, so far as appliIn addition, rules are in force
cable, as the rules already outlined.
which require that all milk sold in stores where other merchandise
is kept for sale must be sold in "tightly closed and capped bottles
or receptacles."
The
general milk ordinance passed by the city council in April,
an important clause relating to the tuberculin test
1908, contained
Subsequent ordiof cows, with pasteurization as an alternative.
nances passed by the city council on July 13, 1908, deal more
They required the tuberculin test,
specifically with these matters.
beginning January 1, 1909, for all cows used to supply (1) milk,
cream, buttermilk, or ice cream, (2) butter, and (3) cheese, with an
alternative provision for pasteurization during the five years ending
January 1, 1914. The ordinance requiring the tuberculin test, and
the health department rules governing the details of the test and of
pasteurization, are here reprinted substantially in full, as follows:
ORDINANCE REQUIRING TUBERCULIN TEST' OF COWS.
milk, cream, buttermilk, or ice cream shall be
sold, offered for sale, exposed for sale, or kept with the intention of
selling within the city of Chicago after January 1, A. D. 1909,
Section
1.
No
'
39
unless such milk or cream or the milk or cream contained in buttermilk and ice cream be obtained from cows that have given a satisfactory negative tuberculin test within one year; the cows having
been satisfactorily tested shall be marked "tuberculin tested" and
shall be numbered and a certificate shall be filed with the division
of milk inspection of the department of health of the city of Chicago
upon forms furnished by the commissioner of health, giving the
number, a brief description of the animal, the date of the taking of
said test and the name of the owner. Said certificate shall' be
signed by the person making such test; provided, however, that
from January 1, 1909, for a period of five years, to wit, until January
1, 1914, milk or cream or buttermilk and ice cream made from milk
or cream obtained from cows not tuberculin tested or not free from
tuberculosis may be sold within the city of Chicago if the milk or
cream from said cows is pasteurized according to the rules and regulations of the department of health of the city of Chicago.
Section 2. Any milk, cream, buttermilk, or ice cream offered
for sale, exposed for sale, or kept with the intention of selling within
the city of Chicago, which shall be found within the city in violation
of section 1, shall be forthwith seized, condemned, and destroyed by
the milk and food inspectors or other duly authorized agents or
employees of the department of health of the city of Chicago.
Section 3. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from
and after January 1, 1909.
RULES KBGULATINQ THE TUBERCULIN TESTING OP COWS.
Rule
1.
Who may make
be made by
the test.
—^Tuberculin tests made on ani-
Chicago with milk or milk products may
licensed graduate veterinarians, federal or state veteri-
mals supplying the city
of
narians, federal, state, or city dairy and milk inspectors, and by
persons regularly employed by the Chicago department of health
for that
purpose.
—
The regular injection method of
2. The test to be employed.
tuberculin testing shall be employed. The temperature shall be
taken at least four times on the day preceding the-inoculation, and
at least six times on the day following the inoculation, at not less
than two-hour intervals. A rise of 2 degrees over the average temperature on the day preceding the inoculation shall be considered
a positive test. If a rise of from IJ to 2 degrees is obtained the
results shall be considered doubtful, and the animal subjected to a
later retest.
Animals that have been added to the herds within the
last six weeks shall be tested by the ordinary injection test supplemented by Calmette's ophthalmic test, and a positive result with
either one or the' other shall condemn the animal. The department
of health shall have the power to require the retesting of all animals
submitted for milk supply by the Calmette ophthalmic method or
any other method to be decided on in the future.
Rule 3. The numbering and tagging of animals. All tested animals shall bear an indestructible tag indicating the series, and also
the number assigned to the animal. Tags placed by federal, state,
and municipal inspectors will designate (jy abbreviations or otherwise the series represented
Veterinarians supplying the numbered
tags must have their initials or some other distinctive mark appear
on the tag with the number to indicate the series.
Rule 4. Statement to be submitted. ^A statement must be filed
with the division of milk inspection for every tuberculin-tested animal supplying the city of Chicago with milk or milk products. This
statement must indicate the number and series given to the animal,
which number and series must correspond with the tag or mark
worn by the animal. This statement must also state the age and
color of the animal, and any other distinctive marks shown by the
animal. In addition, the statement must show the temperature
record of the animal on the days preceding and following the test,
the date and the exact timfe of taking these temperatures, and the
date and time of making the injection, and amount and kind of
tuberculin used; the name of the owner and the signature of the
person making the test, together with the official capacity of said
person or persons making the test, 'and their address. The statement submitted shall also indicate the date of the last tuberculin
test made upon the animal and the method of making this test, and
the length of time that the animal has been in the herd.
Rule
—
.
—
RULES regulating THE PASTEURIZING OP MILK AND MILK
PRODUCTS.
The
following rules shall regulate the pasteurizing of milk and
for sale, exposed for sale, or kept with the intention of selling within the city of Chicago, after January 1, A. D.
1908:
Rule 1. Milh and shimmed milk. Milk and skimmed milk shall
not contain more than 100,000 bacteria per cubic centimeter from
May 1 to September 30, and not over 50,00Q bacteria per cubic
centimeter between October 1 and April 30.
milk products offered
—
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
40
—
Rule 2. Cream and ice cream. Cream and ice cream shall not
contain more than 200,000 bacteria per cubic centimeter from May 1
to September 30, and not over 100,000 bacteria per cubic centimeter
between October 1 and April 30.
Rule 3. Milk, skim7neamilk,buttenmlh, cream, and ice cream. An
original package of pasteurized milk, skimmed milk, buttermilk,
cream, or ice cream, exposed to the temperature of the room for
forty-eight hours and stoppered with a sterile cotton plug, shall not
show evidences of putrefaction after being so exposed.
Rule 4. Skimmed milk and ice cream. Skimmed milk and ice
cream shall give a negative test when treated in the following
—
—
manner:
To 5 cubic centimeters of the pasteurized product add 2 drops of a
2 per cent solution of paraphenylenediamin and 1 drop of a 2 per
cent solution of hydrogen peroxide, and agitate.
Not more than a tinge of blue shall be obtained by this test within
thirty seconds after mixing.
Rule 5. Butter. Butter shall respond to the following test:
Twenty-five grams of pasteurized butter placed in a small beaker
and heated by being placed in water at 60° C, the clear butter fat
then poured oft and the remaining liquid then diluted with an
equal volume of water. The mixture thus obtained is now treated
with 2 drops of a 2 per cent solution of paraphenylenediamin and 1
drop of a solution of 2 per cent hydrogen peroxide.
when thus treated, not more than a perceptible blue color shall
be obtained within thirty seconds after mixing.
Rule 6. Pasteurizing temperatures. All pasteurized milk, cream,
skimmed milk, milk products, and milk and cream used in the production of milk prodAicts shall be pasteurized in accordance with
the following regulations:
(A) Continuous pasteurization. In all continuous pasteurization
the milk and cream shall be heated to a temperature which shall
be determined and fixed by the department of health for each
machine at a point corresponding to the temperature required to
kill 99 per cent of the bacteria and all pathogenic bacteria contained in the raw product. For this determination ordinary raw
milk containing in the neighborhood of 3,000,000 bacteria shall be
used and the pasteurized product shall be collected as it fiows from
the cooling apparatus.
All continuous pasteurizers shall be equipped with a feeding
pipe which is so constructed that the pasteurizer can not be fed
in excess of its normal working capacity; that is, in excess of the
working capacity of the machine at which. 99 per cent of the bacteria
are killed when the required amount of heat is applied.
All continuous pasteurizers operated outside of the city limits,
for the ;production of pasteurized milk and milk products to be sold
in the city of Chicago, shall be equipped with an apparatus regulating automatically the. supply of steam and heat, so as to correspond
—
—
—
with and produce the required temperature of the outflow of the
pasteurized product. These automatic thermoregulators shall be
accurate and must be approved by the commissioner of health
before being installed.
A
recording apparatus shall be installed upon all continuous
pasteurizers operated within the city limits, so as to record during
operation the temperature of the pasteurized product as it flows
from the heater. The thermometer of this recording apparatus must
be accurate and kept submerged in the milk in such a way that it is
not exposed to escaping steam or other heat, except the heated
milk.
The records made by this recording thermometer must be accurate and made in a chamber which is kept under lock and key in
the control of the department of health.
The automatic thermoregulating and recording apparatus may be
combined into one instrument, and it is recommended that all
pasteurizers be equipped with both appliances or the combination
apparatus.
(B) neld pasteurization. ^Whenever milk is held during pasteurization in such a manner that the process of pasteurizing is not a
continuous one, namely, a continuous flow of milk through the
heating or heat retaining chamber, the process shall be designated
as "held pasteurization."
Such methods of pasteurization and
pasteiorization appliances or systems installed and used shall be
examined and approved by the commissioner of health, or his duly
appointed representatives, when all of the following requirements
are fulfilled:
1. When the pasteurized product shows that over 99 per cent of
the bacteria and all pathogenic bacteria contained in the raw
product have been destroyed.
2. When the mechanism of the pasteurizer or pasteurizing system
is such that the three important elements, namely, the temperature,
time of exposure, and the quantity of milk exposed at one time can
be readily kept under control and observation by the department of
health
—
•
When the following conditions are complied with:
uniform heating to 140° F. maintained for twenty minutes;
150° F. maintained for fifteen minutes; 155° F. maintained for five
minutes; 160° F. maintained for one and one-half minutes; 165° F.
maintained for one minute.
The time shall be calculated from the period that the entire
quantity reaches the required temperature.
Rule 7. Cooling temperatures. The pasteurized product shall
be cooled at once to a temperature of 45° F. or less. This cooling
shall be so conducted that the pasteurized product is not exposed
This cooling apparatus shall be
to the air or other contamination.
so constructed that it can be readily cleaned and sterilized.
3.
A
—
It is generally understood that for five years pasteurization is permitted as an alternative to the tuberculin test, in order to give
ample time to test the hundreds of herds and thousands of cows furnishing milk and milk products to Chicago.
Boston, Mass. The conditions under which every cow whose
milk is brought to the city is kept must be made known to the board
—
of health,
if
required,
and must be approved by the board, and no
other milk shall be brought into the city.
No milk
shall
be sold
except from cows which have been examined within a year by a
competent authority and shown to be free from diseases dangerous
Ample provision must be made for washing
to the public health.
and sterilizing all dairy utensils and milk containers, and after use
all such articles must be cleansed and sterilized before they are used
again.
State of Maryland.
—Under legislation
of
1898 all dairymen supply-
ing miik to the cities of this state must register their herds with the
It is the duty of the board named
state live stock sanitary board.
such registered dairymen inspected once a
any inspection discloses unsanitary conditions, the board may prohibit the shipment of milk therefrom until
the premises are inade to conform with the rules of the board. At
the request of any owner of dairy herds the board must furnish a
certificate of health to the owner, provided stipulated rules are
complied with and that there is no visible sign of disease among the
herds. -Such certificates are revocable at will. A Maryland law of
to
have the premises
of
year, without notice.
If
up various standards and definitions relating to the production and sale of milk.
1900 sets
Baltimore, Md.
—^Various city ordinances, from 1896 to 1908, con-
tain regulations for controlling the
prohibit the keeping of
unless the
cow
is
milk supply.
Some
any milch cow within the city
of
of these
Baltimore
stabled on ground not less than one-fourth of an
acre in extent, all the land not occupied
by
the stable to be ac-
cow or cows for exercise and fresh air. Not more than
cows shall be kept on any such one-fourth acre.
cessible to the
eight
State of Pennsylvania.
—A general statute
of
May
16, 1908, penal-
milk from which the cream has been removed or
which has been adulterated; penalizes feeding cows impure food
or distUlery wastes; and penalizes failure to allow cows free movement in the open air, at pasture, at least four hours a day. Milk
subjected to infection from persons or animals so that human life
may be endangered, and milk from tuberculous cows or cows suffering from any febrile disease, is declared impure and unwholesome.
The tuberculin test is required for all cows from which milk is supplied to cities of the second class.
Cincinnati, Ohio. All cows from which mUk is sold must have
"good, wholesome, and sufficient pasturage at least twelve hours
in each twenty-four hours each day during the months of May, June,
July, August, and September of each year.
Milwaukee, Ms.— The bureau of milk and food inspection, created by an ordinance of May, 1906, amended in March, 1908, congists of the commission of health, the bacteriologist of the municipal
laboratory, the city chemist, and the milk and meat inspectors.
The bacteriologist and chemist are appointed by the commissioners
under local civil service rules. They must be persons skilled in the
sciences of analytical chemistry and bacteriology.
izes the sale of
—
Minneapolis,
Mnn.—Following
city councils of this
permissive state legislation, the
and several other Minnesota
cities license
mUk
SUPERVISION OF CITY MILK SUPPLIES.
dealers after tlie commission of health has made an investigation
and report on the fitness of the applicant and of his milk supply.
and must send the sputum
The tuberculin
sputum
Minnesota
by the ordinances
test is required
of
a number
of
though it is not specified in the state law.'
Jersey City, N. /.—Dealers are required by ordinance to furnish lists of the persons and places from which the milk which they
sell is taken and to give notice of changes in the same.
This is an
important regulation, which might well be more generally adopted,
and which should be extended to include lists of customers as well.
Such lists properly and promptly made and used are invaluable in
detecting and averting possible epidemics of milk-borne disease.
State of Rhode Island.
State laws require city councils to create
departments of milk inspection, to appoint milk inspectors, and to
license milk dealers on recommendation of the niilk inspectors, all
independent of the local health authorities.
Los Angeles, Col. The sale of pasteurized milk is prohibited
cities,
—
unless
it is
—
Mass. — Cows must be examined once a year by a com-
so labeled.
Worcester,
petent authority and certified to be free from all diseases dangerous
to public health.
Bottles or other milk containers must not be left
with any family in which there
ease,
and
hcEilth.
A preferable rule prohibits the removal of bottles from houses
where there are communicable diseases until permitted to do so by
the board, whereupon the bottles must be removed and sterilized
separately from all other bottles. This plan obviates the Objectionable practice of pouring milk from one receptacle to another and
exposed in the open air.
of milk is required to publish in the
daily newspapers, from time to time, the results of analyses of milk
.nd cream, giving the names of the persons from whom the samples
ere taken and the percentage of butter fat at each test, or else the
average percentage, as deemed best by the inspector; provided,
that when the sample is below the standard the percentage shall be
published and the average not struck. Certified milk is defined aa
having an acidity of not over 0.2, or containing not more than 30,000
bacteria, of any kind, per cubic centimeter, and not less than 3.5
per cent of butter fat at time of delivery to consumer. The board
of health is authorized to appoint a certified-milk commission and
perhaps leaving
Seattle,
Wash.
it
—The inspector
—The sanitary code
February, 1908, prohibits
granting a license to any dairy scoring less than 50 per cent as a
whole or under 20 per cent in any one feature of the dairy score card
of the Bureau of Animal Industry, United States Department of
Syracuse, N. Y.
No milk may be
Agriculture.
and
of
any store or shop unless it
used must be filled in a place pro-
sold from
all milk bottles
purpose and kept at a temperature of not less than
50° F. No milk ticket shall be used more than once.
Albany, N. Y. Health bureau regulations of 1897 prohibit the
use of pasteboard or cardboard tickets. Paper coupon tickets are
permitted, but must be destroyed after having been used once.
is
in bottles,
vided
for that
—
These regulations contain other features particularly commendable
for rules
made as long ago as 1897.
New Jersey The state food and drug
—
State of
act of 1907 fixes a
milk standard of at least 12 per cent of total solids, not over 88 per
cent of water, and not less than 3 per cent of milk fats. Adulteration
and preservatives are prohibited; also milk produced under unsanitary conditions. Cleanliness and freedom from communicable
diseases are required.
Camden, N.
J.
—Rules
of
the board
of
health adopted in January,
1908, provide that all milk dealers and handlers must be free from
tuberculosis. The local health officer must obtain sputum from
anyone in the milk business who is suspected
of
having tuberculosis
As early as 1896 the highest court of Minnesota held that the
tuberculin test was within the powers of the cities of the state.
'
If
is examined has tuberculosis, then the consumptive, if a
must quit handling milk; if an employee, then he muet be
dismissed; otherwise, in either case, the license of the milk dealer
concerned must be revoked.
dealer,
—An ordinance
Wilkes-Barre, Pa.
engaged in handling,
of 1907
provides that
all
persons
milk shall be cleanly in
person and clothing and shall not be less than 16 years of age.
State of Washington.
State laws compiled to the close of 1905
provide that all persons who sell milk from vehicles in any city (from
more than two cows) or from a store must obtain a license from the
selling, or delivering
—
state dairy commissioner.
—
Spokane, Wash. A council ordinance of January, 1906, gives the
board of health jurisdiction over dairies, and requires the board to
employ a bacteriologist. Twice a month the bacteriologist must
examine the milk from each dairy doing business in Spokane.
Butte, Mont.
A city ordinance of January, 1908, requires the
meat and milk inspector to inspect each dairy once every month and
to give each dairyman a certificate of health and of the sanitary condition of his dairy once every three months (if conditions warrant it)
—
—^The health code, as passed by the city council
Springfield, Ohio:
makes it unlawful to sell milk containing
pathogenic bacteria.
Elmira, N. Y.. The board of health ordinance of March, 1905,
adopts the dairy rules given in Farmer's Bulletin 63, of the United
States Department of Agriculture, so far as they, do not require
anything already demanded by the laws of New York.
in
November,
1907,
—
—
The widespread and
campaign against tuberculosis
which is now being waged is already reflected in milk
legislation.
In view of the growing interest in the
subject and its great importance, it seems advisable
to extract from the ordinances and statutes in hand
Tuberculin-test requirements.
rapidly
increasing
the sections dealing with the tuberculin test.
Chicago, III.
—(See reprint already given in preceding section.)
—Section 13 of a city ordinance April 1896,
Baltimore, Md.
as
of
given in a compilation
force
establish rules for certified milk.
to the st*te laboratory of hygiene.
the bacteriologist of the laboratory decides that the person vhose
bottles previously left
consent of the board of
one.
known to be any contagious dismust not be removed without the
This provision is not an uncommon
is
41
June
1,
1908,
is
of state
and city
legislation
21,
on milk in
as follows:
It shall be the duty of any person owning or having control of
cows used for the production of milk for sale or exchange to submit
said cows to the tuberculin test for tuberculosis.
Stale of Pennsylvania.
—Section 7
of a legislative act relating to
the production and sale of milk provides as follows:
On and after the passage of this act, for all milk brought into,
or offered for sale in, the cities of the second class, satisfactory evidence shall be furnished to the bureau of health by the producers
or dealers that said milk has been produced by healthy cows, and
especially that they are free from tuberculosis, which rtjnditions
of health shall be determined by examinations and tuberculin
tests to be made by the veterinarian who may be employed by
the proper authorities of the city. After examinations have been
made, the veterinarian sha'l place upon each animal found by
him to be in a healthy condition an ear tag, to be furnished by the
bureau of health, ahd also furnish the said bureau a certificate
setting forth that each of said animals is free from disease, is being
properly fed, and that the premises occupied by them are in good
sanitary
condition.
Subsequent examinations,
tests,
and
cer-
as aforesaid, may be required by the superintendent,
whenever, in his opinion, based upon rehable information, any
of said animals are in an unhealthy condition, or the premises
tificates,
occupied by them are in an unsanitary
state; and the superinand experts shall at all times have full
and free access to any place or places where such animals are kept,
for the purposes aforesaid, where such animals and the milk therefrom are kept, whether such places be within or beyond the limits
of such cities, and any person impeding such access shall be guilty
of a violation of this act.
tendent, his
officers, agents,
'
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
42
Milwaukee, Wis.
—A city ordinance
of
March
30, 1908, contains
the following section:
Section
24.
sale, either
No person
by wagon,
Milwaukee for
any other kind of vehicle,
sell in said city, any milk or
shall bring into the city of
cart, train, or
or keep, have, or offer for sale, or
cream drawn from cows outside of said city, contained in cans, bottles, or packages, unless such cans, bottles, or other packages containing such milk or cream for sale shall be marked with a legible
stamp, tag, or impression bearing the name of the owner of such cows
from which such milk was drawn, giving his place of business,
including name of city, street, and number, or other proper address,
and unless the owner or owners of such cows shall, within one
year from the passage of this ordinance, file in the office of the commissioner of health a certificate of a duly licensed veterinary surgeon, or of any other person given authority by the state live-stock
sanitary board to make tuberculin tests, stating that such cows
have been tested with tuberculin and found free from tuberculosis
or other contagious, diseases. Such certificate shall give a number which -has been permanently attached to each cow, and a
description sufficiently accurate for identification, stating the date
and place of such examination, and such certificate shall be good
for one year from the date of its issuance.
Such certificate^ howeverj must be renewed annually and filed in the office of the commissioner of health, and each euch certificate shall show in each
case that the animals from which such milk waa drawn are free
from tuberculosis or other contagious diseases.
Minneapolis, Minn.
—The original city ordinance requiring the
tuberculin test was passed in 1895 or 1896, and soon afterwards the
test requirement was upheld by the highest court of the state.
The
city council ordinance, approved
September
20, 1907, con-
tains the following:
'
Section 9. Upon the filing of any application under this ordinance for a license to sell or dispose of milk in the city of Minneapolis,^in case no inspection and test has been made within one year
next prior to the date of filing such application, the dairy and dairy
herds of the applicant for such license or the dairy and dairy herds
of the persons from whom such applicant obtains or is to obtain
his milk for sale within said city, and each and every animal of
such dairy and dairy herds producing milk for sale in said city,
shall be inspected, examined, and tested without unnecessary
delay by the veterinarian of the department of health of the city
of Minneapolis, or by some duly licensed veterinary surgeon, for
the purpose of detecting the presence or absence of tuberculosis
and other contagious and infectious diseases, and in making such
inspection, examination, and test the person so making the same
is hereby authorized to use what is commonly known as the "tuberculin" test as a diagnostic agent for the detection of tuberculosis
in such animal or animals so examined and tested as aforesaid.
After such inspection, examination, and test of such dairies and
dairy herds as hereinbefore provided, each and every animal so
examined and tested shall be tagged by the person making such
examination and test with a tag duly numb''red and of such character as to afford a permanent record of such examination and test
and the results of the same as regards the presence or absence of
infectious or contagious diseases. The department of health of
said city shall furnish all the tuberculin, stationery, and tags necessary and required for mating such inspection, examination, and
test of dairies and dairy herds, but the actual and reasonable cost
of making such inspection, examination, and test, not to exceed
fifty cents for each animal examined and tested, and six cents per
mile for each mile actually traveled by the veterinarian makmg
such inspection in going to and returning from the place of making
such inspection, shall be paid by the applicant for such license
to sell mUk in the city of Minneapolis and the owner of the dairy
and dairy herds inspected as herein providejd. All such dairies
and dairy herds shall be inspected, examined,'and tested as hereinbefore provided at least once every twelve months so long as the
milk produced by them shall continue to be sold and distributed
within the city of Minneapolis. All moneys received by the department of health and its officers for the inspection of dairies and
dairy herds under the provisions of this ordinance shall be accounted
for and paid monthly into the city treasury.
St. Paul,
January
Mlnv.
—Two
sections of
a city ordinance approved
22, 1907, are as follows:
Section 9. No person shall bring into the city of St. Paul for sale,
either by wagon, cart, train, or any other kind of vehicle, or keep,
have, or offer for sale or sell in said city any milk or cream contained
in cans, bottles, or packages unless such cans, bottles, and other
packages containing such milk or cream for sale shall be marked
with a legible stamp, tag, or impression bearing the name of the
of the cows from which euch milk waa drawn, giving his
place of business, including name of city, street, and number, and
unless the owner or owners of such cows shall first file in the office
of the commissioner of health a certificate of a duly licensed veterinary surgeon stating that such cows have been tested with tuberculin and found free from tuberculosis or other contagi6us diseases.
Such certificate shall give a number which has been permanently
attached to each cow and a description sufficiently accurate for
identification, stating the date, the place of examination, the temperature of the cow or cows at intervals of three hours for twelve
hours before the subcutaneous injection of the tuberculin, the
temperature at the tenth hour after the injection of the tuberculin,
and every three hours after the aforesaid tenth hour for twelve
hours,' or until the reaction is completed.
Section 10. No milk which is watered, adulterated, reduced, or
changed in any respect by the addition of water or other substance
or by the removal of cream or milk which has been drawn from
cows suffering from tuberculosis or any other contagious disease, or
milk which has been drawn from cows which have not been inspected
by a duly licensed veterinary surgeon and tested by physical
examination and the tuberculin test for the purpose of detecting
the presence or absence of tuberculosis, shall be brought into the
city of St. Paul, or held, kept, sold, or offered for sale at any place
in said city, * * *
owner
iVcftr.— Cows suspected of
Omaha,
tested, according
approved July
to
having tuberculosis must be
the following extract from a city ordinance
11, 1907:
tuberculin test.
—
Section 3. Rule 1. Whenever the city veterinarian shall find
a cow, whose milk is sold or brought into the city of Omaha, afflicted
with tuberculosis, or one that from its physical condition he haa*
reason to believe or to suspect has tuberculosis, he shall order the
tuberculin test to be made at once on all cows and bulls on the
premises, said test to be made by a veterinarian who has been
legally authorized to practice his profession in the state of Nebraska.
Rule ^. The veterinarian maiii^ the test shall deliver his
report in writing as soon as the test has been completed, to the
commissioner of health of the city of Omaha, said report to be the
—
original chart of test and signed by the veterinarian making
the test, and it shall be unlawful, after five days from said notice by
the city veterinarian, for any person, firm, or corporation to sell, offer
for sale, or bring into the city limits of the city of Omaha any milk
drawn from cows to which the city veterinarian has ordered the
tuberculin test applied, except milk from those cows that said test
shows are free from tuberculosis.
cows' HAVING tuberculosis.
Rule
—All cows having been so tested by the tuberculin
test
to have tuberculosis shall be disposed of and the commissioner of health notified in writing by the owner or person in
charge of the same of the place and maimer of such disposal, and
under no circumstances shall the milk of such cows be sold, offered
for sale, or brought within the corporate limits of the city of Omalia;
and upon failure to dispose of such cow or cows so afflicted the
commissioner of health shall at once suspend the license of the
owner of such cow or cows; and no milk from any cow kept upon the
S.
and found
premises with any cow having tuberculosis shall be sold, offered
for sale, or brought into the city of Omaha.
Penalty. Any person, firm, or corporation found guilty of violating rule 2 or 3 of section 3 of this ordinance prohibiting the sale,
offering for sale, or bringing into the city milk as therein prohibited,
shall be fined in a sum not less than twenty-five ($25.00) dollars
and costs or more than fifty ($50.00) dollars and costs.
—
cows TAGGED.
Ruin ^.--All cows having had the tuberculin test applied shall
be tagged in such a manner that the tag shall be permanent, giving
the date and result of the test made.
Penalty.
Any person, firm, or corporation failing to comply with
any part of rules 1, 2, 3, or 4 of section 3, the heanh commissioner
shall, in addition to the other penalties, have power to seize, confiscate, and destroy any or all milk found in the city of Omaha
which may have been drawn from ,said cows or other cows running
with them.
—
Fall River, Mass.
—Suspected cattle in existing herds,
all
cattle
added to old herds, and the cattle in all new herds established must
be tested, according to board of health rules of April 9, 1908:
Section 16. Before a license is issued to an applicant for the
sale or delivery of milk, skimmed milk, or cream in the city of Fall
River, said applicant shall produce to the milk inspector a certificate
SUPERVISION OF CITY MILK SUPPLIES.
(of
form prescribed and furnished by the board of health) for every
is brought by him or his servants or employees
cow whose milk
into the city of Fall River, or kept, delivered, or distributed with
the latent to sell the same in said city, from a veterinary surgeon
licensed to. practice in Massachusetts, stating that he has given
said cow a careful physical examination, and in his opinion she is
free from tuberculosis or any disease dangerous to public health;
and further stating that every such cow has placed in one of her
ears a tag (of form prescribed and supplied by the board of health),
having a number corresponding to a number to be written on the
said certificate, imless said cow shall already have in her ear a tag
des^ated by the cattle bureau of this state.
Section 17. No cow or bull shall be kept as a part of a dairy herd
whose milk or other products or service is to be sold or distributed
or used in the city of Fall River until such cow or bull shall have
been given a careful physical examination by a veterinary surgeon
as hereinbefore mentioned, and all other requirements of the
preceding section shall have been complied, with. And every
animal which fails to successfully pass such examination shall be
immediately removed from the herd and reported by the veterinary
surgeon making the examination to the board of health; and the
product of such animal or the use of such animal shall not be sold
or offered for sale or for service in the city of Fall River until permission is given in writing by the board of health; furthermore,
such an animal shall not be permitted to be used for dairy pm-poses
either by itself or as a part of a herd whose products are to be sold
or offered for sale or for service in the city of Fall River imtil such
animal shall have been tested with tuberculin by a veterinary
surgeon, as hereinbefore mentioned, and declared, in his opinion,
to be free from tuberculosis or other diseases dangerous to public
health, and shall have been tagged as described in section 16.
Section 18. No cattle shall be added to any herd, nor shall any
new herdsbe established forthe purpose of producing milk, skimmed
milk, or cream in the city of Fall River until after they shall have
been tested with tuberculin by a veterinarian qualified as set forth
in these regulations, and certified by him to be free from tuberculosis or any other disease that might cause the milk or flesh of such
an animal to be injurious to public health; excepting such cattle as
have been tested with tuberculin within one year by the cattle
bureau of this state or a veterinary surgeon acceptable to the board
of health; and all such cattle shall have placed in their ear a tag
designated by the cattle bureau of this state or the board of health.
,
—
Grand Rapids, Mich. The test is demanded by the following
portions of a city ordinance, passed and approved on April 29, 1907:
limits of said city of Duluth, belonging to or controlled by the said
applicant or the person from whom said applicant obtains or is to
obtain his milk, but also of each and every cow, heifer, bull, steer
or calf over the age of six months in the dairy or dairy herd of such
person for the purpose of detecting the presence or absence of tuberculosis or any other contagious or infectious disease, and said commissioner of health, or his said authorized inspector, acting under his
direction and supervision in making such inspection and examination, is hereby authorized to use what is commonly known as the
tuberculin test as a diagnostic agent for the detection of tuberculosis.
Section 6. After such examination and inspection of the dairies
and dairy herds as in the next preceding section provided, an
authorized agent of the department of health of the city of Duluth
shall tag each and every animal so examined, which tag shall be of
such character as to afford a permanent record of such examination,
nor shall such tag be altered, mutilated, orremoved by any one other
than an authorized agent of the health department of the city of
Duluth, and the result of the same as regards the presence or absence
from an infectious or contagious disease, and immediately thereafter
and without undue or unnecessary delay the commissioner of health
shall present the application in section 2 hereof provided for to the
common council of the city of Duluth, and shall accompany it with
a report which shall contain the result of the examination and
inspection of the dairy and dairy herd of the applicant, or of the
dairy and dairy herd of the person or persons from whom the applicant obtains or is to obtain his milk for sale or distribution within
the corporate limits of the city of Duluth; and the commissioner of
health shall also state in such report what disposition, if any, has
been made by the applicant or the person or persons from whom the
applicant obtains or is to obtain his milk of the animals which were
found to be affected with tuberculosis or any other contagious or
infectious disease, if any there were, and whether or not any animals
so diseased are used by the applicant or the person or persons from
whom the applicant obtains or is to obtain his milk for the production of milk for sale or distribution for consumption within the
corporate limits of the city of Duluth.
Section 7. The common council shall thereupon, after proper
nvestigation, whether from a consideration of such report or from
other sources, adjudge and determine what applicants may be
entitled to obtain a license for the sale or distribution of milk
within the corporate limits of the city of Duluth, and shall thereupon by resolution grant the license applied for to such of the applicants as may be, in the opinion of the common council, entitled
thereto under the provisions of this ordinance.
,
Norfolk, Va.
cows who sell milk within the city limits
shaH^cure a metal tag from the milk inspector's department for
each cow showing that all the milch cows have been subjected to the
tubeVciilin test, and if there are any cows in the herd which do not
ass the tuberculin test, the sale of milk from such cow or cows shall
Ije excluded from the city, and such cow or cows shall be separated
from the rest of the herd, and upon order of the milk inspector shall
be disposed of. The milk inspector is hereby empowered to cause
any cow, from which reaction to the tuberculin test is shown, to be
isolated from the herd.
That the milk inspector or his authorized assistant or assistants
shall make such tuberculin test according to the rules and regulations of the board of health of the city of Grand Rapids, andf the
report thereof shall be made upon temperature charts furnished by
said board of health. All cows from which nfllk is sold within the
city of Grand Rapids shall be subjected to the tuberculin test under
the provisions of this ordinance at least once a year and oftener if so
directed by said board of health, and that no test or report made by
any person or persons other than the milk inspector or his assistant
shair be accepted as a test or report under the provisions of this
That the owners
of all
ordinance.
Mnn.—As at Minneapolis and St. Paul, all licenses to
milk are granted by the city council, after application. to and
report by the commissioner of health. A cotmcil ordinance approved
Duluth,
43
of
March
—Although the following extract from an ordinance
seems somewhat indefinite, the
12, 1901,
test therein
men-
tioned appears to be the tuberculin test, especially as Table 56 indicates that the tuberculin test is required:
Any owner of cows selling milk within the city of Norfolk shall
have such cows tested for tuberculosis by a reliable veterinary
between September 1 and December 1, of each year, and shall file
with said inspector within said time a certificate of said veterinary
as to the condition of the cows, and should any of said cows have
tuberculosis no milk shall be sold by such owner within the city of
Norfolk while in possession of such tubercular cow.
•
Yo7\kers,
N. Y.
—Licenses for the sale of milk are required under
the provisions of a sanitary code adopted in 1905. Such licenses are
"subject to such conditions as may seem best to said board for the
Applicants for milk licenses must
answer such questions as may be required by the board. Included
in the code is a schedule of questions to be asked yearly of all
applicants who propose to bring milk into the city from outside its
limits.
Two of the questions are: Has tuberculin test been applied
to herd? If so, when? The code states in this connection:
preservation of health," etc.
sell
on December
7, 1904, says:
the filing of the application with the commissioner of health, as provided in section 2 thereof, said commissioner,
or an authorized inspector or veterinary, acting under his instructions, shall proceed, without unnecessary delay, to inspect the
dairy and dairy herd of such applicant, or the dairy and dairy herd
of the person or persons from whom the applicant obtains or is to
obtain his milk for sale or distribution within the corporate limits of
the city of Duluth, and it shall be the duty of said commissioner of
health to make or cause to be made, under his direction and supervision, an examination and inspection, not only of each and every
animal producing milk for sale or consumption within the corporate
Section
5.
Upon
No herd shall be considered as having had the tuberculin test applied unless chart showing the test of each animal thereof in detail
shall have been filed with this board of health, verified by a registered veterinarian, the same to be valid for a period of not more than
one year from date of test; a supplementary report to be made for
test of each addition to herd.
According to Table 56 the test was not applied in 1907.
Portland, Me. ^An ordinance of the board of health, enacted June
—
29, 1897, is as follows:
Section 1. No person shall at any time, by himself, his clerk,
servant, or agent, directly or indirectly, sell or offer for sale, or keep
with intent to sell, any milk or cream within the city of Portland,
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
44
same therein for the purposes of sale, unless the cows
from which the same shall have been taken shall have been examined by tuberculin test or otherwise sufficient to determine the
physical condition of the cow, applied by some veterinarian approved by this board, and a certificate of such examination, giving
the name and residence of the owner or keeper of the cow, and a
description sufficient for her identification, and the place and conditions as to the food and drink furnished or to be furnished such
cow, and showing that such cow is healthy and free from disease,
shall have been filed with the secretary of this board.
Section 2. Veterinarians for such examination may be approved
and their approval revoked at any time, but their certificates shall
remain in force one year and no'longer.
Section 3. Any violation of the foregoing by-laws by any person
or corporation shall be deemed a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof such person or corporation shall be punished by a fine
of not more than $50, and all by-laws upon the subject to which these
by-laws relate heretofore ordained by this board are hereby revoked.
or bring the
Fort Wayne, Ind.
—A city ordinance
of 1907 prohibits
the sale of
"
drawn from any cow which has not been shown to be free from
by the tuberculin test." This test must be made "at
least once a year."
Any cow which, in the opinion of the department of health, reacts in a positive manner, shall be, if ordered by
such department, killed by the owner of the same.
milk
tuberculosis
Butte, Mont.
council on
5, 1907,
—A
general health ordinance, passed
December
4,
by the
city
and approved by the mayor on December
contains the following:
158. All cows from which mUk is sold shall be tuberculin
tested at least twice each year, under the direction of the department of health, and in case any cow shall be found to be affected
with tuberculosis the department of health shall report same to the
state live stock sanitary board.
Section
According to Table 56, the test was not applied in 1907, but, as
will be noted, the ordinance cited was not enacted until the close
of that year.
—
Tuberculin-test requirements are more detailed in
than in many cities, as will be seen from these extracts
from a city ordinance approved September 26, 1907:
Mobile, Ala.
this city
Section 517. (a) No person, firm, or corporation shall sell, deliver,
or transport, or cause to be sold, delivered or sold in the city of Mobile any milk or cream unless such milk or cream has been obtained
from dairies, all of the cows of which are healthy and free from any
disease, and all of the cows of which, or such number as may be
des^ated by the milk inspector of the city of Mobile, shall have
been tested with tuberculin for tuberculosis by the milk inspector,
or by other persons, such as the board of health may direct.
(6) All cows showing a rise of temperature of two and one-half
degrees within fourteen hours after the injection of tuberculin are
condemned, and shall be branded on the right hip by the milk
inspector, or his assistants, with a hot iron bearing tne designation
"C."
inspector, or his assistants, in the testing or branding of the cows
in such manner as he desires.
dairy
(i) Any person injecting tuberculin into any cow used for
purposes in the city of Mobile, or within seven miles of the same,
shall furnish written notice of such injection to the milk inspector
within twenty-four hours after such injection, stating the_ owner of,
the cow, and, if one is present, the serial number of the tag in the ear.
any dairy farm containing a cow
(j) No milk shall be sold from
which has been injected with tuberculin by a person other than
the milk inspector, unless written notice has been given to the milk
.
inspector by the owner of the cow.
(fc) All dairymen having a permit to sell milk in the city of
Mobile shall furnish to the milk inspector, within twenty-four hours
after any time that he has tested the cows of such dairymen for
tuberculosis, an affidavit stating that such cows have not been injected with tuberculin, or tested for tuberculosis in any way during
the previous three months.
Section 518. Fee for testing.— fee of fifty cents for each cow
shall be paid by the owner to the tax collector of the city of Mobile
for testing the cow with tuberculin for tuberculosis, provided that
if a cow shall be retested, the fee must not be charged oftener than
once in twelve months.
A
Superior, Wis.
council ordinance, approved June 29, 1907,
Section
7.
The board
of
health of said city, the health
oflacer, or
any person appointed or designated by him or them, shall have the
right at any time to enter upon the premises where cows shall be
kept and examine the bams, premises, food, milking utensils, and
all things that may in any way be sources of contamination or
infection of such dairies or milk, and to take samples of such milk
and to make such tuberculin or other tests of such animals and
premises as may be desired Provided such tuberculin test shall
be made only by a veterinary surgeon who is duly registered as
:
provided by section 1492 of the Wisconsin statutes.
Section 7a. That whenever the tuberculin test shall have been
made of any cows by an inspector of the health department a certificate of a veterinary surgeon is furnished to the health officer that
such test has been made, it shall be tagged by the health department and a register kept of the same, together with the date of such
tests, and no cows shall be sold in the city of Superior or shipped into
or in any way brought into the city to be used for milk purposes
without the same having been tested within one year prior to such
-date and satisfactory proof of such tests having been made and
furnished to the health officer.
No person shall sell milk in the city of Superior drawn from cows
that are kept outside the city of Superior unless such cows and the
premises and utensils shall be kept and be in compliance with and
according to the requirements of this ordinance, and such cows shall
have been tested by the tuberculin test within one year and satisfactory proof of such testing furnished to the health officer of said city.
—
Sacramento, Cal. Nearly the whole of a brief milk ordinance
approved by the mayor on May 16, 1905, is devoted to the tuber-
The main
culin test.
All dairy cows tested^ for tuberculosis by the milk inspector
taaged by him with a metal tag in the ear, which tag shall
bear a serial number. No tag shall be removed from any cow by
any person except on written permission from the milk inspector.
(d) All condemned cows shall be removed by the owner from the
dairy, within twelve hours after being branded as above, to a place
which shall be at least one mile from the dairy, and which shall be
approved by the milk inspector, and no cow shall be removed from
such place unless notice of the same be given to the milk inspector
by the owner, giving the location of the place to which she is to be
removed, or if she is sold, giving the name and address of the buyer;
and no condemned cow shall be carried to or remain in any dairy
supplying milk or cream to the Mobile milk or cream market.
(e) No condemned cow shall be sold unless the buyer be notified
by the owner that she is condemned.
other than
(/) No one diall milk a condemned cow in any place
in an open field, and milk obtained from such cows shall be drawn
directly to the ground and not into a pail.
(g) No person shall release, or cause to be released, from the bams
any cow for a period of twenty-four hours, or such portion thereof
as the milk inspector may designate after notice from said inspector
that he desires to test said cows; and it shall be the duty of any person holding a permit under this ordinance to enforce this regulation
upon such persons as may assist him in the maintenance thereof.
(h) The milk inspector of the city of Mobile, or his assistants, shall
have the right to test with tuberculin any dairy cows which he deany way with the
sires, and no person or persons shall interfere
—A
provides as follows:
sections follow:
(c)
may be
m
Section
Any person,
firm, corporation, or association engaged
in the sale or delivery of milk in the city of Sacramento shall first
obtain permission to sell or deliver the same from the milk, food,
and market inspector of the city of Sacramento, and said milk, food,
and market inspector of the city of Sacramento shall not grant permission to any person, firm, corporation, or association to sell or
deliver milk in said city without examining the milk to be sold or
delivered, and without first making a thorough investigation of the
dairy from which said milk is produced.
Section 2. It shall be the duty of the milk, food, and market
inspector to inspect each and every dairy supplying milk for human
consumption to the public in the city of Sacramento as to the
health of the animals and general sanitary condition of the surroundings, and if said milk, food, and market inspector shall, upon examination, find any animal which shows symptoms of the disease
known as tuberculosis, he shall cause the same to be tested with
tuberculin, according to the rules and regulations of the United
States Bureau of Animal Industry, and if he shall find said animal
suffering from said disease, he shall not issue any permit to any
person, firm, corporation, or association owning said dairy to sell or
deliver milk in the city of Sacramento, and if such permit has
already been granted to such person, firm, corporation, or association, he shall immediately revoke such permission so granted to
the person, firm, corporation, or association conducting the dairy
at which said animal is located from selling or delivering milk in
said city of Sacramento.
'•'
1.
'
'
SUPERVISION OF CITY MILK SUPPLIES.
Section 3. Any person violating any of the provisions of this
ordinance shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished by a fine not
exceeding $300, or by imprisonment in the city jail not exceeding
ninety days,, or by both such fine and imprisonment.
A meat, provision, and milk ordinance passed in 1896 contains
more extended regulations for the production and sale of milk and
appears to have been in force in 1907.
La
Crosse, Wis.
— Portions of a council ordinance passed and ap-
proved in May, 1908, and published on
May
25, 1908,
provide
for
the tuberculin test as follows:
Sbction 2. From and after the first day of November, 1908, no
milk or cream shall be sold, or delivered or peddled from any wagon,
sleigh, or other vehicle, or by hand, nor sold from any store, depot,
house, or other place within the limits of the city of La Crosse, without a certificate in writing signed by the health officer of said city
having first been issued to such person, firm, or corporation, or in
case of any person, firm, or corporation buying milk or cream from
another for the purpose of resale within the limits of the city of La
45
Crosse without a certificate having issued to the person, firm, or
corporation from whom said milk or cream is purchased. * * *
Section 4. In order to obtain a certificate as hereinbefore provided, every person, firm, or corporation owning or leasing or in
the possession of milch cows from which milk is drawn and sold,
or offered for sale, within the limits of the city of La Crosse, shall
have all said cows, and all cattle running with said cows in the same
herd, tested by the tuberculin process to ascertain the existence or
nonexistence of tuberculosis among said cattle; and before any
such certificate shall issue, the health officer of the city of La Crosse
shall be furnished by each and every person, firm, or corporation
above referred to with a statement issued and signed by a competent and reliable person, the said health officer being the sole
judge of such competency and reliability, that the said herd has
been tested within one year previous to said application for tuber* * *
culosis and is free from the same.
The
56,
tuberculin test was not applied in 1907, according to Table
this was prior to the enactment of the ordinance quoted
but
above.
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
Table
Date of incorporation as a
are given, (1) the dates
ities
were
first
1.
city.
when the
—Under
this
head
different municipal-
organized as cities under general pro-
by special charter, and (2) the
dates of the latest organization under new general
laws or special charters. Frequently the laws or
charters have been amended or revised, and the cen-
visions of state law or
sus agents in some instances have experienced difficulty in determining whether given changes should be
reported merely as modifications o"f the first organizanew organization of the municipal corporation. The Census Ofl&ce has not been able to
tion, or as a
devote sufficient time to the study of this problem to
determine accurately in all cases the date of the latest
incorporation, but it may. be safely assumed that the
time of the last important or complete reorganization
of a municipality is shown in the table.
The date of
the first organization as a city corporation is more
easily ascertained
and in most instances
given.
Population and area.
—This table
is
correctly
gives, for
each of
the 158 cities ii\cluded in the report, the population
enumerated at the Federal censuses of 1890 and 1900
and the estimated population for 1905, 1906, and 1907.
The estimates are those computed and used by the
Bureau of the Census whenever it is necessary to compare data collected for intercensal years with contemporaneous population, as in the per capita debt,
per capita payments and receipts, etc. For this purpose it is assumed, in the absence of any state census^
that the annual increase of population since the last
Federal census is equal to one-tenth of the decennial
increase between the last two Federal censuses.
In
mention should be made of the fact
during any year any territory was annexed to
this connection
that if
a given city, the estimates for the succeeding year
include the population in 1900 of the territory annexed, plus the increase in its population, computed
upon the same
basis as that of the original city;
cor-
responding deductions are made where territory has
been detached during any year.
Where' there has been a state census, the returns of
that census are accepted for the year to which it
relates, and estimates are made for other years by
employing the average annual increase as determined
(46)
by a comparison
of the state census with the Federal
census of 1900.
The
priate footnotes, to
table calls attention,
all
by appro-
estimates thus based partly on
Federal and partly on state censuses.
In the case of Los Angeles and Oakland, Cal.,
Seattle, Tacoma, and Spokane, Wash., and Fort
Worth, Tex., the available information indicates a
rate of increase in population
much
greater than would
be shown by the application of the rules above set
forth; in the case of San Francisco, Cal., the population decreased because of the earthquake.
For these
7 cities no estimates are shown and no per capita
figures are
computed.
The area
cities is
as given in Table
number
the
1
for each of the 158
of acres included within the limits
on June 1, 1907, subdivided wherever posand water areas.
of the city
sible into land
Table
Summary
and funds.
—of
2.
transactions, by divisions of governments
A.s stated in
the introduction to this re-
port,' the organization of cities for local self-govern-
ment
differs greatly, e. g., in some instances all city
functions are performed through a single municipal
corporation, while in others the work is divided among
To procure
with such diverse organ-
several independent governing bodies.
comparable
statistics for cities
ization it is necessary to collect reports from many
local governments other than the city corporation.
The local governments included in this report, together
with their several separate funds, are shown in Table 2
under the head
city, and divisions and fimds of its
'
'
government."
When
the city corporation is the only
government, the several funds are designated immediately below the name of the city, as in the case of
New York; when several additional governmental divilocal
sions or bodies are here included, these divisions are
shown under the name
of the city as coordinate with
the city corporation, as in the case of Chicago.
For cities of the latter class the funds of each civil
division are shown subordinate to the division to which
they belong and a subtotal is presented for each governmental unit, together with a grand total for all divisions opposite the name of the city.
The different
governmental units shown in Table 2 as coordinate
'
See "Differences in local governmental organizations," page 11.
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
47
Math the city corporation have power to levy taxes and
to incur indebtedness, and, with the possible exception
city corporation for school expenses will
of the counties referred to in the following paragraph,
each of these local governments,, though independent
school outlays will
of the city corporation, exercises municipal functions.
In 7 of the cities of over 300,000 population a per-
centage of the county receipts, payments, and cash
balances based on the ratio between the assessed
valuation of the city and that of the county has been
included with the figures for the city corporation and
—
—
other local governments. This treatment seemed desirable because in the remaining 8 cities of Group I the
coimty organization had
original
lost its identity
from
the standpoint of financial administration, this function
having been absorbed by the constantly expanding
city corporation.
The addition of the coimty figures
places the cities of Group I on a more nearly comparable basis than heretofore existed. In making comparisons involving the cities of over 300,000 population, however, it should be borne in mind that for 1907
coimty receipts, payments, and cash balances have been
added to the city figures in Chicago, Pittsbm-g, Cleveland, Buffalo, Detroit, Cincinnati, and Milwaukee.
Of the independent local governments reported, the
school districts are the most important and numerous,
being reported in 69 cities park districts are foimd in
4 cities sanitary districts in 2 cities poor districts in
1 city; a port improvement district in 1 city; and a
bridge district in 1 city. Six cities each show two or
more different kinds of independent districts. There
is no material change since 1906 in the number of
independent local governments reported, a new park
district being reported for Tacoma, Wash., and a new
bridge district for Portland, Me.; while the omission
of the poor district in Scranton, Pa., and the addition
;
;
;
Kalamazoo, Mich., are due to
changes in the method of reporting rather than to
changes in governmental organization.
When there were several independent school districts within the limits of one city corporation a report was prociu-ed from each district, but the reports
are consolidated into a single total in Table 2. In
some cities the school district maintains only a part of
the public schools, the city corporation maintaining
the rest. In such cases the payments shown in Table
2 as made by the school district do not constitute the
of the school district in
total
payments
city corporation
tion, parks,
The
of the city for public schools.
may also expend money for sanita-
poor
relief,
port improvements, or bridge
construction in addition to the payments for the same
purposes by these independent districts. The transactions of all independent districts are analyzed and
their payments or receipts added to the corresponding
payments or receipts of the city corporation in making
up the other financial tables of this report; thus, payments of an independent school district and of the
90196—10
4
dated in Division
VI
be consoli-
payments for
appear under that head in Table 9.
of Table 5,
and
all
As subordinate to each governmental imit, Table 2
shows those fimds which are kept wholly separate
from other funds and whose transactions are recorded
by
city officials in independent systems of accounts.
An
exception is made in the case of linking, investment, and trust funds which are always shown separately, whether the city officials record the transactions of these funds with other city transactions or
maintain separate systems of accounts therefor. With
the exception just mentioned, the first column of
Table 2 indicates the number of separate accounting
systems or sets of records from which census agents
must prociu-e data in order to make a full report of the
A
financial transactions of municipal governments.
large
number
of funds, as in
New
Orleans, La.,
and
many
municipal transactions are not under a central accounting control and
that accountability must be divided among several
Judging from the experience of the commerofficials.
cial world, it is believed that the best fimancial administration is possible only when all financial transactions are brought within the control of one accounting
system and when one official is given the power and is
held responsible for its proper conduct. In Washington, D. C, the Federal Government shares the administration and cost of municipal affairs with the
District government, which fact in part accoimts for
the large mmiber of funds in that city.
The term "general treasury" is applied to the principal system of accounts or that one over which the
The
city auditor or comptroller exercises authority.
term "cash in transit" refers to a transfer of cash between departments or divisions of government, which
transaction has been entered on the books of one department but not on those of the other. This condition is frequently found when the transfer is made at
the close of a fiscal year.
The table shows wide differences as to the date
when the fiscal years close. These differences complicate the work of showing comparable statistics,
especially in cities which have several independent
divisions of government closing their accounts on difIn Ohio and a few other states the
ferent dates.
statutes fix a uniform date for the close of the fiscal
years of all city corporations. A uniform fiscal period
for all cities in Massachusetts is urged in the first report of the state bureau of statistics on "the cost of
municipal government in Massachusetts." Every
state should have a law establishing a uniform fiscal
Louisville, Ky., indicates that
year for
its cities.
For some
cities the cash reported as on hand at the
beginning of 1907 differs from that shown in the report for 1906 as on hand at the close of that year.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
48
Such
may
be due to (1 ) Changes in the
fiscal year, (2) inclusion of funds omitted from former
reports, or (3) errors on the part of city officials or
differences
:
census agents.
Table
3.
—
Payments and receipts classified by character. The
aggregate payments and receipts are segregated in
Table 2 into those to or from the public, and those
between city departments, enterprises, or funds. In
Table 3 each of these main classes of payments or
receipts is further subdivided, the transactions with
the public being given under two heads so as to show
those for "meeting governmental costs" separately
from those which are merely incidental to the conduct
of the city's business, while interdepartmental payments and receipts are classified to show the character
of the transactions.
Payments for meeting governmental costs are the
net amounts of money which the cities pay or expend
for meeting those costs essential to the conduct of their
business later subdivided and defined as expenses,
interest, outlays, and decrease in debt
while receipts
for meeting governmental costs are the net amounts
received from the public for the purposes of government, after making deductions for receipts in error
and other duplications. In its previous reports the
Bureau of the Census has given the name "corporate"
to such payments and receipts, but since that term
did not readily convey the intended meaning it has
been thought best to substitute the more significant
'
—
term
—
meeting governmental costs."
to and receipts from the public
included under the heading /or all other purposes are
."for
The payments
by the Bureau of the
counterbalancing payments and receipts,
(2) payments for and receipts from uivestments, and
(These
C."^) payments and receipts as agent or trustee.
terms are discussed in full on page 27.)
In the following table the several subdivisions of
of three distinct classes, called
Census,
(1)
these three classes of payments and receipts are shown,
together with the numbers of the main tables of this
which the several classes of transactions are
presented
report, in
'
For a
full discussion of terms, see
page
26.
Table I.—Summary of payments
to
and
receipts
from
the
other than those for meeting governmental costs: 1907.
public
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
which include
all transactions between depart
or funds not associated with the performance of services, the purchase of securities, or the
fers,
ments,
offices,
payment of interest thereon. Service, interest, and
investment transfers are summarized in the following
tables, which give the numbers of the main tables of
this report showing these transfers:
Table.
CLASS OF PAY-
MENTS.
II.
Summary
of service transfers: 1907.
49
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
50
ance of services or the furnishing of materials for compensation; and (4) the operation or management of
the productive enterprises, investments, and properties of the government.
The several subdivisions of expenses and revenues
are defined in the introduction to this report and also
in the text descriptive of the tables giving the details
of payments for expenses and receipts from revenues.
In Table 4 of this report, payments for expenses of
municipal service enterprises i. e., those undertakings which are maintained solely for public purposes,
as lighting streets, and do not serve private consumers
are presented separately, while in previous reports they were merged with payments for "general
expenses." A further slight change is made in that
interest is classified as coordinate with expenses rather
than as a subdivision thereof as formerly.
As the per cent distribution of payments and receipts
for meeting governmental costs is given in Table 33,
no discussion of this important analysis is needed here.
In computing the payments for outlays shown, in
Table 4, deductions are made not only for the duplications due to erroneous payments later corrected by
refund receipts and to interdepartmental transactions,
but also for receipts from the sale of real property.
Such receipts arise from the conversion into cash of
a part of the city's permanent investment, which had
been acquired by means of outlays previously reported,
and correspond to those receipts of a commercial enterprise which result from the conversion of one form
of capital asset into another. Hence such receipts
must be deducted from gross payments for outlays to
ascertain the net addition, during a given period, to
the value of the city's permanent properties. The
cost of this net addition must be met either from reve-
—
—
*
nues or from loans.
The column
payments on account of debt shows
that, 30 of the 158 cities reported payments for reduction of debt in excess of receipts from new debt obligations incurred. In 1906, 53 out of 158 cities and
in 1905, 63 out of 154 cities reported net payments
In most cities reporting net
for reduction of debt.
the
loans
were made in order to
debt,
from
receipts
construct public improvements, for which the payments, as shown in the column for "outlays," are
greatly in excess of the net receipts from debt. For
very few cities does the amount of such receipts reported represent much more than 50 per cent of the
payments for outlays.
Excess of payments or of receipts. The last four
columns of Table 4 correlate, or "strike a balance
between," payments and receipts for meeting governmental costs. Three bases of study are presented:
(1) The excess of payments for revenue expenditures
that is, expenses, interest, and outlays, over receipts
from revenues, or the reverse; (2) the excess of receipts from revenue over payments for expenses and
of
—
;
the excess of payments for revenue expenditures
over receipts from commercial revenues that is, re(3)
—
from the performance of services or the furnishIn all of these
ing of materials for compensation.
comparisons, it should be borne in mind that payments
and receipts are given and not accrued current exThe relative
penses, interest, outlays, and revenues.
merits of studies based respectively on payments and
receipts and on accruals may be disregarded for the
present, since too small a number of cities keep their
accounts on the basis of accrued revenues and expenses
to justify the Census Bureau in adopting that basis
Table 4 is deficient in that it does
for its statistics.
not show the cash balances available for meeting governmental costs at the beginning and the close of the
year.
A deficit in the receipts from revenue for the
ceipts
current year might, for some cities, be largely or
wholly offset by a free cash balance at the beginning
of the year.
An
payments for revenue expenditures over
during 1907 payments for the costs of government exceeded receipts
from revenues. This excess is sometimes referred to
in governmental finance as a "revenue deficit" or
"deficit in revenue receipts."
Such a term may be
correctly used in governmental business in referring
to the excess of expenses, interest, and outlays over
revenues, since all such costs must even ually be met
from revenues, while in private finance outlays are
always chargeable against capital receipts. In governmental business, however, good financial manageexcess of
receipts from revenues indicates that
ment may demand that a part of the cost of new
work be distributed, by means of loans, over a series
of years.
Thus all outlays are not necessarily chargeable against the revenues of the current year.
For each group of
payments
the
amount given
as the
expenditures over
revenue receipts is the sum of the several excesses
reported, and not the excess of all revenue expenditures over all revenue receipts for the group; that is,
in computing for each group of cities the excess of
payments over receipts those cities with an excess of
receipts over payments are excluded.
Of the 158 cities, 119, or 75.3 per cent, show an
excess of payments for revenue expenditures over
revenue receipts, while in 1906, only 57.6 per cent,
and in 1905, 62.3 per cent, showed such an excess.
The 119 cities showing revenue deficits in 1907 include
13 of the 15 in Group I, 23 of the 39 in Group II, 34
of the 47 in Group III, and 49 of the 57 in Group IV.
With the exception of Camden and Hoboken, N. J.,
each of the 119 cities with a revenue deficit in 1907
had sufficient revenues to meet its expenses and
interest, so the deficits may be considered as due to
excess of
payments
for
cities
for revenue
improvements and additions.
the expenditures and revenues of those cities
showing an excess of revenue receipts over revenue
If
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
expenditures are excluded from consideration, the percentage of revenue expenditures not met from revenues
was 23.1 for the cities of Group I, 12 for those of
Group II, 16.3 for those of Group III, and 15.1 for
those of Group IV. The percentages are exceptionally
51
pay for the largest possible * proportion of public
improvements from current revenues, or (2) to incur
debt for such improvements, and thus leave the
largest portion of their costs for future
payments.
large for
This information would be disclosed, however, by a
statement of revenue expenditures and revenue
in
receipts for a series of years.
New Yorlf city in Group I; for Seattle, Wash.,
Group II; for Trenton, N. J., Wilmington, Del.,
Camden, N. J., New Bedford, Mass., Oakland, Cal.,
Yonkers, N. Y., and Schenectady, N. Y., in Group III;
and for Altoona, Pa., Passaic, N. J., Jacksonville, Fla.,
Wichita, Kans., Galveston, Tex.,
and Oklahoma City, Okla.,
New
Britain, Conn.,
in Groiip IV.
So far as
the figures for a single year can be trusted, these percentages indicate that the proportion of costs of gov-
ernment not met from revenues does not vary matewith the size of the cities.
For all cities combined and for each group of
cities, the amount of the excess of payments for
rially
revenue expenditures over revenue receipts agrees
rather closely with the excess of receipts over payments on account of indebtedness. But for many
individual cities there is no such agreement between
the two items. Twenty cities report net receipts from
debt, yet do not show revenue deficits.
On the other
hand, 11 cities show revenue deficits, yet do not
report net receipts from debt. It is evident, however,
that the excess of costs over revenues must be met
either from loans or from accumulated revenues; and
while an analytical summary of payments and receipts
for one year will not indicate from which source such
costs are met, a statement covering a series of years
would unquestionably show that a majority of the
cities are annually borrowing money to meet the costs
of government.
An excess of receipts from revenues over payments for
revenue expenditures is the converse of the excess discussed above and indicates that during 1907 receipts
from revenues exceeded payments for the costs of
government. This excess frequently referred to in
governmental finance as "revenue surplus" is available for reducing present indebtedness, for meeting
expenses of a future period, or for making improve-
—
—
ments.
39 show an excess of
revenue receipts over payments for revenue expenditures; in other words, these cities raised revenues
sufficient not only to meet all current expenses, including interest on debt, and to pay for all new work,
but to accumulate a surplus as well. In 1906, 67 out
of 158 cities, and in 1905, 58 out of 154 cities reported
Of the 158
cities reported,
a similar revenue surplus.
While the columns of Table 4 indicating the relation between payments for expenditures and receipts
from revenues show the outcome of the financial
transactions of each city during the year 1907, they
do not disclose whether the policy of the city
is (1)
to
An
of receipts from revenues over payments for
is shown for 156 of the 158
cities.
This excess must not, however, be considered
as a "revenue surplus," as is the excess of the income
or revenues of a commercial enterprise over its
expenses, because wise municipal administration
demands that at least part of the costs of new properties and improvements be paid from current revenues.
But the amounts here shown may be considered
as that portion of revenue receipts available for the
acquisition of permanent properties or for the reduction
excess
expenses and interest
of debt.
An
excess of
payments for revenue expenditures over
from commercial revenues shows the amount
of payments for government purposes paid or payable
from general revenues that is, from taxes and other
contributions by the citizens. With the exception
of expenses of public service enterprises, which in most
receipts
—
cities
are chargeable against the revenues of such
enterprises,
it
is
impossible definitely to charge the
several classes of expenditures against specified classes
But in a general way it may be assumed
that general expenses, interest on funded debt other
than that for public service enterprises, and the larger
of revenues.
portion of outlays are paid or payable from general
revenues, while special service expenses, expenses of
invested funds and of public service enterprises,
and on
and the smaller portion of
outlays are paid or payable from commercial revenues.
interest
on indebtedness
of such enterprises
special assessment loans,
The outlays last referred to comprise (1) those to be
met by special assessments, the receipts from which
are included under "revenues from special services,"
and (2) those outlays for public service enterprises
which are paid, in accordance with local policy, out of
the revenues of such' enterprises.
Comparative summary, 1902 to 1907. Appended to
Table 4 is a summary of payments and receipts from
1902 to 1907 for those 148 cities of over 30,000 population which have been included in the census reports
—
on
statistics of cities for all of the years
named.
In
the payments and receipts from 1902
to 1906 are adjusted to the classification employed
for 1907, so that they may be comparable for the six
this
summary
The payments and receipts presented in this
summary, with the exception of those on account of
interest and indebtedness, include certain counterbalancing payments and receipts which could not be
segregated for 1902, 1903, or 1904. The amount of
years.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
52
these transactions, however,
affect
is
too insignificant to
any deductions drawn from the
figures here
presented.
The total payments for general and special service
expenses, for interest, and for outlays have steadily
increased from 1902 to 1907, while payments for
expenses of invested funds and of public service enterprises, and those on account of debt, have fluctuated.
Receipts from each class of revenues have steadily
increased during the six years, with the exception of a
slight decrease in receipts from interest between 1903
and 1904, while receipts on accoimt of debt have
fluctuated greatly.
The
extraordinarily large receipts
on account of debt in 1904 and 1907 are due principally
to debt incurred in those years by New York city.
Table V shows the payments for expenses and interest and outlays and the receipts from revenues for each
year from 1902 to 1907, together with the percentages
of increase over 1902.
The fluctuations in payments
and receipts on account of debt are so great that no
attempt is made to present percentages for these
figures.
Table V.
receipts
1902.
Summary
of payments for reveniie expenditures and of
to 1907, with per cent of increase over
from revenue, 1902
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
—
Classification hy division of city government paying.
In the columns headed "school districts" and "other
and
all
53
other purposes under
The percentage
tj;ie
title
"miscellaneous
governments which
aU payments to the
public for generar expenses formed by .payments for
salaries and wages changed but httle during the four
are independent of the city corporation but which
exercise some function ordinarily exercised by the city
years 1904 to 1907, being 68.4 per cent in 1904, 68.8
per cent in 1905 and 1906, and 68.5 per cent in 1907.
divisions of the
payments
government
of the city" are entered
for expenses of local
government
The latter colunan g,lso includes
Group I a portion of the county payments, these payments being included in order to put
the 15 largest cities on a more nearly comparable basis
(see text on Table 2).
The "other divisions of the
itself.
for 7 cities of
government of the city" are as follows: Chicago, 111.,
park and sanitary districts and county government;
Philadelphia, Pa., poor districts; Pittsburg, Pa.,
Cleveland, Ohio, Buffalo, N. Y., Detroit, Mich., Cinciimati, Ohio, Milwaukee, Wis., and Denver, Colo.,
county governments; Portland, Oreg., Port of Portland, Peoria and Springfield, lU., pleasure, driveway,
and park districts; Tacoma, Wash., park board; and
Portland, Me., bridge
—
Classification hy departments, offices,
accounts.
—
municipal service enterprises which, as stated above,
are reported for 1907 in Table 6.
Of the payments for charities and corrections, the
amount shown in the column headed "all other"
under "insane in institutions" includes the following
payments to other civil divisions and to private associations
:
Table VI.
—
To
City
Total.
ber.
Total
New York, N.Y...
Chicago,
st. Louis,
Pa-
Mo
Boston, Mass
Baltimore, Md
expenses by
This
presented
for
paying
has
been
government
division of
percentage
of
period
the
this
During
three years.
school
districts
independent
paid
by
total expenses
has increased from 9.2 per cent in 1905 and 9.6 per
Washington, D.
St. Paul,
C.
Minn
956
111
Mass
Cambridge, Mass
134
2,711
29,565
41
14,235
241
238
11,534
419
10,314
463
2,911
712
1,625
5,067
133
.
Hartford, Conn
Lowell, Mass
Bridgeport, Corm..
Ijynn.Mass
cent in 1906 to 11.1 per cent in 1907. The number of
cities reporting independent school districts was 65
New
Bedlord, Mass
Waterbury, Conn.
Charleston, S.C...
Portland,
127
129
130
131
140
155
Chelsea,
Me
Mass
Newcastle, Pa
Salem, Mass
Newton, Mass
New Britain, Conn
Taunton, Mass
pri-
vate associations.
268
28,780
163,780
21,873
25,414
To
civil
$781,622
N. Y...
Fall Biver,
otber
private
divisions.
268
28,780
163,780
21,873
1,681
New Haven, Conn.'
Rocliester,
lo
$858,183
168,667
6,013
21,267
1,792
16,299
7,912
27,215
295,832
Pittsburg, Pa
Cleveland, Ohio
San Francisco, Cal.
Detroit, Micli
Cincinnati, Obio
New Orleans, La . .
for
in 1905, 67 in 1906, and 69 in 1907. The percentages
paid by other divisions of the government for the three
years can not be accurately ascertained since the 1905
figures erroneously include, as stated in the report for
III
Pliliadelphia,
service enterprise.
payments
to other civil divisions and
on account of the insane: 1907.
num-
for the Port of Portland in Table
of
Payments
associations
government" of an ordinary c;ty corporation; the
expenses for the operation of its dredges and dry
docks are tabulated in Table 7 as expenses of a public
1,681
121,385
6,013
21,257
1,792
16,299
58
295,832
956
111
26,414
134
2,711
25,582
41
14,235
241
238
11,497
419
10,314
463
2,911
712
1,625
4,867
133
$76,561
37,272
7,854
27,215
3,9S3
37
200
many
accounts and funds belonging to the city
corporation, and, further, the 1907 figures include
county payments not reported for the former years.
Under the head of payClassification hy payee.
classified
by "character" are
pubhc
ments to the
the amounts paid
government
of
costs
shown as the
while
the amounts
expenses,
of
in the final settlement
claims are
erroneous
other
and
bills
paid on dupUcate
head
of paythe
Under
error.
in
shown as payments
1906,
and
Payments for general and special service expenses are
shown for 1907 under the same classification of departments, oflaces, and accounts as was used for 1906.
The only change from 1906 in the method of reporting
is the omission from Division VIII of payments for
5 represent only the general administrative expense
which corresponds to the expense of the "general
classification
of
district.'
Of the payments by independent school districts, a
smaU amount less than 1 per cent was paid for
other than educational purposes and hence is tabulated under appropriate heads of Divisions I to V of
the classification by departments, offices, and accounts.
The expenses shown
objects."
—
ments to public classified by "object" are shown as
salaries and wages the amounts paid to persons in the
direct employ of the city whether employed and paid
by the year, month, or day. Payments for work done
by contract are included with payments for suppUes
In the classification by "departments, offices, and
accounts," the aggregate for each of the eight main
groups- of departments is considered fairly accurate,
but the figures for some of the individual objects of
expenditure are imperfect; for example, under "highways" the expenses of maintaining and repairing
street pavements, curbing, or sidewalks in some
instances can not be separately reported at the present time and are included with some other highway
expenses. Other items causing especial difficulties in
classification
are
the
city
engineer's
office,
street
and snow removal. Street cleaning is performed in some cities by an independent department
cleaning,
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
54
but in most cities by the health or street department,
in which case a separate statement of the expense of
street cleaning is difficult to make.
So far as the
objects of expenditure here mentioned are concerned,
it must not be inferred that blanks in Table 5 necessarily indicate no expenses for these purposes.
The per capita averages and the per cent^ distribution of payments for general and special service expenses are given for groups of departments and for
several of the most important departments in Tables
34 and 35. A discussion of these subjects is therefore
presented in connection with those tables.
With the rapid extension of municipal functions and
undertakings, changes must necessarily be made in
any scheme which classifies city departments and
offices according to function.
Of new forms of municipal activity which have recently grown to large
proportions and which have no appropriate place provided in the census classification, mention may be
made of the protection and care of trees. In some
cities forestry departments have been organized to
care for trees in city parks and streets and in private
grounds, giving especial attention to the destruction
of injiu-ious insects and other tree pests.
The cost of
work on trees in private grounds is frequently charged
against the property owners, sometimes in the form
of special assessments and sometimes as bills for servTable VII.—ESTIMATED
Payments for forestry departments are reported,
more appropriate place, under "miscellaneous protection of life and property," together with
other payments for care of trees which are not charged
to the park department or some other regular department. Payments for drinking fountains and city
clocks, which are reported by many cities, do not come
under any sp'ecific head of Table 5, and are, therefore,
ices.
for lack of a
tabulated in Division VIII, "miscellaneous." These
maintained for the comfort and convenience of all the citizens, and if the payments therefor
were sufficiently large, a separate division would be
required for reporting them. In this class belong also
payments for public comfort static^ns, which are being
constructed and maintained by an increasing number
The cost of these, for the present, is reported
of cities.
facilities are
under "miscellaneous sanitation." The censiis classiand of hospitals, as pointed
fication of these items
out in the text on Table 5 for 1906 is tentative and
—
—
be modifie*d as their functions become well established or their cost becomes of sufficient importance
will
to justify separate divisions.
In Savannah, Augusta, and Macon, Ga., Mobile, Ala.,
and Jacksonville, Fla., the schools are under county
control, and the expenses of schools for the cities can
not be accurately shown. However, the amounts
expended by the county in maintaining schools for
the cities have been estimated as follows
PAYMENTS FOR EXPENSES OF SCHOOLS IN SPECIFIED
CITIES:
1907.
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
Table VIII.
Payments by Massachusetts
cities to the state
fied accounts: 1907.
ON ACCOUNT OF ARMORIES.
City
number.
on
speci-
55
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
56
©state in Chicago,
111.,
and from leasehold rents
in
Cincinnati, Ohio, are regarded as exceptions to this
rule
and are included
in Table 7,
column "all other
public service enterprises."
Of the Massachusetts
tion,
cities of
over 30,000 popula-
6 are in the metropolitan water district and
•obtain the supply of water for their several systems
from the metropolitan waterworks. The metropolitan
system is operated by the state for the benefit of the
cities and towns, and all costs of construction, extensions, and maintenance are apportioned among the
mimicipalities benefited. These costs are annually
assessed against the cities in three parts: (a) For the
accumulation of sinking funds to redeem bonds issued
for the construction or extension of the metropolitan
system; (6) for interest on such bonds; and (c) for
expense of maintenance. The Massachusetts Bureau
of Statistics in its report on the Cost of Municipal Governments in Massachusetts includes the three classes
of payments with expenses of maintenance and operation of city water-supply systems. This ofiice enters
the maintenance charge in Table 7 tmder "other expenses of operation and maintenance," but the interest
is tabulated in Table 8 under "interest on debt obligations," and the payments for sinking funds in Table 10
under "payments on account of indebtedness." An
exhibit of the amoimt of the metropolitan water debt
chargeable to each city, together with the annual
increase or decrease in such debt for each city, can not
be presented, but the payments of a city to the state
sinking fund may be considered as a discharge of a porThe
tion of the obligation to the state on this account.
referred
to
are
sepaabove
three classes of payments
The 6 cities included in
rately presented in Table IX.
charges from the
state
all
of
these
this report paid
earnings of their water-supply systems
Table IX.— Payments by
Massachusetts
cities to the state
of metropolitan waterworks: 1907.
City
number.
on account
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
The
toll
bridges reported for
New York
are the
Brooklyn and Williamsburg bridges, which yield nearly
$400,000 in tolls as shown in the text for Table 17.
The items shown in the column "miscellaneous"
were for the following purposes: Chicago, 111., general
real estate; Boston, Mass., ferries with the exception
of $18,012 in the column "all other," which was for
rapid transit subways and tunnel; Cincinnati, Ohio,
leasehold rents;
New
Orleans, La.,
Pubhc Belt
Rail-
road with the exception of $5,160 in the column
"salaries and wages," which was for sugar sheds;
Portland, Oreg., dredges; Wilmington, Del., paving
plant for which a detailed report could not be secured,
and which possibly should be classified as a municipal
service enterprise and included in Table 6 Charleston,
S. C, powder magazine; Portland, Me., liquor agency;
Dallas, Tex., fair park; Augusta, Ga., canal; Racine,
;
Wis., artesian well.
Table
8.
—
Payments for interest on debt obligations. ^The payments for interest included in Table 8 are limited to
those charged to expenses. Payments for interest
charged in the city accounts to outlays are included
and are reported separately in the text for
that table. Included in this table are certain payin Table 9,
ments of counties containing cities of Group I, for
which counties no similar payments have been shown
Payments referred to were
in previous Census reports.
Chicago, 111., $344,092; Pittsburg, Pa.,
$212,128; Cleveland, Ohio, $68,863; Buffalo, N. Y.,
$32,302; Detroit, Mich., $73,936; Cincinnati, Ohio,
$103,496; and Milwaukee, Wis., $20,901.
as follows:
Of the total amount of interest payments, 94.4 per
cent was borne by the city corporations, 2.4 per cent
by school districts, and 3.2 per cent by other independent
divisions.
The aggregate of all interest payments charged to
expenses was $71,256,717. Of this amount, $10,790,175 represents mere transfers, or amounts of money
paid by the various divisions of the government of the
city as interest upon city securities held by the city
sinking, investment, and public trust funds the money
;
remains in city funds devoted to municipal purposes
and constitutes municipal assets. The total amount
paid to the public was $60,466,542. There was received during the year as accrued interest on city
bonds sold and in correction
of
payments in error
$404,840, leaving $60,061,702 as the net expenses for
interest, all paid to outside holders of city securities,
payments and receipts.
by refunds
aggregated $13,362, as follows: Newark, N. J., $35;
Minneapolis, Minn., $7,183; Kansas City, Mo., $800;
and
free
from dupHcation
The payments
of
in error later corrected
$14; Somerville, Mass., $2,112;
Harrisburg, Pa., $70; Holyoke, Mass., $20; Mobile,
Ala., $1,940; Atlantic City, N. J., $561; and Elmira,
Bridgeport, Conn.,
N. Y., $627.
57-
In the classification of intesest according to loans
on which paid, 70.2 per cent of the total gross payments was interest on loans for general purposes; 4.6
per cent on special assessment loans; and 25.2 per cent
on loans for public service enterprises. As a rule the
interest upon special assessment loans constitutes a
burden not upon the entire municipality, but only
upon the property affected by such loans; it is impracticable, however, to make a segregation showing
the amount of such interest collected by the city from
the owners of such property and paid to the holders
of the bonds.
In the case of loans for public service
enterprises, the interest on the debt is often charged
against revenues from the enterprises on account of
which the debt was incurred.
In addition to the classes of data presented in the
table of interest payments for 1906, Table 8 for 1907
shows per capita payments for interest, the average
rates of interest paid on the different classes of loans,
and the highest and lowest rates on all loans. The
annual interest charge for the 158 cities increased
during the year by $6,680,225, or 10.3 per cent; for
the cities of Group I the per cent of increase was 12.4;
Group II it was 4.3; for Group III, 7.3; and for
Group IV, 7.3.
The highest average interest rates in each group of
cities were as follows: Group I, 4.1 per cent in Chicago, lU., Cleveland, Ohio, Milwaukee, Wis., and New
Orleans, La. Group II, 5.4 per cent in Denver, Colo.
Grdup III, 5.5 per cent in Taconia, Wash. and Group
IV, 5.6 per cent in Birmingham, Ala. The lowest
average rates were found in Washington, D. C, of
Group I, 3.2 per cent; Providence, R. I., of Group II,
3.6 per cent; Hartford, Conn., of Group III, 3.6 per
cent; and Binghamton and Elmira, N. Y., of Group
for
;
;
IV, 3.6 per cent.
study of the table shows that interest rates vary
more or less in different parts of the country. Three
A
ranges in the average rates are found to coi-respond
approximately with three continuous belts of territory, as shown below:
(a) Average interest rates 3.2 to 4 per cent.
The
territory north of the Potomac river and east of the
state of Ohio contains 71 cities of over 30,000 population; of these 46 report rates within the range stated,
and 25 report higher rates as follows 7 cities, 4. 1 per
:
cent; 2 cities, 4.2 per cent; 9 cities, 4.3 per cent;
2 cities, 4.4 per cent; 2 cities, 4.5 per cent; 2 cities,
and 1 city, 4.7 per cent.
Average interest rates 4.1 to 4.7 per cent. The
territory including Ohio, Virginia, North and South
Carolina, Georgia, Kentucky, Missouri, Nebraska,
Montana, and all states within these limits and northward to the Canadian border contains 57 cities of over
4.6 per cent;
(b)
30,000 population; of these 43 report average rates
ranging from 4.1 to 4.7 per cent, while 8 report average
rates ranging from 3.2 to 4 per cent, and 6 report
average rates above 4.7 per cent.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
58
Average interest rates
(c)
territory including Florida,
4.8 to 5.6 per cent.
The
Alabama, Tennessee, Ar-
kansas, Kansas, Colorado, Washington, and all states
south contains 30 cities of over 30,000 population; of
these 22 report average rates within the range indicated, while 3 report rates falling within range (a),
and
5,
rates falling within range
(b).
may
be noted that the cities of New Jersey and
New Hampshire, which geographically are situated, in
the territory in which the rates of range (a) prevail,
report for the most part rates which fall within range
(b); and that the cities of Louisiana and Utah, situated in the territory in which the rates of range (c)
prevaD, report rates falling within range (&), while
the cities of California, which is situated in the same
belt of territory, report rates falling within range (a).
Little space can be spared for the discussion of these
anomalous cases, but it appears probable that the
lower interest rate in California cities is connected
with their limited debt. The gross indebtedness of
San Francisco is less than half as great as that of the
city of Group I reporting the next smallest indebtedness; and comparison of the statistics for the 4 California cities with those for the 4 other Pacific slope
It
cities
—
after allowing for the uncertainty of per capita
figures for 6 out of these 8 cities
—shows
The Massachusetts
showing high
-average interest rates, together with Woonsocket,
Yonkers, Schenectady, Jersey City, and Paterson, report at the same time large revenue loans outstanding,
and Table 8 shows that interest rates are generally
cities
higher on 'loans of this character. The same explanation can not be put forward, however, in the case of
other New Jersey cities with high interest rates, nor
of any Pennsylvania city. Finally, a number of the
cities which are situated in the territory where the
rates of range
within range
(6)
(a),
prevail,
but which report rates
are cities of large population.
Table
Payments reported in the column "other divisions
of the government of the city" for Chicago, 111., were
made by park districts, $2,668,064; sanitary district,.
Payments
$1,449,324; Cook county, $2,449,463.
made by
were
cities
other
for
this
column
shown in
the following divisions of government: Pittsburg, Pa.,
by Allegheny county; Cleveland, Ohio, by Cuyahoga,
county; Buffalo, N. Y., by Erie county; Detroit, Mich.,
by Wayne county; Cincinnati, Ohio, by Hamilton
county; Milwaukee, Wis., by Milwaukee county; Portland, Oreg., by Port of Portland; Peoria, 111., by
pleasure, driveway, and park district; Tacoma, Wash.,
by Metropolitan Park Board; Portland, Me., by Portland Bridge district; and Springfield, 111., by pleasure,
driveway, and park district.
The purposes of outlays reported in the coltunn "for
all other purposes" under "paid or- payable from
In 1904,
special assessments," are shown in Table XI.
25.2 per cent of the total outlays were paid or payable
from special assessments; in 1905, 21.4 per cent; in
1906, 23.5 per cent;
Table XI.
9.
Payments for outlays.—XJnder "outlays" the Bureau
of the Census includes all costs, paid or payable, in-
curred by cities in the purchase of land and in the
purchase or construction of buildings and other structures, equipments, improvements, and additions that
Table 9
are more or less permanent in character.
presents in greater detail information such as was
shown in Table 8 of the special report for 1906, and
presents also a classification of outlays by division of
government by which such payments were made.
This table includes certain outlays of counties containing cities of Group I, for which payments of a
similar character have not heretofore been shown in
Census reports, as follows: Chicago, 111., $2,449,463;
Pittsburg, Pa., $853,176; Cleveland, Ohio, $383,840;
and in 1907, 24.5 per
cent.
Payments/or outlays, paidor payable from special assessments included in column ''for all other purposes," Table 9.
that the
highest per capita indebtedness, gross or net, for a
California city is lower than the lowest for a northern
Pacific city.
Buffalo, N. Y., $251,672; Detroit, Mich., $34,958; Cincinnati, Ohio, $163,512; and Milwaukee, Wis., $54,249.
City
number.
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
Those reported in the column "all other" under
"higjiways" were made for the improvement of bays,
and harbors, boulevard, viaduct, steps to hill
and stone crusher.
The payments reported in the column "miscellaneous" under the heading "groups of. departments,
offices, and accounts" were for the following purposes:
Pittsburg, Pa., soldiers' memorial hall, $96,616, and
rivers,
tops,
real estate, $2,287 ; Cincinnati, Ohio,
and
memorial, $55,340,
ground building, $842; Washington, D. C,
property yard; Seattle, Wash., land for stables and
.fair
shops; Portland, Oreg., interest charged to outlay for
which the purpose was not reported; Eichmond, Va.,
Jamestown Exposition building, $10,000, and miscel-
Table XII.—PAYMENTS
City
number.
59
neous real estate, $5,000; Saginaw, Mich., deep wells
for drinking water; and Superior, Wis., weUs.
Municipal service enterprises reported in column
"all other" were as follows: New York, N. Y., asphalt
repair plant, $21,346, and high pressure water system,
$2,148,628; Chicago, 111., municipal waterworks shops,
$15,108; St. Louis, Mo., industrial school bakery;
Pittsburg, Pa., Columbus, Ohio, and Topeka, Kans.,
asphalt repair plants; Auburn, N. Y., quarry and stone
crusher; and Fort Worth, Tex., paving plant.
A
umn
amounts reported in the colunder the heading "public service
presented in Table XII:
classification of the
"all other"
enterprises"
is
FOR OUTLAYS FOR PUBLIC SERVICE ENTERPRISES INCLUDED IN THE COLUMN "ALL
OTHER" IN TABLE 9: 1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
60
Investment transfer payments to the sinking, investment, and public trust funds of the several cities
in payment of city debt obligations held by them
amounted to $38,925,659, or 13.3 per cent of the total
debt payments, as compared with a corresponding
percentage of 10.7 for 1906. These funds purchased
12.9 per cent of the debt obligations issued by the
several cities, the total of such purchases, $55,430,158,
being shown in the table as investment transfer
receipts.
This percentage shows a decrease from that
which was 13.8.
The column "to pubhc" includes payments by
Massachusetts cities to the state on account of sinking ftmds for redeeming metropolitan sewer, park,
and water loans, armory loans, and grade crossing
for 1906,
loans.
128 increased and 30 decreased
their indebtedness during the fiscal year 1907.
The
cities,
amount received from the issue of debt obligations
was greater than the amount expended in their
redemption and cancellation by $137,396,847, this
amount representing the net increase of debt for the
reported in 1907.
In Table 9
shown that
it is
in 1907 the expenditures
of the cities for outlays, exclusive of
payments
in
aggregated $243,980,964. This amount exceeds
by $106,584,117 the increase of debt for the 158
cities taken as a whole; in other words, of the aggregate expenditures made for improvements and additions of a more or less permanent character, 43.7
per cent was paid out of current revenues, or out of
those nonrevenue receipts as from the sale of real
property and from insurance which are especially
error,
—
—
A
comparison of the
details of Table 10 with those of Table 9 makes possiapplicable to meeting outlays.
ble a division of
the cities into three classes: (1)
all their public improvements
Those which paid for
(2) those which incurred debt
meet a part or all of the cost of public improvements
and (3) those which incurred debt in order to meet
out of current revenues
;
to
even ordinary expenses.
It
is
probable, however,
that in some cities of the third class a part of the debt
was incurred in order to make improvements in the
succeeding year. This comparison discloses the fact
that it is not the fixed policy of American cities,
taken as a whole, to finance all permanent improvements by loans. In this respect the American cities
offer a marked contrast to the cities of Great Britain.
Table
Receipts
from
11.
general revenues.
—General
revenues
compulsory or voluntary contributions
of private individuals or corporations which are levied
or collected to defray the general costs of government,
but which are not conditioned upon the performance
of any specific service to the individual contributor.
In the report for 1907 the Census includes, for the first
consist of those
time, certain receipts of cotmties containing cities of
Group
$736,668. In Table 11 the receipts from general
revenues of the various cities are classified by the
division of the government of the city receiving, by
character,
I,
as follows:
Chicago,
111.,
$3,284,160; Pitts-
and by source.
greater portion of the general revenue receipts
of cities was received by the "city corporations,"
The
86.4 per cent being received by city corporations, 9.7
per cent by school districts, and 3.9 per cent by
"other divisions of the government of the city." The
receipts from local governments reported under the
last-named head are from the following sources Chicago, 111., park districts $3,353,184, sanitary district
:
$2,098,160,
Of the 158
cities
burg, Pa., $1,706,098; Cleveland, Ohio, $1,161,038;
Buffalo, N. Y., $982,662; Detroit, Mich., $737,874;
Cincinnati, Ohio, $1,630,849; and Milwaukee, Wis.,
and Cook county $3,284,160; Philadelphia,
Pa., poor districts; Pittsburg, Pa., Allegheny county;
Cleveland, Ohio, Cuyahoga county; Buffalo, N. Y.,
Erie county; Detroit, Mich., Wayne coimty; Cincinnati, Ohio, Hamilton county; Milwaukee, Wis., Mil-
Denver, Colo., Denver coimty;
Port of Portland; Oakland, Cal.,
sanitary districts; Peoria and Springfield, 111., pleasure,
driveway, and park districts; Tacoma, Wash., Metropolitan Park Board; and Portland, Me., Portland
Bridge district.
Column 6 shows the amount of general revenue
receipts that were later refunded because erroneously
collected.
For two cities, however, there are included
with these receipts service transfer receipts by one
division of the government of the city from another,
the amounts of these transfers being shown separately
waukee
county;
Portland,
Oreg.,
in footnotes.
—
The proportion of revenue deClassified hy source.
rived from the different sources varies widely. In
most cities the greater part of the annual revenue is
derived from general property taxes. Business licenses
constitute a much larger proportion of the total revenue
of southern cities than of the northern.
Table XIII
shows the per cent distribution of receipts from general revenues for the cities reported in 5 Northern
states, 4 Southern states, and 1 Western state, as fol-
lows:
Table XIII.
Per cent distribution of receipts from
in
cities
of specified states: 1907.
gerieral revenues
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
To
illustrate the variation in the per cent distribu-
tion of receipts
from these sources
as
shown by the
61
the highest and lowest perceirtages for the cities of
those states are presented in Table
XIV,
as follows
individual cities of the ten states given in Table XIII,
Table XIV.— VARIATION IN
PER CENT DISTRIBUTION OF RECEIPTS FROM GENERAL REVENUES FOR THE CITIES
OF SPECIFIED STATES:- 1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
62
Maryland.
—Baltimore
and business
taxes.
The
received $571,557 from special property
state levies taxes at three-tenths of 1 per
cent on the assessed valuation of securities .and one-fourth of 1 per
cent on savings bank deposits, distributing all of the former and
three-fourths of the latter to the counties
and the city of Baltimore in
proportion to the valuation held therein.
the city
Prom the former
source
Baltimore received $427,543; from the latter, $143,810.
Prior to April 7, 1904, the laws authorized the collection of a state
mortgage tax of 8 per cent annually on all interest covenanted to be
of
paid on debts secured by mortgage. Of this tax, the collectors remitted one-fourth to the state and three-fourths to the counties and
the city of Baltimore in proportion to the amount collected in each,
the latter receiving in 1907 the sum of $204 as its share of receipts
from back taxes of this character.
Table XV shows for the several cities of MassaMassachusetts.
chusetts the special property and business taxes received as city
revenues in 1907. The taxes on the stock of national banks located
in the state are apportioned among the cities according to the number of shares owned in each, the tax on shares held outside of the
state falling to the state. The collection of the tax upon the whole
issue of stock of a given bank is made by the city in which the bank
is located; the city retains its apportionment of such collection and
pays the remainder to the state for distribution among the other
Massachusetts cities in which stock in this bank is owned. In
Table
the taxes on national bank stock are divided into two
classes: (1) Those amounts collected and retained for its own use
—
XV
by
the city in which the
bank
is
located,
and
(2) those
amounts
received from the state as apportionments of taxes collected from
banks located in other Massachusetts cities. The taxes on the
capital stock of street railways and of "other corporations" located
in the state are collected by the state and apportioned to the cities
the street railway taxes on mileage basis, and taxes on "other corporations" according to the residence of the stockholder.
Table XV.
Specified classes of special property
Massachusetts cities: 1907.
and business
taxes in
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
Table XVI.
Specified classes of special property
in New Jersey cities: 1907.
and business
taxes
—
South Carolina. Charleston receivetf $24,607 from a tax, at the
municipal rate, on gross earnings of insurance companies; $23,104
of this
Taxes on
Railroad
City
num-
Total.
ber.
foreign
and
fire in-
canal
surance
amount was
panies.
Virginia.
$486,654
Newark
16
18
37
50
53
66
74
98
115
117
$450,408
136,246
16,667
362,629
2,948
7,194
12,719
8,113
3,917
2,652
4,062
3,090
1,693
29,
Jersey City
370,
Paterson
Trenton
Camden
Hoboken
30,137
20,253
6,424
1,153
3,003
,
Elizabetli
Bayonne
Passaic
Atlantic City.
—
New Yorl. Table XVII shows for the cities of New York the
revenue derived in 1907 from special property and business taxes,
which consist of a 1 per cent tax on the valuation of bank stock, a
2 per cent tax on the premium receipts of foreign insurance companies, and half of the tax on mortgages collected by the county
clerk
when the mortgages are recorded, at the rate of one-half of
on the amount of the loan secured. After deducting the
1 per cent
cost of collecting the mortgage tax, half of the remainder
the taxing district in which the mortgaged property
the other half to the
Table XVII.
is
paid to
is
situated and
state.
Specified classes of special property
in
New
York
cities:
Taxes on
City
num-
Total.
bank
stock.
ber.
and
business taxes
1907.
Taxes on
fire insur-
Mortgage
ance com-
taxes.
New York...
BufEalo
Rocliester
Syracuse
Albany
Troy
Yonkers
:
Utica
Schenectady.
71
Binghamton.
Elmira
103
138
146
Auburn
$350,820
$1,831,943
5,120,923
163,175
76,737
50,288
57,026
34,771
4,379
60,247
13,561
14,005
12,008
7,777
3,108,072
91,142
49,231
24,257
47,176
27,128
2,333
51,261
5,905
11,643
7,556
6,429
279,437
25,721
12,188
7,326
5,773
5,020
2,046
3,958
3,387
2,362
2,264
1,348
.,733,414
46,312
15,318
18,705
4,076
2,623
(')
5,028
4,269
(')
2,198
m
not received Until after the close of the year.
in 1907 because the county treasurer regarded his warrant insuf-
'
Taxes
2
Not distributed
for 1907
$3,432,133
"
ficient.
—
Ohio. The statutes provide for a tax of 5 per cent on collateral
inheritances 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 a county revenue. Prom this source
Cleveland received $462; and -Cincuinati, $1,103. These items
are shown as municipal receipts because of the inclusion of parts
of the transactions of Cuyahoga and Hamilton counties, respectively.
Pennsylvania.
foreign
—The
state Insurance commissioner collects
from
&e insurance companies a tax of 2 per cent on gross premium
receipts.
One-half of this amount is distributed among the cities
collected, for the benefit of local firemen. The
in the table for Pennsylvania cities were from this
which it is
amounts shown
in
source.
Ehode Island.—Providence received $147, Pawtucket $24, and
Woonsocket $1 from an auctioneers' tax of one-eightieth of 1 per
cent on the amount of sales. This tax, which is known in the statutes as "auctioneers' duty," consists of one-tenth of 1 percent of the
amount
of sales; auctioneers are required to
to the city
and the remainder
90196—10
5
to the state.
pay one-eighth
of this
$110,182 from special property and
Of this amount $14,292 was derived from a tax of
income in excess of $600; $26,559 from a tax of 80
—
—
panies.
15,614,896
the school district at the rate of $1.50
cents per $100 valuation of intangible personal property; $45,518
from a tax of 80 cents per $100 of bank stock valuations, assessed
against the shareholders; and $23,813 from a 5 per cent tax on the
gross receipts of street railway companies.
West Virginia. Wheeling received $3,369 from a tax of one-half
of 1 per cent on the gross amount of premiums received by foreign
insurance companies. This tax is collected under authority of an
act of a state legislature empowering the city of Wheeling to levy
such a tax, and an ordinance of the city council providing therefor
and fixing the rate. In addition to this tax, which is paid to the
city by local agents, foreign insurance companies pay to the state
a tax of 2 per cent on gross premium receipts.
Wisconsin. Milwaukee received $41,750 from special property
and business taxes; of which $5,019 was from inheritance taxes
received by Milwaukee county and $36,731 from a tax on fire insurance companies. County treasurers collect the inheritance tax,
which is both direct and collateral, and which ranges from 1 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
are to retain 5 per cent of the collections up to $50,000, 3 per cent on
the next $50,000, and 2 per cent on all additional sums. The cities
of Wisconsin levy a 2 per cent tax on premium receipts of fire insurance companies. This tax is paid to the city treasurers by
local agents, and is for the benefit of the fire departments.
From
this source Superior received $5,795; Racine, $4,006; Oshkosh,
and La
$3,663;
All cities.
for
—Norfolk received
business taxes.
$1.40 per $100 of
All cities
for the city corporation, at the rate of $28.50
per $1,000, and $1,503
per $1,000.
com-
taxes.
63
Poll
were
Crosse, $2,755.
taxes.
—Poll
taxes amounting
reported for 1907
amount, the 20
by 68
to
$1,251,709
of the 158 cities.
Of
Massachusetts received
or
55.4
per
cent;
9
cities in Pennsylvania,
$693,082,
per
and
or
16.5
cent;
9 cities in New Jersey,
$206,657,
per
cent.
In
the
cities of some states
or
7
$87,676,
poll taxes are collected at a fixed amount per capita,
as $1 or $2; while in others the occupation of the
individual is given a specified valuation, on which a
tax is collected at the same rate as taxes on general
property. All receipts from per capita taxes, whether
uniform or graded, are included in the column "poll
this
cities of
taxes."
—
Liquor licenses and taxes. In the column "Uquor
and taxes" are included aU the revenue
receipts of cities from the liquor traffic.
Where no
such receipts are reported, either none are collected,
the cities being under general or local prohibition, or
the revenue belongs to the state or some other civil
division.
The very small amounts shown in this
column for certain cities indicate that in such cities
the only liquor Ucenses issued are those permitting
druggists to sell liquors and alcohol for medicinal and
mechanical purposes only.
licenses
Other business licenses.
—Under
this
head are
re-
ported receipts from all business licenses other than
those derived from the liquor traffic. Receipts of
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
64
this class include licenses collected
from
street railway,
and other corporations, the
amounts of which are shown by cities in Table 40.
General licenses. Receipts from "general Hcenses"
were reported for 74 of the 158 cities. For some
telegraph,* telephone,
—
cities
similar receipts are doubtless included in the
column "other business
licenses;" while in others it
probable that such receipts are retained as fees by
the official making the collection. General hcenses
include marriage licenses, hcenses granted for vehicles of all kinds not used in business, for carrying
is
deadly weapons, for private boats on city lakes and
hunters' licenses.
Permits.
—The permits for which receipts are given
by public
the latter class are
in Table 11 do not include permits issued
service enterprises; receipts
of
reported in Table 17. Of the 158 cities, 115 reported
receipts from permits other than those issued by pubUc
service enterprises.
The purposes for which these
permits were granted, so far as reported, were as follows: Building, connecting sewers and drains, opening streets, disinterment", plumbing, sidewalks, ciu'bing,
storing gmipowder, and carrying pistols.
Fines and forfeits. Receipts from fines and forfeits
were reported by all of the 158 cities except JoHet,
HI.; in that city the fines are retained by the police
magistrate as his fees of ofiice, and no report of their
amount could be obtained. Besides fines imposed by
—
courts
and
which
in
forfeits of deposits for
most
cities
appearance in court,
constitute the greater part of
such receipts, there are included in this column fines
imposed on pohcemen and firemen for violation of rules
or neglect of duty, and also forfeits of bonds and
deposits guaranteeing, the fulfillment of contracts, the
good faith
of bids,
and the performance
of certain
acts.
In some cases the receipts included in Table 11 as
from fines and forfeits in criminal proceedings are
incomplete because of the fact that in the cities of
many states the greater number of petty criminal
cases are tried in county or justices' courts instead of
in the municipal courts.
Forfeits of bonds and deposits for
the fulfillment
and the performacts were reported by 26 cities, and
of contracts, the good faith of bids,
ance of specified
aggregated $182,531. Classified according to the purpose of the bonds or deposits, these forfeits were as
follows:
Deposits
deposits
Contractors'
New
York, N. Y.
Chicago,
Mo
15,
Mo
Pa
Montgomery, Ala.
Maiden, Mass
Jacksonville, Fla
Joplin,
sified:
100
New Orleans, La.
100
Worcester, Mass
St. Joseph,
6,000
.
Mo
.
Mo
Somerville, Mass. .
Utica, N.
235
.
Tex
Minn
$140
100
300
Miscellaneous or unclas-
50
Charleston, S.C.
Dallas,
765
Mich
St. Paul,
10
320
Schenectady, N.Y.
EvanSville, Ind . .
Erie,
with
Indianapolis, Ind.
151,166
San Francisco, Cal.
New Haven, Conn.
Joseph,
Detroit,
$500
.
111
St. Louis,
St.
made
bids:
and bonds:
Y
2,800
Houston, Tex
1,050
Butte,
Mont
Bay City, Mich
50
Superior,
250
Wis
1,
000
503
60
100
20
1,014
160
552
5
181
Of the amounts shown above
as miscellaneous or
unclassified, that for Worcester, Metes., represents de-
made at the time of
be refunded on conditions which were
not complied with; that for St. Joseph, Mo., was a
posits of pupils of night schools,
registration, to
deposit on liquor license; and that for Somerville,
by a gas company for failure
The character of
received by the remaining cities was not
Mass., represents forfeits
to furnish gas of standard quality.
the forfeits
reported.
Subventions, grants,
and
gifts.
—^The
total of subven-
and grants received from other civil divisions
amounted to $24,849,241, of which $16,441,172, or
In comparing
66.2 per cent, was for education.
amounts in the column for "education," it is essential
that municipal organization in the several cities be
taken into account. For example, Los Angeles, Cal.,
received 59.5 per cent more for this purpose than San
Francisco, though the latter city is much larger than
the former; but the item for Los Angeles includes.
$406,718 received from the state and $493,916 from
the county, while all of that for San Francisco,
$564,804, was received from the state an amount
corresponding to the county item of Loe Angeles being
received in San Francisco as original taxes, because the
city and county governments are combined in the case
of that city.
The amount received by San Francisco in
1907 was 21.2 per cent less than reported for 1906, the
decrease being due to the loss of population caused by
tions
—
the earthquake near the close of the fiscal year 1906.
Of the 158 cities reported, there were only 8 which
did not receive grants for education. The facts for
these cities are as follows Of the grant of $5,690,963
made by the United States Government to the Dis:
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
Columbia, and reported for the city of Washingtonin the column "for other purposes," more than
$1,000,000 was used for school purposes. In the cities
of Savannah, Augusta, and Macon, Ga., Mobile, Ala.,
and Jacksonville, Fla., the schools are under county
government, and no exact segregation of transactions
for schools could be secured.
In Boston and Chelsea,
Mass., the dog tax is retained by the cities instead of
being paid over to the county as in other cities. Subventions for education in Massachusetts are derived
from this tax and are found in all the other cities of
trict of
the state.
Of the 158
65
Table 12 classifies the total ifeceipts from commerrevenues as received from the public or from departments, officers, enterprises, funds, and accounts.
cial
Most
of the amounts in the column "service transfers,"
are included in the columns for " enterprises " or in that
for "special services."
Revenues from "special serv-
ices" comprise receipts from departmental services,
from special assessments, and from privileges.
A study of Table 12 in connection with Table 11
shows that duplications on account of receipts in
error and transfers are much more common in receipts
from commercial revenues than in those from general
cities, 93 reported gifts received from individuals and corporations to be applied to expenses
revenues, constituting in the former case 10.4 per cent,
aggregating $1,864,445. These consisted of (a) assessments, percentages of salaries, dues, etc., for
police pension funds, $455,668; for firemen's relief
total.
funds, $179,856; for teachers' retirement funds, $533,243; for library funds, $1,076; and for other purposes,
$5,411; and (b) donations, awards, and bequests for
police pension funds, $84,823; for firemen's relief
funds, $100,187; for teachers' retirement funds, $12,964; for schools, $24,579; for libraries and museums,
$88,383; for rewards and prizes, $2,361; for parks,
$15,007; for hospitals, $4,452; and for miscellaneous
and unreported purposes, $356,435. Gifts from individuals and corporations to be applied to outlays were
reported by 38 cities and amounted to $1,075,395.
They were received for the following purposes Schools,
:
$113,506; libraries, $794,541; parks, $62,231; public
buildings, $27,012; playgrounds, $100; hospitals, $700;
speedways, $9,328; cemeteries, $8,619; and for miscellaneous and unreported purposes, $59,358.
Table
12.
from
cluded, for the
first
fcontaining cities of
Table
1
per cent of the
13.
—
Receipts hy municipal service enterprises.
In former
census reports any receipts by municipal service
enterprises were included with departmental receipts.
But, as stated in the text for Table 6, the Census
Bureau wishes to emphasize the need for more data
on the cost of operating such enterprises and, therefore, has prepared additional tables on this subject in
the present report.
The allowances for depreciation are made more to
call attention to this factor in accounting than to
attempt an accurate calculation of operating costs.
Whenever city officials fiirnished figures for depreciation or for interest on value of plant, such figures
have been presented in the table; in all other cases
depreciation has been computed at 7 per cent of the
reported value of the system, and the interest on the
value of the system has been computed at the average
rate of interest on funded debt reported by the
cities.
Table
Receipts
14.
from departmental
ception of special assessments,
or commodities fm-nished
services.
all
—^With
the ex-
receipts for services
by departments and
offices
time, certain receipts of counties
other than municipal service enterprises and public
service enterprises are tabulated in Table 14.
In the
report for 1907 are included, for the first time, certain
Group
receipts of counties containing cities of
I,
as follows: Chicago,
111.,
$1,421,843; Pittsburg, Pa., $408,745; Cleveland, Ohio,
$260,105; Buffalo, N. Y., $82,686; Detroit, Mich.,
$194,059; Cincinnati, Ohio, $101,613; and Milwaukee,
Wis., $103,087.
in the latter about three-tenths of
respective
—
commercial revenues. Commercial
revenues of cities are those derived from the exercise
These revenues are
of their commercial functions.
in the nature of recompense for services performed
and of profits, earnings, rents, or interest in connection
with productive enterprises, investments, or properties
managed by the cities. In the report for 1907 are inReceipts
and
follows:
Chicago,
Group
I,
as
$1,275,643; Pittsburg, Pa.,
$368,859; Cleveland, Ohio. $80,526; Buffalo, N. Y.,
$68,266; Detroit, Mich., $160,509; Cincinnati, Ohio,
5,844;
111.,
and Milwaukee, Wis., $53,998.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
66
Fees and charges are contributions of wealth which
are exacted from persons, natural or corporate, to
defray a part or all of the expenses involved in some
by the government.
The greater portion of the receipts classified by the
Bureau of the Census as fees is for services which can
be performed only by governments. They are mainly
clerical in character, and their cost is so well established that the amounts therefor, which are often only
nominal, are fixed by statute or ordinance establishing
special service rendered
a
combined city and county functions
and in those cities of Group I with which county
The distribution was as follows
receipts are reported.
cities exercising
New
York, N.
Chicago,
Y
Philadelphia,
St. Louis,
Pa
Mo
Boston, Mass
Pittsburg,
$404, 210
216, 675
111
Pa
Cleveland, Ohio
226, 055
67,111
San Francisco, Cal.
Detroit, Mich
Cincinnati, Ohio
Milwaukee, Wis
85,
650
Washington, D. C
Providence, R. 1
19,
302
Denver, Colo
29,
922
scale of fees.
The amounts
classified as charges generally represent
reimbursements for services which are similar in
character to those rendered by one individual to
another in private life, and as a rule are other than
clerical in nature.
With few exceptions, the amounts
to be charged are definitely established only upon
completion of the work or service. Among the
by charges are the
making of connections with sewer and water pipes
and the removal of snow from sidewalks.
Included in the column "charges" are certain
amounts received by the cities as reimbursements for
outlays, aggregating $2,192,247.
Such reimbursements for outlays for the abolition of grade crossings
amounted to $1,192,888, and were reported by 12
cities; for general street services, $626,851, by 25
cities; for sewers, $242,336, by 15 cities; for sidewalks,
$82,335, by 7 cities; for schools, $18,000, by 1 city;
for police department, $8,377, by 1 city; for bridge,
$6,071, by 4 cities; for engineer's office, $6,057, by 1
city; for protection of life and property, $5,992, by 1
city; and for prisons and reformatories, $3,340, by 2
special services of cities paid for
cities.
Under
rents are reported all receipts of cities corre-
sponding to those commonly so designated in private
finance.
Receipts which in former census reports
were classified as privilege rentals are-for 1907 classified
as either rents or licenses, depending upon their
As stated in the report for 1906,
the separation of receipts from privilege rentals and
those from rents was often very difficult, since it was
specific characters.
based upon differences in the method or system of
collecting revenue rather than upon distinct types or
kinds of revenue.
Under sales are tabulated receipts from the sale of
discarded equipment and materials. Included in this
column are certain reimbursements for outlays, as
follows: Cleveland, Ohio, for grade crossings, $3,531,
and for prisons and reformatories, $150,000; iDetroit,
Mich., for general street services, $2,810; Los Angeles,
Cal., for sewers, $15,141; and Grand Rapids, Mich.,
and property, $2,124.
Of the amount included in the column "all other"
under the heading "protection of life and property,"
$1,233,150, or 90.1 per cent, was from fees of public
administrators, registrars, recorders, and sheriffs in
for protection of life
Hartford,
Conn
. .
$81, 633
19,
815
17,064
15,
812
34,955
10,
116
4,
830
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
whom
the service
67
performed, or according to the
in Table 11 as "general property taxes," as "special
assumed increase in the value of the property affected
by the improvement. It is probable that for some
cities the amounts reported under "penalties and collectors' fees" include interest on deferred payments of
special assessments, which should have been reported
as receipts from interest.
Wherever the separation
was possible, the interest on deferred payments has
property and business taxes," or as "other business
licenses," according to the method by which they were
levied and collected.
A complete exhibit of public
service privilege receipts is shown, in connection with
other classes of receipts from public service corporations, in Table 40.
Included with the public service privileges for Pittsburg, Pa., is a receipt of $16 by the county government.
is
been included with the other interest receipts in
Table 16.
Included in the special assessments shown in Table
15 for certain cities of
Group
I are certain receipts of
the counties containing these cities not formerly reported by the Bureau of the Census, as follows Cleveland, Ohio, $69,505 from special assessments for paved
:
roads, and Detroit, Mich., $18,310 from special assessments for county draining ditches.
Of the total amount received from special assessments 97.2 per cent was for outlays and 2.8 per cent
Among receipts from the latter class of
for expenses.
assessments, which are for the first time shown separately in the Census report, are possibly included some
items derived from "charges" for specific services
with special assessments.
Receipts from special assessments for expenses were,
as far as reported, for the following purposes: For
locally included
street sprinkling, $749,115,
ing, $114,550,
by 4
by 25
cities; street clean-
cities; street lighting,
$79,917,
by
2 cities; garbage and refuse collection, $76,032, by 3
cities; moth extermination, $29,865, by 10 cities; repairing sidewalks, $24,302,
by 8
snow removal,
weed cutting,
$3,951, by 1 city;
cities;
Receipts from minor privileges.
included those receipts of
—Under this head are
cities
which are
collected,
without the granting of a license, for such privileges
as placing lunch stands or other property on the sidewalks; vending produce from street and sidewalk
spaces; maintaining private sewers, drains, or vaults
under the streets or walks; maintaining switches in
streets; and extending awnings, bay and show windows, signs, and other structures and conveniences
beyond the building line. The following
ment of the minor privilege receipts:
is
a state-
—
Alabama. Birmingham received $1,023 from rents of sidewalks
street encroachments.
Mobile received $560 for country produce wagons on street stands.
California.
San Francisco received 1100 for pipes in streets.
Los Angeles received $300 from sale of franchises to oil companies
for pipes in streets and $102 from a tax of 2 per cent on the gross
earnings of such companies in piping oil for others.
Colorado. Denver received $150 for side tracks in streets and
and
—
—
$97 for billboards.
Georgia.
Illinois.
alleys,
—Macon received $1,746 for encroachments on sidewalks.
— Chicago received $326,281, as follows: For streets and
vacated by city, $224,597; for use of space under sidewalks,
$21,976,
3 cities; tree, grass, and
$4,235; for pipes
$4,011,
cities; flushing streets,
$12,584; for merchandise stands, $10,282; for public scales in streets,
by
by 4
general care of streets, $3,873, by 3 cities; street repairs, $3,192, by 1 city; cleaning sidewalks, $161, by
1 city; and $203,700 for unreported purposes, by 21
and conduits,
$24,265; for switches in streets,
$7,425; for other use of streets, $1,789; for
bay windows, $704; and
not reported, $400.
Indiana. Evansville received $40 for a switch in the streets.
Iowa. ^Dubuque received $532 for the use of space on sidewalks.
Kansas. Topeka received $300 for the privilege of advertising
for privileges
—
—
—
cities.
Receipts from special assessments for outlays were
principally for the following purposes Street opening,
street widening, paving, repaving, sewers, sidewalks,
:
curbing, grading, parks, parkways, macadamizing,
and
extension of water mains.
Receipts from puhlic service privileges. Under this
designation the Bureau of the Census includes all re-
—
other than those from taxes, Hcenses, and
charges for services, which are collected from individuals or corporations enjoying the special privilege of
using the streets and alleys of a city for providing some
public service, such as that furnished by a street railway, subway, electric light, gas, telegraph, or teleceipts,
phone company. The amounts reported under this
head are in the nature of receipts from rentals of pubUc
Receipts from such corporations for servproperty.
ices rendered are included in the various columns of
Table 14 as receipts from charges. Those receipts
from the same corporations which are in the nature of
taxes, as defined by the Census Bureau, are included
on waste boxes.
Kentucky.
— Louisville
received $250 for street space for waste
—
Louisiana. New Orleans received $2,772 for the use of streets by
country produce wagons, and $2,455 for privileges not reported.
Maryland. Baltimore received $48,503, as follows: For drains,
$36,337; for area ways, $2,764; for windows, bay and show, $1,647;
—
use of streets, $1,492; for closets, $1,277; for bridges, $737; for
use of sidewalks, $673; for awnings, $668; for pipes, $661; for vaults,
$341; for cellars, $292; for electric franchise, $291; for signs, $261;
for superstructures, $173; for tunnels, $166; for pavement, $150; for
for
electric lamps, lights, etc., $133;
and
for 27 other classes of
minor
privileges yielding from $1 to $87 each, $440.
—
Boston received $15,243 for the privilege to sell
Massachusetts.
produce on sidewalk space. Fall River received $75 for the privilege of taking oysters in city waters. Taunton received $200 from
venders of notions maintaining stands in public ways.
Minnesota. Minneapolis received $182 for the privilege of maintaining heating pipes under the street, the basis of compensation
being 4 per cent of the amount received for heat by the heating
—
plant.
Missouri.
— St. Louis received $3,960 for pipe lines to conduct oil
St. Joseph received $1,007 for
spaces in streets, and $565 for spaces on sidewalks.
and water
for distribution.
wagon
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
68
Nebraska.— Omaha received $108 for advertisements on waste
paper boxes. Lincoln received $50 for the privilege of maintaining
heating pipes under streets.
South
Omaha
received $15 for use of
street ends.
New
Jersey.
right of
—Camden received $60 from a railroad company
way over
for
city property.
New Fori.—New York
received $311,141, as follows: For vaults
tunnels, $264,955; for bay windows, $37,176; for ornamental
projections, $3,441; for temporary sheds, $3,945; for bridge over
street, $2,624.
Buffalo received $425 for the privilege of connect-
and
lijg
The amounts tabulated in the column "accrued
interest and receipts in error" are of three distinct
classes, as follows:
1. Accrued interest received by the various divisions of the government on loans issued to the public which is counterbalanced by
later payments to the public;
2. Interest received by the sinking, investment, and public trust
funds on securities held by them, which counterbalance interest
paid to the public at the purchase of such securities; and
sewers belonging to private individuals and other civil divisions
with the city sewers, and $60 for permission to construct and maintain a frame building on the sea wall strip. Albany received $2 for
a conduit and $1 for branch track. Yonkers received $25 for use of
streets for storage of building materials.
Utica received $50 from an
annual charge on account of a building extending over the building
line.
Auburn received $100 for the privilege of connecting a private sewer with the city sewer system.
Ohio. Cleveland received $3,830 from market gardeners for curb
—
and $964 for advertisements on waste paper boxes.
Columbus received $664 from curb market rents. Dayton received
f925 for rent of sidewalk spaces for market purposes. Akron reprivileges,
ceived $200 from curb rentals for market purposes.
Oregon. Portland received $25 for permits to erect signs on side-
—
walks.
Pennsylvania.
struct vaults
awnings.
—Philadelphia received $5,121 from permits to con-
under sidewalks, and $1,146
for so-called licenses for
Pittsburg received $26,560 for switches, sidings, and
and $576
for streets vacated by the city.
Wilkes-Barre received $580 from gardeners and hucksters for curb stand privileges.
Altoona received $100 as an annual charge for use of city sewer.
Johnstown received $272 and York $472 for street spaces on market
days. Chester received $39 from unreported sources.
Rhode Island. Providence received $1,413 for privileges to erect
buildings on piles in the river. Pawtucket received $13 for the
scales,
—
privilege of stringing wires in the streets.
—^Dallas received $30 from privileges not reported.
—Salt Lake City received $40 from a 5 per cent tax
jreceipts from advertisements on waste paper boxes.
Virginia. —Norfolk received $13,097 from curb rentals.
Texas.
Utah.
Table
on
—
special assessments, or as accrued interest
on
city
Where
the amounts shown in city
reports as receipts from interest on taxes or special
securities
sold.
Receipts of interest in error subsequently corrected by refund
The' receipts in error are given separately on page 48.
The interest receipts ia error which were subsequently corrected by refund payments aggregated
$90, as follows: Los Angeles, Cal., $14; Camden, N. J.,
$3; Harrisburg, Pa., $35; South Omaha, Nebr., $38.
In Table 16, these receipts are included with accrued
on original loans.
The column interest transfers between the municipality and the sinking and public trust funds includes
$39,286 received by St. Louis, Boston, Baltimore,
and Providence from service transfers which closely
interest
resemble interest transfers, in that they consist of
by a department for the use of real estate
held by one of the invested funds.
In St. Louis the
school public trust funds received from the library
$12,023 in rents; in Boston the public trust fund
received $300 for rent of real estate; in Baltimore
the sinkiug funds received $26,673 for rent of buildiags
and "ground rents" of lands used for school and other
municipal purposes; in Providence a public trust
fund received $290 for rent of real estate occupied by
the fire and school departments.
Of the aggregate receipts from the income of sinking,
investment, and public trust funds, shown in column
rents paid
6, $10,941,148, or 64.1 per cent, were contributed by
the governments of the cities, either as interest upon
16.
from interest. This table includes all interest received by the general treasury and the separate funds and accounts of cities, whether received on
investments, on cash balances in banbs, on taxes and
Receipts
3.
payments.
assessments appear to be receipts for the use of city
or credit, they are included in this table as
receipts from interest; where the amounts so reported
appear to be in the nature of penalties and fees for
nonpayment of taxes or special assessments at the
time prescribed by law, they are tabulated in Tables
Of the total interest
11 and 14 as penalties and fees.
own securities held by these funds as investments
or as service transfers for rent of real property; the
their
remaining 35.9 per cent was derived from investments
in securities other than those of the municipality in
which the funds were held, and from cash balances
deposited in banks. The interest upon general city
cash is reported in column 7.
Table
money
receipts certain
amounts were received by counties
not formerly reported containing cities of Group I.
These amounts were as follows Chicago, 111., $146,200;
Pittsburg, Pa., $39,870; Cleveland, Oliio, $110,074;
:
Buffalo, N. Y., $14,420; Detroit, Mich., $15,240; Cincinnati,, Ohio, $34,769;
and Milwaukee, Wis., $17,759.
17.
—
Receipts from revenues of public service enterprises.
The report for 1907 includes for Milwaukee, Wis., a
receipt of $31,330 from the public service enterprises
of Milwaukee county, which were not included in the
reports of the census on statistics of cities for previous
years.
The statistics of public service enterprises are
defective in consequence of the following facts: First,
most
cities the method of accounting is faulty in
does not give credit to enterprises for materials
furnished or services rendered by them to the depart-
in
that
it
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
ments and to other public
utility enterprises; second,
in those cities crediting their enterprises for materials
or services so furnished, there is no uniform method
of determining the
amounts
defects are evident
when
finances of any
to be credited.
These
a thorough study of the
public service enterprise is undertaken.
Such a study for water-supply systems is attempted
in Table 39, where the value of services rendered to
city departments is estimated on a per capita basis,
because it is believed that such estimates are more
reliable than the figures reported by a majority of the
cities.
The only remedy for these defects is the
adoption, by officials iu charge of municipal accounting, of a uniform system of giving credit to enterprises
for utilities furnished by them to the departments
and to other public service enterprises. Those cities
which ia 1907 gave credit to their enterprises for such
utihties are indicated in Table 17 by entries in the
column "service transfers." On superficial study,
the methods of accounting for enterprises ia such cities
seem to be superior to those in cities which make no
record of the transactions between their enterprises
and departments.
Service transfers formed only about 1.6 per cent of
all
receipts of public service enterprises reported in
derived from the furnishing of public utilities, such
as water, gas, and electricity.
Under tolls are reported
receipts from ferry and bridge tolls.
Under manufactures are reported the receipts from the sale of
manufactured by industries maintained in
articles
penal and charitable institutions, and receipts from
the sale of like products of other industries. Under
permits are reported amounts received from the issue
of permits by public service enterprises; in most
instances, such permits are issued by the water-supply
enterprises for the privilege of making connections
with the main pipes. As stated in the text for Table
14, privilege rentals, which were separately reported
in former years, are not given for 1907 as a distinct
class of revenue, because it was found impracticable
to
make
rentals
a satisfactory distinction between privilege
and rents and
in
1.7 per cent as
the corresponding table for 1906. This
due largely to the fact that the report for
decrease is
1906 included
as
service
transfer
receipts
certain
items derived from departmental estimates of the
value of utilities furnished free to cities by enterprises,
while such items are not included in ihis report. In
some
cities
service transfer receipts formed a large
percentage of the total. In Woonsocket, R. I., they
formed 23.1 per cent, and in Yonkers, N. Y., 26.3
per cent, though it should be noted that in the latter
city in 1907 the waterworks received from the city
$30,990 for water furnished in 1906, the elimination
of which would reduce the year's revenue from service
In 8 other
transfers to 13.9 per cent of the total.
revenues
of
of
the
total
per
cent
cities more than 10
public service enterprises consisted of service transfers.
In the classification of revenues of public service
enterprises
rents,
and
by
source, the receipts from fees, charges,
are the same in character as the
sales
departmental receipts shown under the same heads in
Table 14. Under rates are reported the receipts
licenses.
The
larger part of the
were received for the use
of city property and in 1907 are included in Table 17
under "rents."
Of all the public service enterprises, the watersupply systems, are the most important. The total
payments for expenses and receipts from revenues
of these systems in the 148 cities reported for the
years 1902 to 1907 were as foUows:
so-called privilege rentals
Table 17 for 1907, as compared with
shown
69
TEAR.
•
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
70
PROM REVENUES OF SPECIFIED PUBLIC SERVICE ENTERPRISES INCLUDED IN THE
COLUMN "ALL OTHER PUBLIC SERVICE ENTERPRISES" IN TABLE 17: 1907.
Table XVIII.— RECEIPTS
City
number.
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
Table
19.
Private trust funds and accounts.
—In certain cases
and hold money under conditions which
create implied private tru§ts. The trusts of this kind
most frequently met with in the financial administracities receive
71
or bequests are to be applied Jo purposes which are
other than municipal in their nature and for which the
can not make appropriation.
trust funds of the first-mentioned class are
estabhshed for objects of charity, education, pensions,
and other pubhc benefits and those of the second class
are for carrying out purposes which are in their nature
private, but the fu lfillm ent of which, because of its
extending over a long period of time or being continued
city
PubHc
;
tion of cities concern the estates of deceased persons
held in trust for unknown heirs, or moneys deposited
as guaranty of contracts.
Sometimes the moneys held
under these private trusts are set aside in special private trust funds, and sometimes they are represented
by private
trust accounts.
Private trust funds are
distinguishable from private trust accounts only by
the method of caring for the cash held in trust. That
of private trust funds is deposited subject to order in
name of the particular trust, while that of trust
accounts is covered into the city treasury, and an individual account therefor is opened. In a number of
cities, however, but little attention is given to the
proper recording of transactions affecting private
trusts, the receipts and payments frequently being
entered upon the books as ordinary city revenues and
expenses. The absence of a proper record of these
temporary transactions, in which the municipaMty
acts in the capacity of a trustee, leads not only to conthe
fusion and irregularity but sometimes even to defalcation.
Besides the cities shown in Table 19, numerous
others in fact had incurred private trust liabiHties, but,
owing to lack of a proper method of accounting, no
record thereof is available.
At the close of the fiscal year 1906 private trust
funds and accounts were reported by 99 cities and involved in the aggregate $12,382,258, while at the close
of 1907 such habilities
were reported by 105
cities
and
involved in the aggregate $11,376,726. Included in
the cash, cash credits, and investments at the close of
1907 for certain cities of Group I, are, certain amounts
in care of the counties containing these cities which
have not been shown in former Census reports, as follows: Chicago,
111.,
$37,566; Pittsburg, Pa., $1,320;
and Buffalo, N. Y., $11,349.
In Table 19 the receipts and payments are not shown
separately for funds and accounts, the transactions of
these two forms of trusts being consohdated. The
total cash credits of the private trust accounts are,
however, shown separately, as well as the amount of
investments and cash in the private trust funds.
Tables 20 and
21.
—
Public trust funds. Cities frequently receive donations and bequests for what the statutes and court
In
decisions have denominated "charitable uses."
is
to
or
bequest
donation
of
the
most cases the purpose
of
what
the
in
excess
aid
extend in certain directions
might deem practicable to expend on its own account in a smaller number of instances the donations
city
;
is entrusted to municipaKties as consticonvenient agencies for accomplishing the
in perpetuity,
tuting
desired object.
In former Census reports trust funds of these twa
classes have been presented together under the head
"pubHc trust funds," but for 1907 they are separately
reported; those held for the apphcation of their proceeds to purposes which are other than municipal in
their nature and for which the cities can not make
appropriation from revenues being designated trust
funds for nonmunicipal uses, and those designed for
city uses being termed trust funds for municipal uses.
In the cace of the greater number of these funds the
income alone is appHcable for the purposes for which
the funds were created. In the case of a few, however,
both principal and income may be used for the purpose
of the trust.
The best way of caring for all pubhc trust moneys
by a "trust fund," as described in the text for Table
19.
In some cities, however, the pubhc trust fund
is
cash, although apphcable only to the specific purposes
been merged with general city baland the transactions are not as clearly set forth
would seem essential to correct administration and
of the trusts, has
ances,
as
accounting.
In the majority of
cities,
however, the
transactions are properly recorded and kept entirely
distinct
from ordinary municipal transactions and
accounts.
—
Public trust funds for nonmunicipal uses. The funds
reported in Table 20 are received and held for the apphcation of theirproceeds to purposes that are not municipal,
which the municipahty does not make approIn Massachusetts and a few other states
the cities are not only authorized but directed to accept
and
for
priations.
money
in trust to guarantee the care of specified
mon-
uments and graves in cemeteries. The acceptance of
such moneys creates an express pubhc trust and makes
the city a trustee in the same way that a private individual or corporation becomes a trustee under corresponding circumstances. The acceptance of such a
trust creates a debt liabihty for the amount received,
and such liabilities should be shown in accounts and
reports.
Of the 158 cities covered by the present report there
were 36 that reported pubhc trust funds for nonmunicipal uses; of these 16 were in Massachusetts, 3 in
New York, 3 in Connecticut, 2 in Rhode Island, 2 in
Ohio, 2 in Michigan, and 1 in each of the following
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
72
states
:
Maine,
New
Hampshire,
New Jersey,
Pennsyl-
Tania, Indiana, Illinois, Nebraska, and Utah.
All of
the 36 cities reported pubKc trust funds for the care of
and graves in cemeteries, and 4 reported funds for
lots
other nonimunicipal uses, as follows: New Haven,
Conn., a contribution from the G. A. R., reported as a
memorial tablet fund; Cambridge, Mass., a fund of
S10,000, received by bequest in 1864, the income to
be used to promote the cause of temperance; Lowell,
Mass., a fund of $1,000, the income to be paid to the
trustees of a church for the benefit of
its
and Portland, Me., a fund the income
Sunday school
of
which
is
to be
applied to the purchase of medals for high school
pupils, and the assistance of a student in Bowdoin
College.
Public trust funds for municipal uses.
—-The
accept-
ance by a city of donations and bequests for municipal
uses acts as an appropriation thereof, and the money
or wealth so received, if accounted for in a legal sense,
would be shown
To
priated."
in the accounts or reports as
'
'
appro-
distinguish such appropriations from
the ordinary governmental appropriations they are
usually set apart in special funds denominated "public
trust funds."
Wealth belonging to these funds constitutes a governmental asset, and the acceptance
thereof creates no liabihty other than the liability
involved in the ordinary governmental appropriation.
The municipal purpose most often subserved by
trust funds is the provision of pensions for policemen
and firemen who have suffered disability or completed
a specified term of service, the gratuities usually
extending to the families of those who have died in
the service or after retirement. The pensioning of
teachers
is
finding favor in recent years
and several
funds for this purpose. A
number of cities, mostly those of the eastern states,
report pubhc trust funds for charitable uses, such as
the care of the poor and defective classes.
Included in Table 21 are statistics of certain funds,
mostly pension funds, which are supported largely,
or altogether, by appropriations and by certaifi kinds
of municipal revenues assigned to them by statute,
cities report public trust
by charter provision, or by ordinance. Although
these so-called funds are in their origin and nature
more nearly alhed to administrative accounts than to
trust funds, they are assigned to the latter class in
accordance with the general usage of American cities.
Of the 158
cities having a population of over 30,000
public trust funds for municipal
107
reported
in 1907,
Of the total assets of these funds reported by
uses.
the different cities at the close of the fiscal year,
$15,526,580 consisted of investments in securities of
the city by which the funds were held, and $43,877,007
was represented by investments in other securities
and real estate, while $3,252,711 was in cash. The
investment securities are reported at their par value,
but in most cases their market value is greater.
The receipts from interest or other earnings derived
from investments were $3,378,185, or an average of
5.4 per cent on the nominal or par value of the assets.
When compared with the earnings of sinking funds,
the average rate of income would seem rather high,
but this is partly explained by the fact that the investments of public trust funds not infrequently embrace
real estate holdings, the value and earning power of
which increase from year to year. An example is
furnished by the Girard trust funds of Philadelphia,
the assets of which include much real estate, the
income from which considerably affects the average
rate as above given.
Table
Investment
funds.—Under
22.
this
designation
the
of the Census reports all interest-bearing securi-
Bureau
ties and other productive investments of
cities, with
public
service
enterprises
of
and the
exception
the
funds;
although
sinking
and
trust
the
of
term
assets
"investment fund" is seldom, if ever, employed by
it seems to describe appropriately the
mentioned. Transactions pertaining to
real estate incidentally acquired and yielding little or
no income are not included in this table, but are
reported in Tables 5 and 14, and the values of such
properties are shown in Table 30.
In some instances
the assets of investment funds consist of bonds or
stocks acquired by the city in consideration of financial
aid or grants to railroads or other public service corporations; in a few instances they consist of real estate
held for the purpose of securing profit from rents or
from an increase in value; while in other cases they
consist of bonds or mortgages received in exchange
for real estate and held as investments until maturity
or awaiting a favorable market.
In a majority of the cities reported in Table 22 the
investment funds are comparatively small; in some
instances they are doubtless of a temporary nature,
being held merely for a favorable opportunity to dispose of the securities or real estate, after which the
proceeds are usually covered into the general treasury.
In some cities permanent investment funds are established to enable the cities to carry their own fire risks
on mimicipal buildings, an amount equal to the premiums usually charged by fire insurance companies
being set aside each year for the creation of a fund
from which fire losses may be paid as they occur.
Such fimds are usually invested in profitable securities,
and can therefore be classed properly as "investment
funds." Funds for the perpetual care of cemeteries are
estabUshed by some cities from a percentage of the
receipts from the sale of lots, and in some cities funds
are invested during a period of accumulation for the
city officials,
properties
purchase, construction, or equipment of buildings or
other mimicipal permanent properties, and are here
treated as investment funds.
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
Of the 158 cities to which the investigation for 1907
was e?;tended 69 reported investment funds with assets
aggregating $70,270,606, an increase of $35,154,357
over the amount reported for 1906. This enormous
increase is largely accounted for by the fact that for
1906 gas works belonging to the city of Philadelphia,
Pa., valued at $29,000,000, and leased to an operating
company, were reported as a public service enterprise
instead of as the asset of an investment fund. Another
considerable increase was in Cincinnati, Ohio, resulting
from the reappraisement of the Cincinnati and Southern Railway, belonging to the city, whereby the assets
of the investment fund in which it was reported were
by $4,500,000.
increase in the number of funds reported, from
47 in 1906 to 69 in 1907, is due in part to the fact that
increased
The
for a
the
number
first
of cities real estate holdings are here for
time reported as assets of investment funds.
Table
23.
—
Sinking funds. These are funds which are pledged
redemption of bond issues at maturity and are
accumulated^ from year to year; occasionally, these
funds also pay the interest on the bonds. Periodical
for the
appropriations
made by
the city, together with interest
on the investments of sinking funds, constitute the
principal sources of receipts of such funds.
In some
revenues other than taxes are
apart for these funds. The term
"sinking fund" is frequently applied to a bond and
interest account or fund supported by current appropriations sufficient to meet the year's demands on
account of the maturity of bonds and interest coupons.
Such accounts or funds, carrying no accumulations
from year to year, may be closed out or may carry
forward only small balances at the close of the fiscal
year. As the objects of the latter class of funds are
similar to those of sinking funds proper, they are here
treated as sinking funds whenever so designated upon
the city books.
In some states municipalities are required by statute
to accumulate in sinking funds assets sufficient for the
cities certain classes of
specifically
set
'
amortization of bonds at maturity, a separate fund
being provided for each bond issue. In other states
the maintenance of sinking funds, though not obligatory, seems to be the common practice, except in those
cities in which the bonded loans are confined strictly
to serial issues, since 135 of the 158 cities covered by
the investigation for 1907 reported such funds. Of
the 23 cities without sinking funds, the majority
reported no funded debt except serial bonds, which,
being redeemed in annual installments from moneys
directly appropriated therefor, do not require sinking
fund provisions.
For the greater number of cities the sinking funds
are prudently and economically administered, either
by
who
city officials,
73
act as
e^
officio trustees, or
by
independent boards of commissioners appointed for
that purpose. In a small number of cities, however,
the cash accumulations in the funds have been diverted
to current city expenses, with the result that the socalled assets of the funds are mere accounting entries,
and therefore do not constitute true offsets to the
bonded debt.
Table 23 includes for certain cities of Group I certain
funds of the counties containing
these cities which have not heretofore been included
in Census reports.
The assets at the close of the fiscal
year 1907 thus included were as follows: Pittsburg,
statistics of sinking
Pa., $594,904;
Detroit, Mich., $249,691; Cincinnati,
Ohio, $880,488; and Milwaukee, Wis., $37,254.
At the close of the fiscal year 1907 the aggregate
assets of the sinking funds reported in Table 23 equaled
19.2 per cent of the total indebtedness of the 158 cities
reported in Table 24 as compared with 20 per cent in
1906 for the 158
cities
then reported.
The percentage
which the value of the sinking fund assets represented
of the aggregate amount of funded debt was 21.8 in
1907 as compared with 22.6 in 1906. The slight decreases in the percentages for 1907 as compared with
those for 1906 are attributable largely to the fact that
the percentage of the county debts included with those
of cities of
Group
I in
Table 24, which
is
offset
by
sinking fund securities as reported in Table 23, is
smaller than the average for the cities included in
the report.
Since Table 23
is
confined to sinking fund transac-
and assets and does not include the general city
cash and other assets available at the close of the year
tions
redemption of special assessment, revenue,
unfunded loans, the table should be compared with the funded debt statements rather than
with those pertaining to the aggregate indebtedness.
for the
or other
Table
24.
—
Debts classified by authority incurriTig. Of the total
debt of the 158 cities at the close of the fiscal year 1907,
94.9 per cent was incurred by the city corporation,
2.2 per cent by independent school districts, and 2.8
per cent by other authorities having power to incur
local debt independently in a territory which is practically coextensive with the city, or to which the city
contributes all but a small fraction of the revenues.
The debts shown in the column headed "other divisions of the government of the .city" were incurred by
the following divisions of the city government or independent governments County government, $8,532,771
:
in Chicago,
and the
total
amount reported
for Pitts-
burg, Pa., Cleveland, Ohio, Buffalo, N. Y., Detroit,
Cincinnati, Ohio,
Milwaukee, Wis., and
Mich.,
Denver, Colo.; park or park and driveway
$12,229,338 in Chicago,
111.,
and the
total
districts,
amount
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
74
reported for Peoria,
111.,
Tacoma, Wash., and Spring-
sanitary districts, $18,641,773 in Chicago,
field, 111.;
amount reported for Oakland, Cal.
amount reported for Philadelphia; Port of Portland, the total amount reported
for Portland, Oreg.
and bridge district, the total
amount reported for Portland, Me.
Debts classified iy provisions made for their 'payment. Classified by the provisions made for their
111.,
and the
poor
total
districts, the total
;
—
payment, the outstanding city debts are separately
shown in Table 24 under two principal heads funded
or fixed debts and current debts.
The first class is
not subdivided, but the current debts are tabulated
under the fom- subheads "special assessment loans,"
"revenue loans," "outstanding warrants," and "all
—
other."
(1) Under 'funded or fixed debts" are tabulated (a)
those debts which have a number of years to run and
for the amortization of which, or the payment of interest on which, no assets other than those of sinking
'
funds have as yet been specifically authorized or
appropriated; and (6) those on which interest is to be
paid in perpetuity. The first class of debts includes
bonds, corporation stock, certificates, and other longterm debt obligations receiving variotis local designations, and the second class includes those special debt
obligations which are created when a city converts to
general public uses money or other property received
at the creation of public trusts and assumes the annual
payment of the interest on the amount so converted.
The funded or fixed debts of cities are always the
amoimts of their debt obligations which, by reason of
the conditions under which they are incurred, are liens
upon all the taxing property within the city, and for
the payment of which no assets are held other than
those of the sinking funds.
Special debt obligations to public trust funds, aggregating $882,641, were reported from 18 cities, as
follows
Indianapolis, Ind
$22, 000
Fall River, Mass
111,783
Tenn
Grand Rapids, Mich ...
NashAdlle,
Cambridge, Maes
Hartford,
Conn
Lowell, Mass
Bridgeport,
Conn
New Bedford,
(2)
In
loans " are
Mass
3,700
2, 000
25,
000
23,481
36,200
6, 000
143, 835
Lawrence, Mass
Manchester, N
.
Portland,
H
Me
Bay City, Mich
York, Pa
Maiden, Mass
Newton, Mass
Fitchburg, Mass
Taunton, Mass
$77, 755
50,
000
289, 984
194
7,710
300
1,
3,
500
50,
674
525
27,
column headed "special assessment
shown those obligations which were incurred
the
the purpose of financing public improvements
whose costs are to be paid, wholly or in major part,
for
from the proceeds- of
special
assessments.
These
obligations may be long or short term bonds or "certificates," or outstanding warrants payable on demand.
In this column are included the following amounts of
special assessment warrants (called "certificates" in
Salt
Lake
City,
Utah.
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
not been given by the auditor because not yet called
for, and (2) "unpaid vouchers," where the orders have
been duly rendered but not yet redeemed.
(5) In the column headed "all other" are tabulated debts of several distinct kinds, which include
unpaid judgments and all other demand or short-term
debt obUgations not belonging in any of the three columns preceding; also obligations on mortgage security
and a few others to be described below. Of the total
amount of $7,271,427, reported under this head, a
single item
$5,605,339 reported for New Orleans,
La., as "interest on premium bonds"
represents
nearly 76 per cent. These bonds were issued in 1876
on condition that no interest should be paid until
—
—
when interest at the
date of issue would be added
principal now outstanding is
having matured and been
rate of 5 per cent from
maturity,
$5,505,339
is
accumulated
to the principal.
The
$3,412,440 ($1,587,560
paid), on which the
interest;
Besides
New
the only city which
reported debt obligations representing unpaid interest,
Orleans, La., Philadelphia, Pa.,
the
amount reported being
is
For the following cities the obhgations included
under the head "all other" consist exclusively of unpaid judgments: Chicago, 111., Milwaukee, Wis., St.Paul, Minn., Denver, Colo., Scranton, Pa., S3nracuse,
N. Y., San Antonio, Tex., Youngstown and Akron,
Ohio, Lancaster and McKeesport, Pa., East St. Louis
and Springfield, 111., Jacksonville, Fla., .and Joplin,
Mo. Obligations of this character were also reported
for the following cities:
New
Orleans, La., $126,044;
Des Moines, Iowa, $21,087; York,
ford,
111.,
Pa., $20,792;
here spoken of as actual deht^oi the city, as distinguished from the obligations held by city funds, which
is here called nominal debt.
The term "actual debt,"
as here used, should be distinguished from the term
net debt, which is employed in referring to gross debt
is
less sinking
Rock-
$3,000.
For the following cities the obligations represented
by the amounts reported in this column represent exclusively loans on mortgage security: Pittsburg, Pa.,
Ky., Grand Rapids, Mich., Bridgeport,
Conn., Houston, Tex., Altoona, Pa., Sioux City, Iowa,
and Allentown, Pa. Such loans were also reported
Louisville,
fund
The
assets.
assets at the close of the
latter are the "total
year" shown in Table 23.
These included, besides securities of the cities, other
investments and cash slightly exceeding 2 per cent of
the gross aggregate debt in amoimt, leaving as a net
total $1,526,232,964, or 80.8 per cent of the gross total.
But
this figure must not be taken as indicating the
proportion of the public debt for which no provision
has been made, since for a considerable and doubtless
greater part of the debt characterized as "current"
there are other assets available, such as the special
assessments provided for meeting special assessment
loans and the tax levies pledged for meeting revenue
loans, while there is usually cash on hand sufficient for
all outstanding warrants several times over.
The
report for 1906 shows that 18.4 per cent of the
gross debt
$14,000.,
75
was nominal,
i.
e.,
debt held by city invested
funds, while the corresponding percentage for 1907
was
fell
18.
The ratio of sinking fund assets to gross debt
same time from 20 to 19.2 per cent. The
in the
noted already in the disdue almost altogether to a fall
in the ratio for Group I from 22.7 to 21.5 per cent, the
changes for the other three groups having been almost
imperceptible; and the apparent explanation is the
inclusion in 1907 of county debt not included in 1906
and having a lower ratio of sinking fund accumulation.
Per capita debts. Preceding and following the column in Table 24 showing the amount of net debt are
columns showing respectively the average gross and
net debt per capita of population, calculated on the
basis of the estimates in Table 1, and subject of course
change in the latter
cussion of Table 23,
case, as
is
—
to all uncertainties attaching to those estimates.
comparison of these per capita
figures-
The
shows great
by Philadelphia, Pa., to the amount of $10,000; Des
Moines, Iowa, to the amount of $36,250; and New
Britain, Conn., to the amount of $70,750.
Contract balances of $18,693 were reported for Rock-
irregularities for individual cities
The
111., and of $3,500 for New Britain, Conn.
amount shown for Salt Lake City, Utah, represents
water scrip. The other items included in this column
debt per capita, in order, were New York, N. Y.,
Boston and Newton, Mass., and Cincinnati, Ohio,
while those showing the highest net debt per capita
were New York, N. Y., Cincinnati, Ohio, Boston, Mass.,
and Galveston, Tex. At the other extreme in respect
to gross debt per capita are Wheeling, W. Va., and
JopUn, Mo., while Erie, Pa., with a gross debt per
capita considerably higher than either of the two
cities just mentioned, shows the lowest net debt per
capita of any of the 158 cities.
ford,
are $110,000 reported under the head of "outside
Des Moines, Iowa; and $1,224 under the
claims," for
of "dower," for York, Pa.
Actual and net debts. Of the total debt obUgations
of the 158 cities, about 17.2 per cent was held at the
close of the fiscal year 1907 in the sinking funds of the
cities which incurred them, and 0.8 per cent in the
pubhc trust and other fimds with investments belonging to the same cities; while 82 per cent of the same
This last amount
obligations was held by the pubhc.
head
—
but a progressive
increase in the group averages with the size of the
cities,
the larger cities having, as a rule, the higher per
The cities showing the highest gross
capita debt.
—
The increase or decrease in
Increase in gross debt.
outstanding debt, as given in Table 24, is not in every
case the difference between the gross debt reported in
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
76
this table
and the corresponding
1906; for in a
number
Table 22 for
have been changes
total in
of cases there
methods of reporting certain special debt obligations, an item omitted as a debt from the accounts
for one year being included in those of the other.
For example, debt of the Scranton and Dunmore poor
district amounting to $170,281, which was included in
ing to purpose of issue, as stated in the local official
records.
The debt most
in the
the debt of Scranton, Pa., for 1906,
omitted for 1907.
Wash., in
1907, amounting to $733,000, is included in the total
debt reported for that city in Table 24, but is not considered in computing the increase. The additions on
account of coimty debt included for 7 cities of Group
I
Chicago, 111., Pittsburg, Pa., Cleveland, Ohio, Buffalo, N. Y., Detroit, Mich., Cinciimati, Ohio, and Milwaukee, Wis. amounted in all to $21,005,368, which
were similarly excluded from consideration in computing the increases in gross debt shown in Table 24.
Among other sources of discrepancy between the
increases shown in the table on the one hand, and the
differences between the amount of gross debt in Table
24 and that reported in Table 22 for 1906 on the other,
attention may be called to a method of reporting debts
matured but unpaid, which is followed in some cities,
where bonds, for whose redemption money has been
set aside in a special fund or deposited with fiscal
agents, are dropped from reports of the city's liabilities
but are again included if for any reason they remain
unredeemed and the money so deposited is returned to
the treasury.
The difference between the increase or decrease in
outstanding debt, shown in Table 24, and the excess of
receipts or payments on account of principal, shown in
Table 10, usually denotes the premiums seciu-ed and
discounts allowed on debt obligations sold and purchased. In Massachusetts cities there is a further
difference, due to the inclusion in Table 10 of payments
to the state on account of sinking funds for state loans
for armories, metropolitan sewers, parks, and waterworks, and abolition of grade crossings. These are
part payments of a principal, the amount of which can
not at any time be precisely stated for an individual
city, and which is, therefore, omitted from Table 24.
By reference to Table 23 and the corresponding
table for 1906 it will be se'en that the increase in gross
debt is relatively greater than that in sinking fund
assets, apparently for the reason noted above in connection with the discussion of "net debt."
The debt
of territory
annexed to
is
Seattle,
—
—
»
Funded and
25.
special assessment debt, classified hy pur-
—
'
'
'
'
'
'
p;irpose of
'
additions
or
reclassifications
in
New
York,
New
and Chicago.
In the exhibit below (Table XIX) that portion of the
debt issued for general purposes which is included in
the column headed "miscellaneous purposes" is furOrleans, St. Louis,
by purpose, the
figures being shown for
according to population. It appears
from this table that municipal aid to railways, and the
construction of hospitals, asylums, and almshouses
are by far the most important purposes not specified
groups of
pose of issue. Table 25 is an exhibit of those portions
of the total city indebtedness above defined as "funded
debt and special assessment loans, classified accord-
by
water-supply and lighting systems. So far as other
enterprises of this class are concerned the classification,
is defective; the debt created for municipal service
In
enterprises is probably not completely segregated.
the case of that created for general purposes the division is thoroughly made for very few cities (as is
plainly shown by the fact that the amount reported
under the head "issued for combined or mireported
purposes" forms about 15 per cent of the total for this
class of debt), while probably the greater part of the
debt reported as issued for funding and refunding
belongs properly in preceding columns.
The terms "local improvement," "street improvement," "general improvement," employed in the designations of large bond issues in many cities, have not
been employed in Table 25, the endeavor having been
to obtain, where possible, a more precise statement of
the character of the improvement for which each debt
was originally incurred. Issues of bonds described as
'reftmding" bonds have in like maimer been classified
according to the purpose of issue of the debt they replaced, where such purpose could be discovered without too elaborate a search of the earlier records; and
the amount given under this head in Table 25, representing over 5 per cent of the grand total of funded
and special assessment debt, shows only what could
not be so classified.
The designation "funding" is applied to bonds
issued to meet unpaid claims and judgments and outstanding warrants, but the column so headed doubtless
includes many obligations that would more properly
have been characterized as issued for the purpose of
refunding, and as such represent debt originally incurred for pm-poses indicated in preceding columns.
The debt reported as issued for funding amounts in all
to nearly 8 per cent, of the grand total, or $91,277,39&
more than appeared in the corresponding column of
Table 23 for 1906. Of this difference $87,078,546 was
reported for cities of Group I, and is explained by large
ther classified
Table
satisfactorilv classified
issue is that for the leading public service enterprises
cities
in Table 25.
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
Table XIX.—Debts
reported in Table 25 as issued for miscellaneous
77
Table
27.
purposes: 1907.
Funded and
PURPOSE OF ISSUE.
Tqtal.
Aid to
Total.
Group
I.
Group
II.
Group
Group
III.
IV.
189,376,862 $71,700,928 $10,683,696 $3,692,763 $3,298,575
railroads
33, 494, 810
Hospitals and almshouses.
21,509,930
24,166,952
18,863,880
8,546,000
8,427,000
100,000
19,000
8,241,570
7,935,445
249,000
67,125
'8,104,676
3,064,806
17,060,610
2,883,105
636,660
35,000
2,131,875
452,425
Aid
to (airs arid celebrations
Armories and other mili-
tary purposes
Refuse disposal, street
cleaning, morgues, and
quarantine
Prisons and reformatories.
Buildings not for municipal purposes '
6,371,500 1,842,168 2,124,200
1,940,000
132, 100
573,950
Sundry departmental expenses and minor improvements
Land, not for municipal
611,409
105,505
136,700
1302,000
914,750
10,000
113,736
not explained
in distress
and
788,000
pairs
Monuments
Bathing
facilities
97,000
741,000
668,000
enterprises
destruction
Ferries
while a considerable part consists of serial
7,000
669,000
469, 422
320,000
10,000
469,422
247,000
296,780
43,500
115,000
26, 780
not distinctly shown
73,000
584,000
60,000
'56,066
23,000
50,000
195,000
37,000
Table
25,000
25,000
6,600
'ii5,666
Funded and
I,
and
$220,000 for
A more precise classification of debt obligations,
according to purpose of issue, by the several cities, is
still to be desired.
This is particularly the case
with the special assessment debt, of whose total,
$90,766,383, in Table 24, no less than $78,498,613, or
86.5 per cent, has to be classed as issued for " combined
or unreported purposes." The assurance is gratifying
that the officials of Some important cities are taking
an increased interest in the matter, and promise fuller
and more definite statements of their various debt
obligations in the immediate future; it is to be hoped
that the example may be generally followed.
Table
Funded and
26.
special assessment deh(, classified by year
—
of issue. The debt obligations, which are classifieji
according to purpose of issue in Table 25, are shown
according to year of issue for the twenty-one years ending in 1907 in Table 26. Nearly half the total outstanding debt appears under the head "not reported,"
because of deficient information from the two cities of
New York and Boston together
largest indebtedness.
outstanding debt, or 47.3 per
of
report $830,748,171
cities; whereas they report
158
cent of the total for
$825,498,371 out of a total of $874,674,539 for which
the date of issue was unreported, or 94.4 per cent.
For the 156 remaining cities the total debt is
$926,591,167, and the portion for which the date of
issue was unreported $49,176,168, or only 5.3 per cent.
special assessment debt
classified by rate of interest.
Table 28
Includes $662,500 for abatement of nuisances for Group
"sanitary purposes," unspecified, for Group IV.
' Includes aid to state and courthouses, and memorial halls.
1
28.
'
Abandoned public service
Moth
lot;
bonds for which the amounts maturing each year were
benefi-
cences generally
Flood protection and re-
special assessment debt, classified hy year
—Table 27 shows the debt obhgations for
which statistics are given in Tables 25 and 26, classified
according to year of maturity for twenty years next
following 1907. For $821,202,852, or 46.7 per cent
of the total, the year of maturity was later than 1927;
and for $24,224,141, or 1.4 per cent, it was not
reported. Of this latter amount $3,412,440 represented the principal of "premium bonds" in New
Orleans (mentioned in discussion of Table 24), for
which the amount to mature each year is determined
by
86,540
purjposes, or for purposes
Aid
of maturity.
is
—The
and revenue
loans,
debt included in
that reported in the three tables
imme-
diately preceding, together with the outstanding rev-
enue loans; it is the sum of the debt shown in the
three columns under the head "classified according to provisions made for payment" in Table 24.
The larger part of the debt shown in the last two
columns under the classification referred to in Table
24 is debt bearing no interest. For $6,694,923, out of
$1,858,227,134, or less than 0.4 per cent, the rate was
not reported. The amounts included under the head
of "other reported rates," arranged according to rate,
first
are as follows
Table XX.
Amount
of loans reported at exceptional rates of interest:
BATE FEE CENT.
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
78
The debt reported
as bearing
no
interest consisted
of (1) outstanding warrants classed as "special
assessment loans" (see discussion of special assess-
ment warrants under head of "indebtedness classified
by character," for Table 24) and (2) bonds or other
;
obligations due but not yet presented for redemption.
Of the debt for which a rate of 2 per cent was reported,
$3,650,563 was reported
by Washington, D. C, and
between the assessed valuations of lands sold and
the considerations allowed at such sales, will afford
data for a true statement of the basis of assessment in
practice.
For real property, the percentages in the table are all
undoubtedly reckoned on the same basis. For personal property, however, there are probably two different bases, the ratio being in one case that of the
assessed valuation of the personal property included
$3,000 by Albany, N. Y. The debt bearing interest
at the rate of 2.5 per cent was also reported by 2 cities.
in the tax hst to the true value of the
New York
which reported $11,927,700, and Birmingham, Ala., which reported $16,768. The debt referred to in Albany and Birmingham was incurred for
parks; in the case of New York and Washington, for
while in the other case
various purposes.
other takes into consideration also that which escapes
taxation. There is greater uniformity in the reports
The
city,
total interest-bearing debt for
Tvere reported
was $1,847,783,947.
charge on this debt
which the rates
The
total interest
Table 8, and discussion in
text) was $71,785,707, and the average rate therefore
3.885 per cent. The average rate reported for 1906
was 3.853 per cent, the year showing an increase of
0.032 in the average rate. The average rates for each
population group in 1907 were as follows: Group I,
3.75 per cent; Group
(see
per cent; Group III, 4.26
per cent, and Group IV, 4.45 per cent. The corresponding averages for 1906 were 3.68, 4.21, 4.25, and
4.41 per cent, respectively, showing an increase in
II, 4.11
three out of four cases.
were not identical
As the
for the
four groups of cities
two years, a sHght
irregu-
perhaps not surprising; but each series of
rates plainly indicates a tendency toward lower interest rates along with increases in population.
larity
is
Table
29.
—
Assessed valuation. The valuations given in Table
29 are those of property which is subject to taxation
for purposes of municipal government; in certain
states notably in Pennsylvania and New York
these differ somewhat from the valuations on which
taxes for state and coxmty purposes are levied. In
some instances, the assessed valuation of an independent division of the government of a city, such as
a school or park district, differs somewhat from that
—
of the city corporation.
The
table gives separately
the valuation subject to general property taxes and
that subject to special property taxes for the city corporation but shows only the total assessed valuation
for school districts and for other independent divisions.
—
Reported basis of assessment in practice. The reported basis of assessment in practice is an estimate,
furnished by city officials, of the percentage which the
assessed valuation of property forms of its true value.
The figures for both real and personal property are
subject to possible error, but the former are the more
trustworthy. Yet even in the case of real property,
only a critical investigation, involving a comparison
it is
same property,
that of the assessed valua-
tion of the personal property reported to the assessor
for taxation to the true value of all personal property;
one includes only property that is taxed, while the
for this class of property
than formerly, but undoubt-
edly in a few instances the ratio of the assessed valuation of personal property taxed to the true value of
taxable personal property is given.
Rates of levy. The rates of levy for general property taxes per $1,000 of assessed valuation are given
all
—
in detail for the several taxing bodies, while the rates
per $1,000 of reported true value are the average rates
for all divisions of city
government.
Specific rates of
levy are given below in the accompanying text table.
The rates based on the reported true value are subject
to all the possible errors of the estimates given in
the column headed "reported basis of assessment ia
practice."
—
Tax levies. Under the head of "general property
taxes" are included all general property taxes levied
for all divisions of the governments of cities.
In certain cases the result obtained by appljang the rate to
the assessed valuation differs from the amoimt of levy
reported, the. variation being due to some one or more
of the many factors affecting tax lists, such as the
addition of supplementary tax lists, changes in valuation, and the abatement of taxes.
These variations
are all trifling, however, and are referred to only for the
purpose of calling attention to the complexity of the
data relating to taxes and the difficulty of securing
accuracy in all details.
—
Special methods of assessment and taxation. The
valuation of property subject to general
property taxes in divisions of the city governments
having two or more rates of levy, together with the
specific levies in the different districts of the cities,
are given in Table XXI.
Table XXII similarly shows
assessed
the assessed valuation of property subject to special
tax and the specific levies for cities levying such taxes
at two or more rates.
Under the head "city corporation proper" in these tables are shown the assessed
valuation for the city as a whole, together with the
rate and amotmt of tax levied thereon for general city
purposes, as distinguished from the valuation and
levies of taxing districts including only a part of the
city.
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
79
VALUATIONS OF PROPERTY SUBJECT TO GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES IN DIVISIONS OF
THE CITY GOVERNMENT HAVING TWO OR MORE RATES OF LEVY, WITH RATES ANIf AMOUNT OF LEVIES
FOB EACH TAXING DISTRICT OR CLASS OF PROPERTY: 1907.
Table XXI.—ASSESSED
City
number.
CITY,
OF GOVERNMENT,
DIVISION
AND TAXING
DISTRICTS
OF PKOPEKTY.
OK CLASS
Rate per
Assessed valu-
S1,000 of
ation.
valuation.
Levies.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
80
XXI.—ASSESSED VALUATIONS OP PROPERTY SUBJECT TO GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES IN DIVISIONS
OF THE CITY GOVERNMENT HAVING TWO OR MORE- RATES OP LEVY, WITH RATES AND AMOUNT OP
LEVIES FOR EACH TAXING DISTRICT OR CLASS OF PROPERTY: 1907— Continued.
Table
City
number.
CITY,
OP GOVERNMENT,
DIVISION
AND TAXING
DISTRICTS
OF PROPERTY.
OR CLASS
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
Table XXII.
Assessed valuations of property subject to special
property taxes in cities having txvo or more rates of levy, tuith rates and
amount of levies for each class of property: 1907.
City
number.
81
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
82
Of the investments held by the city those belonging
to the assets of "invested funds" are shown in Tables
city fiscal officers has
21 to 23. Other productive properties, along with
those of the "salable but unproductive" class, appear
yet further improved.
in Table 30, leaving the public improvements,
i.
e.,
the
unsalable and unproductive properties, to be shown in
Table 31. To both these tables, and the latter particularly, the caution stated in reports of previous
years with regard to the effect of varying methods of
valuation in different cities still applies; but there is
reason to think the data of Table 30 more nearly exact
than have been furnished in any similar statement
heretofore, and to hope, now that the attention of
Table
XXIV.—OUTLAYS IN
1907,
been called to the importance
the matter, that the reports for years to follow
of
may be
—
Comparison of increase in values with outlays. The
and extending government properties, by purchase or construction, give rise
These appear in Table 9
to payments for outlays.
and the total outlays for groups of cities, exclusive of
Oklahoma City, which was not included in the investicosts of providing, improving,
gation for 1906, are also shown in the following table,
in comparison, with the increase in the valuation of
properties during the year:
COMPARED WITH INCREASE IN VALUATION OF PROPERTIES DURING
OUTLAYS IN
1907.
TOTAL VALUE OF MUNICIPAL
INCREASE IN VALUATION
DURING
PROPERTIES.
1907.
1907.
Number
Exclusive of
of cities.
outlays for
sewers and
Excess over
Total.
outlays.
highways.
Grand
total
Group I
Group n
Group ni
Group IV
The first column
of figures
shows the number
1240,848,060
$133,008,416
$2,570,906,285
$2,321,946,260
$248,960,025
$115,951,609
166,873,910
44,439,804
24,044,826
15,489,520
98,554,843
18,319,704
10,048,972
6,084,897
1,872,159,703
331,778,996
221,336,935
145, 630, 651
1,675,903,204
307,696,858
202,425,251
135,920,947
196,256,499
24,082,138
18,911,684
9,709,704
97,701,656
8,762,434
8,862,712
3,624,807
of cities
in each group for 1907, while the second gives the total
payments during the year for outlays "for meeting
governmental costs," and the third column shows the
same total exclusive of the outlays for sewers and highways, which are omitted from this comparison because
their values were not reported for 1906, excepting
those of bridges other than toll, for which the outlays
are not shown separately in Table 9.
In the fourth
column is shown the total valuation of the properties
reported in Table 30, by groups of cities; this is the
sum
of the value of public service enterprises, real
property investments, municipal service enterprises,
and properties of departments. The fifth column contains corresponding figures for the beginning of the
year, obtained by deducting the valuation of bridges
other than toll from the totals of Table 28 for 1906,
and by grouping the cities to agree with the order for
1907.
The sixth column shows the difference between
the amounts contained in the fourth and the fifth columns, and the seventh the difference between those
contained in the sixth and the third columns, or the
amount by which the gain in valuation exceeds the
reported payments for outlays.
There seems to be no good reason why the increase
in the value of municipal properties from the beginning to the end of a year should systematically differ
from the outlays during that year, unless the method
of valuation has changed between the two dates.
In
view of this the excess shown in the last column for
each group of cities indicates a tendency to give a
higher valuation to properties in 1907 than in 1906.
There are, however, certain special allowances which
should be made in the case of Group I and which account for the larger part .of the excess for that group
as shown in the last column:
(1) The figures for 1907 include for cities of over
300,000 population, as previous reports did not, values
and outlays for county properties. The total addition
to valuations on this account was $38,569,539, whUe
the total addition to outlays was $4,190,870, or
$3,546,117 after deducting outlays for sewers and
highways. This makes a net allowance of $35,023,422
required on account of the inclusion of county valuations for 1907.
.(2)
York
The abnormal size of some increases for New
city calls for special consideration.
The value
of the water-supply
system was reported in 1906 as
$77,358,125, though its cost was given in Table 16 for
that year as $145,207,255, whfie Table 30 for 1907
shows the value as $128,326,606, which is based on the
city
appraisers'
figures.
Against
this
increase
of
$50,967,481 the payments for outlays during the year
were only $9,629,117, so that the increase in the valuation represents an excess of $41,338,364 over outlays.
Toll bridges in New York were valued at $27,409,042
in 1906 and $61,429,016 in 1907, the latter figure
having been calculated from the total net costs of construction; as compared with this increase of $34,019,974
the outlays during the year were $8,550,687, making
an excess of increase over outlays of $25,469,287.
These two excesses together amount to $66,807,651,
which should properly be treated as abnormal.
(3)
The gas-supply system
of Philadelphia, valued
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
at $28,750,000, was tabulated among "productive permanent properties" for 1906, but for 1907 that system
included in Table 22 as an investment fund.
If allowance be made for all the factors above referred to a net correction of $73,081,073 is obtained,
which should be deducted from the increase in valuation during 1907, as shown in the sixth column, and
is
from the excess of such increase over outlays, as shown
in the seventh column of Table XXIV.
Substituting
the corrected figures for those in the last column, the
aggregate excess is reduced to $42,870,536 and the
excess for Group I to $24,620,583, an amount which
remains greater than the figures for the other groups
increases with
the valuation but not proportionally to it. It may
perhaps be inferred that the valuations for 1906 were
underestimated, as compared with those for 1907, by
a fixed proportion of the total value, modified by local
still
and gives some evidence that the excess
factors in
many
instances.
Comparison of values with funded debt and special
assessment loans. The costs of governmental properties are met in considerable proportion from loans.
The classification of funded debt and special assessment loans by purpose of issue in Table 25 gives a
basis for comparison between outstanding municipal
debts and the value of the properties for which they
were incurred. The water-supply systems, worth,
according to Table 30, $647,334,495, were charged with
a debt, according to Table 25, of $281,940,329, compared with corresponding totals for 1906 of $572,171,710 and $276,829,682, and representing increases of
—
Even after mak13.1 and 1.8 per cent, respectively.
ing an allowance for the deficient valuation in New
York city for 1906, discussed in the preceding section,
the increase for the year is still $33,824,421, or 5.6
per cent, thus showing a substantial decrease in the
ratio of debt to total value,
to 43.6 per cent.
which
in 1907
had
fallen
Similar comparisons for lighting
systems show that property valued at $14,184,801 in
1907 was charged with a debt of $5,750,600, or 40.5
per cent of the total value. For all other public service
show that in the case of New
York city property valued at $185,785,991 was charged
enterprises the figures
with a debt of $185,457,821, representing 99.8 per cent
of the value of the property; for all other cities, the
value of the properties of such enterprises was
83
as in each case the work of construction had not been
completed in 1907 the difference is expected to disappear in 1908. Of the total debt for this class of
enterprises 61.2 per cent
city, for
which
was
for those in
the ratio of debt to value
New York
is
57.8 per
cent.
A comparison of the value of the unproductive class
permanent public properties with the amount of
debt charged to these properties gives less satisfactory
results, because the purposes of issue are often less
clearly stated where debts are incurred for such properties.
Tentatively, the debt "issued for general purposes," as shown in Table 25, may be divided into two
parts by assuming that the total debt for sewers aiid
highways plus the special assessment loans "for comamounting to
bined or unreported purposes,"
"public
improvements,"
$456,028,125, was issued for
and that the balance of the total debt, amounting to
$566,992,593, was incurred for properties of departments. If these figures are assumed to represent, respectively, the cost remaining to be paid of the total
value of public improvements, $894,575,349, as shown
in Table 31, and of the total value of properties of
departments, $1,630,446,303, as shown in Table 30,
the ratio of debt to valuation for these classes of properties is 51 and 34.8 per cent, respectively.
These
percentages, also, would be increased by including the
proper proportions of the debts classified as "issued
for refunding" and "issued for funding," were it posBut the large number of
sible to segregate them.
cases in Table 31, especially for the largest cities, in
which it is stated that the value was not reported,
shows that the total above used for public improvements represents a decided undervaluation. The
omissions probably equal more, rather than less, than
one-half the reported value of improvements, but an
addition of 46 per cent to the amount given in Table
31 would reduce the ratio between debt and value to
34.9 per cent, or practically the same as for properties
It thus appears, unless these figures
of departments.
are subject to some unknown error, that more than
of
improvements in the larger cities of
the United States, as well as of public properties, used
for nonremunerative purposes have already been paid
half of the public
for.
The
ratio of debt to valuation appears higher for
schools than for other property, owing to the influence
New York
which reports school
$71,547,028 and their debt $26,976,025, so that the
It
ratio of debt to value was only 37.7 per cent.
debt
reported
as
of
the
part
that
a
should be added
properties worth $92,581,666 and debt for such prop-
"issued for refunding" was undoubtedly originally
the property, while the total value of school properties
issued for public service enterprises, and that if it
could be included the percentages above given would
reported for
be slightly increased:
-For the plant and equipment of municipal service
enterprises worth $10,939,277 there was a debt of
$4,507,750, equivalent to 41.2 per cent of the value of
the properties. Milwaukee and Columbus show debts
somewhat in excess of the value of the properties, but
of the figures for
city,
erties of $95,608,351, or 103.3
all
other cities
per cent of the value of
is
$320,530,483, as com-
pared with debt of $101,266,025, equivalent to only
31.6 per cent of the total value of the properties
approximately the same percentage as is shown in the
—
case of other properties.
—
Properties of public service enterprises.
The properpublic service enterprises reported had a total
ties of
value in 1906 of $824,636,476, the value of "general
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
84
real
property"
being
deducted,
and
in
$918,852,315, an increase of 10.3 per cent.
by
enterprises, water-supply systems are
1907
of
Of these
most
far the
important, being reported by 118 out of the 158 cities
tabulated, and credited with 70.5 per cent of the total
valuation of pubhc service enterprises. Next follow
docks, wharves, and landings, with 9.6 per cent of the
per cent of the amount shown under this
head being reported by New York city alone, although
ferries are included with docks in the figures for that
city.
Next in order of importance are rapid transit
subways and toll bridges, each of which represents
nearly 7 per cent of the total value, but which are
found in so few cities that they are assigned to the
column headed "all other." Of the total amount of
reported
under this latter head,
$133,712,058
$126,417,651, or 94.5 per cent, represents the value of
the two classes of property mentioned.
The entries in the column headed "electric light and
gas-supply systems" represent gas plants in Toledo,
Ohio, Richmond, Va., Duluth, Minn., Wheeling,
W. Va., and Holyoke, Mass., having a total value of
$5,189,704, and electric light systems in 10 cities, having a total value of $8,995,097.
Holyoke, Mass., is the
only city which supplies both gas and electric light, the
plant and equipment for gas lighting being valued at
$579,704, and that for electric hghting at $522,852.
The value of electric light systems for lighting streets,
parks, and public buildings only is included in the
column "for municipal service enterprises."
Under the head "all other" under public service
enterprises are included the following items:
total, 76.4
Public halls
$1,619,228
Buffalo, N.
Y
119, 700
,
Minn
St. Paul,
425, 000
Y
Eochester, N.
65,
878
Toledo, Ohio
200, 000
Denver, Colo
300, 000
Atlanta,
Ga
Peoria, 111
Charleston, S. C
—
Saginaw, Mich
Canton, Ohio
Chattanooga, Tenn.
Subways
for
Erie,
pipes and wires
Md
N Y
Pa
Auburn, N.
185,
000
30,
000
1,
714, 112
1,
524, 575
495
60,000
35,
Y
000
50,392
61,701,016
NewYork, N.
Ky
Ky
Y
61,429,016
46,000
Covington,
Crosse,
000
'.
Conn
Toll bridges
La
48,
25,650
Britain,
Newport,
650
18,
.
Newcastle, Pa
New
000
70,
100, 000
Baltimore,
Utica,
75,
Wis
•-
46,000
180,
000
Irrigation
works
$445, 620
275, 000
Denver, Colo
San Antonio, Tex
Salt Lake City, Utah.
Rapid
transit
New
58
170, 562
subways
York,
N
.
64, 716, 635
Y
49, 142, 535
Boston, Mass
15, 574,
100
665, 150
Ferries.
Boston, Mass...
578, 400
Portland, Oreg.
86, 750
362,000
Dredges— Portland, Oreg
Stores— Charleston, S. C
Storage warehouse Richmond, Va
Fair park— Dallas, Tex
Canal—Augusta, Ga
Theater— San Juan, P. R
7,000
—
27, 000
359, 800
2,
094, 497
84,000
be observed that two items reported by
rapid transit subways and toll bridges
together amount to $110,571,551,
in New York
or 82.7 per cent of the total value of the properties
reported under the head of "all other" public service
expenses, and that the value of the rapid transit subIt will
a single city
way and
—
—
ferries in
Boston amounts to $16,152,500, or
12.1 per cent of the total.
—
Beal property held as investment. The column bearis intended to show the value of all real
property of the city from which an income is received
or expected and which does not form a part of any
invested fund or belong to any enterprise or governmental department. In many cases such property
consists of land held temporarily, awaiting an opportunity for a profitable sale. One source of such property is a governmental grant or private bequest, the
propertj" coming to the city without such conditions
as create a trust, and not being assigned to the park,
school, or other departments.
Properties of municipal service enterprises. This
class of properties was included with the property of
the sewer and highway' departments in the report for
1906 (see page 78 of that report). The electric lighting
plants in Chicago, with a reported value of $6,886,319,
were included for that year with municipal service
enterprises, but in 1907 electric plants valued at $3,894,665 are reported as public service enterprises and
other plants with a value of $3,414,878 as municipal
service enterprises.
As a result of the change in this
one item the total value of municipal service electric
plants reported decreased from $8,582,989 to $6,512,892, while the public service electric plants increased
from $6,024,715 to $8,995,097 between 1906 and 1907.
Omitting Chicago, 1 1 cities reported municipal service
electriclightsystemsin 1906 with a value of $1,696,670,
while in 1907, 16 cities reported such systems with a
value of $3,098,014. The other enterprises tabulated
ing this head
—
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
under the head
of municipal service enterprises are as
follows
Asphalt
repair
$137,666, reported
and
by
paving
plants,
total
value
New York,
New Orleans,
7 cities, as follows:
N. Y., $21,346; Pittsburg, Pa., $21,560;
La., $60,000; Columbus, Ohio, $9,160; Omaha, Nebr.,
$12,500; Topeka, Kans., $600; and Fort Worth, Tex.,
$12,500.
City shops, Chicago,
111.,
$149,861,
and
Denver, Colo., $15,000. High pressure water system.
New York, N. Y., $4,117,858, reported with fire department properties in 1906.
Quarry and stone
crusher, Auburn, N. Y., $6,000, reported with public
service properties in 1906.
In some cities the importance of special and careful
valuation of property of this kind is evidently overlooked.
The usefulness of the census investigation
into city enterprises depends
—no
less for this class of
enterprises than for the public service enterprises
on frequent and exact valuation of the city property
it is only by strict accounting for the
interest on the cost of such property and for its depreemployed, for
ciation in use that the economic character of these
enterprises can be judged.
—
Properties of departments. Under this head are included all properties that were tabulated as "unproductive permanent properties" in 1906, except bridges
other than toll, which are included in Table 31 for
1907.
The total value of such properties for 1906,
after deducting the value of bridges and municipal
was $1,476,767,334, and for 1907,
The
$1,630,446,303, an increase of 10.4 per cent.
sewer and highway departments are taken together
service enterprises,
because a satisfactory separation of their properties,
a large part of which are included with the properties
of city yards and city stables, can not now be made.
Hospitals are often reported with almshouses when
located on almshouse grounds. The column headed
"all other" includes the following:
Armories valued at $13,111,756, or 55.9 per cent of
the total value of the departmental properties reported under the head of "all other," reported as
follows: New York, N. Y., $11,048,449, or 84.3 per
cent of the total value of armories reported; Philadelphia, Pa., $90,000; Baltunore, Md., $60,000; Cleve-
Richmond, Va., $113,300; Eliza$11,800; Portland, Me., $72,000; Manchester, N. H., $18,100; Augusta, Ga., $18,000; 3
Minnesota, cities, $180,609, $185,000, and $45,000,
85
Baths and bathing beaches, rfeported by 32 cities
and valued at $1,541,773, or 6.5 per cent of the total.
Buildings not used by departments or rented, including some vacant unproductive real property, reported by 9 cities and valued at $1,380,400, or 5.9 per
cent of the total. Of this amount, Boston reported
$1,116,800, or 80.9 per cent.
Garbage crematories and reduction plants, reported
cities and valued at $1,142,629, or 4.9 per cent
of the total.
Of this amount, $217,849, or 19.1 per
cent, was reported by Cleveland, Ohio.
Police and fire alarm signal systems (the value of
which can not be segregated between the two departments), reported by 14 cities and valued at $1,075,863,
by 40
or 4.6 per cent of the total.
Pittsburg, Pa., reported
$545,000, or 50.7 per cent, of this amount.
Electrical department property, for
which the prenot set forth, reported by 6 cities
and valued at $884,258, or 3.8 per cent of the total.
Of this amount 31 per cent was reported by San
Francisco, Cal., and 61 per cent by Washington, D. C,
leaving 8 per cent reported by the reriiaining 4 cities.
The remaining items amounted to $2,232,055, or
9.5 per cent of the total, and included values of the
cise functions are
following classes of property: Potters' fields and unremunerative cemeteries; election booths, voting ma-
and wardrooms equipment of engineers' offices
and sundry other offices; morgues; boats and other
movable harbor property; rifle ranges of 9 Massachusetts cities; pounds; storerooms; and sundries.
chines,
Much
;
as these statistics yet lack of the completeness
and homogeneity desirable in such work, the Census
Bureau appreciates the efforts of those city officers
who have contributed to the substantial improvement
observable in Table 30 over all tables of this character
that have heretofore been published.
It is urged that
such pains be taken for further improvement that no
city of over 30,000 inhabitants may be imperfectly
represented in future reports.
Value of public improvements. Public improvements, as distinguished from public properties, have
already been defined. Heretofore this class of munici-
—
—those which are "unproductive and
—has not been included among the valua-
pal possessions
unsalable"
land, Ohio, $257,370;
tions in the published statistics of cities,
beth, N.
inquiries
J.,
respectively; 9 Massachusetts cities, in
all
$1,012,128,
including $622,000 for Boston. Only 7 cities, outside
of Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Maine, and Minnesota report armories.
Health department property, reported from 24
and valued at $2,095,302, or 8.9 per cent of the
Of this, amount, $1,332,808, or 63.6 per cent,
total.
was reported from New York city.
cities
although
on the subject have been made by the Census
Bureau for some years past, with the intention of
printing the information as soon as a sufficient
have
number
trustworthy statements of the
cost and value of these public improvements. An examination of Table 31 will show for a considerable number of the cities a commendable effort on the part of
the city officials to supply the desired data. Nevertheless, the results are very deficient, as shown by the
number of cases in which the value of such improvements was not reported. From a comparison of the
of cities
fairly
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
86
valuations in cities making complete or approximately
complete reports and in cities making only partial
the text for Table 4, the proceeds from sales of real
estate are eliminated from receipts and the same
estimated that the probable value of the
amount deducted from payments for outlays.
The per capita computations are based upon the
reports,
it is
improvements for which no report was secured is somewhat over one-half the total value reported. That is
to say, if the table were complete, the grand total
would have to be increased, according to this estimate,
from $894,575,349 to about $1,342,000,000. These
figures, it hardly needs to be said, have no value
except as indicating the degree to which the aggregates
in the table are defective.
Future reports will, it is
earnestly hoped, supply a better criterion.
The value
pubUc improvement is the estimated
in as good condition as at present,
which is the same as the actual cost of equipment and
construction after making allowance for (1) changes
that may have occurred in the price of materials and
of labor, and (2) depreciation.
It is possible that some
of a
cost of replacing
it
may
population of the 158 cities, as given in Table 1.
Because of the absence of trustworthy data, the estimates for 7 of these cities are so defective that per
capita payments and receipts computed from them
would not reflect actual conditions or afford a true
basis for comparisons; for these 7 cities, therefore, no
per capita averages are given. But the estimates
of their popiilation, although faulty, are used in computing per capita averages for the aggregate of the
158 cities and for the totals of the four groups, the
errors
of individual cases being so far neutralized
in the totals as to reduce the percentage of error to
a minimum.
The
table shows that the cities included in
Group
be the total
I have the highest per capita averages both of pay-
any Idnd, and it is certain
that a considerable number of them are loose esti-
ments and of receipts for meeting governmental costs,
those of Groups II, III, and IV following in order. In
other words, when each group of cities is considered
as a whole, per capita expenditures and receipts show
a tendency to increase with population. The figures
for the individual cities, however, show many marked
of the values reported in
Table 31
cost without allowances of
The
mates.
difficulties of furnishing
complete infor-
mation are fully understood by the Census Bureau,
but more care on the part of city engineers to calculate
these items on some exact basis would be highly
appreciated.
Under the head
"sewers" are included sewage
disposal apparatus and such special works as the drainage canals in Chicago, 111., and Wichita, Kans., and
the flushing tunnels and river dam in Milwaukee,
of
The column
headed "other highway
improvements" includes for a few cities as in Seatthe cost of grading where this
tle and Tacoma, Wash.
in Table 31
—
—
separately estimated; in other cities the value of
gravel streets; in Pittsburg, Pa., country road valuations; and in Atlantic City, N. J., the board walk;
but in
is
many
included.
is no explanation as to what
The column headed "miscellaneous"
cases there
the following items: Retaining walls and
with a total value of $1,048,521, in Rochester,
N. Y., Columbus, Dayton, and Akron, Ohio, and
Pueblo, Colo.; docks, wharves, and landings, with a
total value of $244,000, in Milwaukee, Wis., St.
Joseph, Mo., Little Rock, Ark., and Oshkosh, Wis.;
river improvement, with a value of $274,852, in
Utica, N. Y.; fire hydrants, with a value of $60,000,
in Des Moines, Iowa; and watering troughs, with a
value of $1,130, in Bay City, Mich. A few of these
items were tabulated as "public properties" for 1906.
includes
levees,
Table
32.
Per capita payments and receipts for meeting governmental costs. The payments and receipts for which
per capita averages are presented in this table are
exclusive of transfers between departments or funds
and of all other dupfications. For reasons given in
—
is
presented to show the growth
receipts of cities reported
payments and
by the Census Bureau
in per capita
Table XXV.
Wis.
is
exceptions.
The following table
receipts
Comparative statement of per capita payments and
for meeting governmental costs: 1905 to 1907.
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
payments $4.60, receipts $5.29; Cleveland, Ohio, payments $2.41, receipts $2.92; Buffalo, N. Y., payments
$2.92, receipts $3.48; Detroit, Mich., payments $2.15,
receipts $2.51; Cincinnati, Ohio, payments $3.32, receipts $4.94; and Milwaukee, Wis., payments $2.59,
receipts $2.60.
The increases in Group I not thus
accounted for are due, as are the total increases for the
other groups, to the fact that the costs of municipal
administration
Table
costs.
33.
payments and
cent distribution of
meeting governmental
receipts for
—The percentages present-
ed in this table are based on the amounts reported in
Table 4, which shows the payments and receipts remaining after the elimination of all transfers between
departments and other duplications. For Groups I,
III, and IV the percentages show but little variation
in the relative proportions of outlays and of the payments included under the head of "expenses and interest," but for Group II the percentage of outlays
was considerably larger than for the other groups.
Among
the individual cities the variations of the
percentages of payments for outlays are very great,
ranging from 4.3 in Chester, Pa., to 73.5 in Seattle,
Wash., the average being 34.3; in 4 cities this per-
centage was less than 10, in 21 cities it was between
40 and 50, and in 7 cities it was over 50.
In Macon, Ga., receipts from the sale of real property exceeded payments for outlays. As it is the
Census practice to deduct such receipts from payments for outlays in computing the net cost of new
properties and improvements. Table 4, upon which
Table 33 is based, shows for this city, in the column
"for outlays," the excess of receipts from the sale of
In computing the "total
real property over outlays.
payments" for meeting governmental costs for this
city, as shown in Table 4, this excess is deducted from
the payments for "all revenue expenditures." The
effect of this
method of tabulation upon the per cent
shown in Table 33 is to magnify the
distribution as
figures in the several
Under the head
ness, "
columns
for expenses.
"on account of indebtedGroup I 'exceptionally large
of receipts
Table 33 shows for
percentages, corresponding to the high per capita aver-
shown in Table 32.
The percentages for the
ages
individual cities indicate
several cases of comparatively large revenue from inCincinnati,
terest and other income on investments.
its total revenue from
from an investment in the
Southern Railway. Other cities, show-
Ohio, derived 10.7 per cent of
this source, principally
Cincinnati
and Maiden, Fall River, and Haverhill, Mass., for
which the percentages are 5.1, 4.1, and 4, respectively,
representing principally interest on sinking and trust
fund investments. With the above percentages should
be compared the average percentage of interest receipts for all cities, which is only 1.5.
Table
&
ing a relatively large proportion of their receipts for
meeting governmental costs as derived from interest,
are Philadelphia, Pa.,
f or ijdiich
the percentage
is 7.8,
34.
Payments for general and special service expenses,
and per capita. In this table are presented the
total and per capita payments for general and special
service expenses, arranged in most cases according to
the main groups of departments, offices, and accounts
given in Table 5, but in a few cases showing separately
the payments for the more important municipal departments, such as police and fire departments and
—
total
reported.
Per
representing largely interest on *the Girard trusts;
and
improvements are increasing
much more rapidly than the population of the cities
87
schools.
The cities of Group I show the highest per capita
average of aggregate expenses, those for Groups II,
The same order apIII, and IV following in order.
pears in all per capita figures for groups of cities in
Table 34, except that in the column headed " all other"
under "protection of life and property" the per capitas
for Groups II and III are the same, and in the column
headed "miscellaneous" the same per capita payments
But the figures
are shown for Groups II, III, and IV.
for individual cities in Table 34, like those in Table 32,
show striking exceptions to the tendency noted for
groups of cities, indicating that there are other factors
calling for special investigation and study of local conditions.
The amounts and per capita averages included
for
counties containing cities of Group I are separately
reported in Table 34, in order to show in what groups
departments and to what extent their influence is
the figures for 1907, as compared with those for
1906, presented in Table 31 of the census report for
of
felt in
that year.
Comparative
statistics,
1902
summary presented
to
1907.
—In
the com-
with Table
34 the figures for the years from 1902 to 1906 have
been adjusted to the classification used for 1907, thus
securing approximately comparable statistics for the
parative
in connection
six years.
In the six years from 1902 to 1907 the per capita
payments by the 148 cities included in the summary
for all general and special service expenses increased
The highest per capita
$2.55, or 19.1 per cent.
increase, amounting to $3.21, is shown by the cities
of Group I, while the smallest, $1.24, is shown by those
There is no uniform annual increase;
of Group III.
in fact, both the average for all cities and that for
Group I show a slight decrease from 1902 to 1903.
The classes of payments showing the most uniform
increase from year to year in the per capita averages
for the ] 48 cities are those for protection of life and
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
88
and corrections, and
education, and those included under the head "mis-
property, sanitation, charities
cellaneous;" the per capita
payments
for health con-
servation and for highways fluctuate without showing
any decided tendency, and those for general government and for recreation at first decrease and later
increase.
As a rule, the annual changes in the per
capita payments for each group of cities are of the
same general character as those in the general average
for the 148 cities included in the summary.
conservation, 5.6,
was reported
1
and the smallest, three-tenths
Pawtucket and Woonsocket, R. I., and Racine, Wis.
For libraries, art galleries, and museums the largest
percentage, 3.9, was reported for Rockford, 111., while
The data
for 1 6 cities no such expenses were reported.
in the column headed "miscellaneous" represent
expenses that are not comparable, and no particular
significance can be attached to the variations there
shown.
The percentages
Table
Per
cent distribution
special service expenses.
tion,
by
35.
of payments for general and
Table 35 shows the distribu-
—
object of payment, of general and special
expenses.
A
comparison of the percent,ages for the cities of
I for 1907 with those for the cities of that
group as reported for 1906, in Table 32 for that year,
shows that the inclusion for 1907 of certain payments
Group
for the counties containing the cities of Chicago,
Cleveland,
Ohio,
Buffalo,
N.
Y.,
Pittsburg,
III.,
Pa.,
and IVIilwaukee,
Wis., has raised the percentages of payments for
general government to the proportions shown for the
other cities of Group I, and has correspondingly
Detroit,
Cincinnati,
Mich.,
Ohio,
lowered the percentages of expenditures for other
purposes.
The expenses
for general
greatest for the cities of
government were relatively
Group I, constituting 13.2
per cent of the total expenses for the group, while
they constituted 8.9 per cent of the total for Group II
and 8.6 per cent of the totals for Groups III and IV.
Among individual cities the highest percentage of
expenses for general government, 19.9, was reported
for Denver, Colo., and the lowest, 4, for Indianapolis,
Ind., these cities having reported the highest and
lowest percentages, respectively, in 1906 also.
The percentages for police department expenses
decrease in like manner from Group I to Group IV,
being 14.3, 11.8, 11, and 10.2, respectively, for the
diflFerent groups; for this class of expenses Savannah,
Ga., and Mobile, Ala., show the largest percentage,
For fire
21.7, and Racine, Wis., the smallest, 5.4.
department expenses the proportion was largest for
the cities of Group IV, 13 per cent, and smallest for
those of Group I, 8.9 per cent, while for the cities of
Groups II and III it was 12.6 per cent; the highest
percentage for any city was 27.5, reported for Macon,
Ga., and the lowest 4.7, reported for Harrisburg, Pa.
The percentages of expenses for health conserva-
and museums,
and those included under the head "miscellaneous"
vary but little for the' different groups. Among
tion, those for libraries, art galleries,
individual
cities,
of
expenses for sanitation, for
and corrections, and for recreation were all
for Group I and smallest for Group IV, the
charities
This table brings out in strong
reUef the relative importance, in the several cities
and groups of cities, of the principal classes of expenses.
service
Augusta, Ga.,
per cent, for
for
of
the largest percentage for health
largest
proportions for the four groups being, for sanitation,
8.5, 7.6, 7.9, and 6.7 per cent; for charities and corrections, 7.8, 4.4, 4.5,
tion,
The
3.6,
2.8,
2.6,
and 3.9 per cent; and for recreaand 1.9 per cent, respectively.
est,
percentage of expenses for sanitation,
for Jacksonville, Fla., and the loweight-tenths of 1 per cent, for Bay City, Mich.
The
largest percentage for charities
21.5,
largest
was reported
15.5,
was reported
and
corrections,
for Augusta, Ga., while 11 cities
reported no expenses for such purposes. For recreation the largest percentage, 9.6, was reported for Atlantic City, N. J., while 3 cities reported less than one-
tenth of 1 per cent.
On the other hand, the percentages of expenses for
highways and for schools were all smallest for Group
I and largest for Group IV, the percentages for the
different groups being, respectively, for highways,
11.3, 12.8, 13.7, and 14.8; and for schools, 25.2, 34,
Lancaster, Pa., shows the largest
33.7, and 35.5.
percentage of expenses for highways, 25.6, and
Hoboken, N. J., the lowest, 4.6. The largest percentage of expenses for schools, 52.9, was reported for
Topeka, Kans., while 4 cities reported no expenses
for such purposes.
In these cities and Macon, Ga.,
for which the expenses for schools reported consisted
merely of a small payment to a private kindergarten,
the schools were managed directly by the counties.
For all cities except the 5 just mentioned and the
cities of
Norfolk, Va., Charleston, S.
Tex., Chattanooga, Tenn.,
C, Galveston,
and Fort Worth, Tex., a
larger percentage of the total expenses
is
schools than for any other one purpose
reported for
shown
in the
Although the per capita expenses for schools,
shown in Table 34, increase with the size of the cities,
they do not increase as rapidly as other per capita
table.
expenses; hence, the percentages of school expenses,
given in Table 35, are relatively greater for the cities
of Group IV than for those of Group I.
Table
Payments for
table per capita
36.
outlays, total
payments
and per capita.—In
this
for outlays are presented
separately for those groups of departments and offices
reporting the largest outlB^s in Table 9, and for all
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
public service
enterprises.
The groups
departother " are
of
ments included in the column headed " all
those included in previous tables under
"general government," "protection of hfe
•erty," "charities and corrections," and
but
little
more than
1
per cent.
"all other general revenues" in-
cludes receipts from fines and forfeits and from subventions, grants, and gifts.
"miscella-
In Table
XXVI, which
is
based upon the data given
in Table 37, the relative importance of the several
a limited extent these per capita figures are a
extraordinary transactions. In all comparisons due
allowance must be made for the conditions and circumstances which necessitated the outlays; for example, the newer and more rapidly growing cities
must make
relatively greater outlays than those older
with a normal annual growth, because the latter
are more adequately provided with permanent public
improvements.
cities
The table shows that the per capita average of the
payments for outlays for all cities in 1907 was
$10.38 as compared with $8.56 for the year 1906.
The average for Group I was $12.10, or considerably
total
greater than the average for all cities, while the average
for each of the remaining three groups was materially
For each class of outlays, with the exception
of those for health conservation and sanitation and for
smaller.
highways. Group I shows larger per capita payments
than does any one of the other three groups; for the
two purposes mentioned the largest per capita payments were those of the cities of Group II. The per
capita payments tor outlays by the several groups of
do not, however, increase with the size of the
cities as uniformly as do the per capita payments for
cities
The differences in the total outlays per
capita for individual cities are very great, for reasons
stated in the preceding paragraph, and call for even
expenses.
more careful study than do the differences in the
amounts of general and special service expenses per
capita, referred to in the text' for Table 34.
all
is
and prop-
measure of the relative progressiveness of cities with
approximately the same population. But in making
comparisons between individual cities these figures
must be used with caution, because they pertain to
For
The column headed
the heads
neous."
To
sion of such receipts
89
payments
of the groups of cities the total
for
outlays per capita in 1907 were larger than in 1906,
the increase being as follows: Group I, 16.8 per cent;
Group II, 37 per cent; Group III, 34.1 per cent; and
Group IV,
6.2 per cent.
3.1 per cent
was due
Of the increase
for
Group
I,
to the inclusion in 1907 of certain
outlays of counties containing
Table
cities of
that group.
37.
—
Receipts from general revenues, total and per capita.
this table are presented the total and per capita
In
receipts from general revenues under the most important of the heads shown in Table 11. These
receipts include amounts received by the city in error
and subsequently refunded, and also, for a few cities,
small receipts from service transfers; but the exag-
geration of the group totals resulting from the inclu-
classes of receipts
by groups
from general revenues
is
shown
of cities.
Table XXVI.
Per cent distribution of
nues: 1907.
receipts
from
general reve-
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
90
summary, but that from 1903
to 1907 there,
was an
at a rate approaching uniformity, in the
per capita averages for "all general revenues" from
$16.11 in 1903, by successive steps of 62, 63, 45, and
increase,
77 cents, to $18.58 in 1907. For the years 1903 to
1905 practically all of this increase was in the per
capita receipts from general property taxes, the main
class of revenue; these increased
by successive
steps of 44
and 57
from $12.97 in 1903,
cents, to $13.98 in 1905,
while the changes for other general revenues, though
generally upward, were comparatively inconsiderable.
From 1905 to 1906, however, the per capita receipts
from taxes showed a
all
slight decrease, while those from
other classes of general revenues increased, nearly
two-thirds of this increase being due to liquor licenses,
which the average was $1.34
in 1905 and $1.63 in
1906 to 1907 there was an increase of 64
cents in the per capita receipts from general property
taxes and but little change in those for other forms of
general revenue.
Comparison of the averages for the four groups of
cities shows that the increases above noted in the per
capita average for "all general revenues," and particularly for revenues from general property taxes, apply
to almost the same extent in all groups; but that the
slight decrease shown in the per capita average for
taxes from 1905 to 1906 is due entirely to Group I,
principally on account of a decrease in general property tax receipts in New York city.
The receipts of counties containing certain cities of
Group I, included for the first time in the Census
report for 1907, materially affect the per capita amounts
for "all general revenues" and "general property
taxes" for that group, increasing the former by 78
cents and the latter by 62 cents, out of total increases
over 1906 of 98 cents and 88 cents, respectively.
for
1906.
From
Table
38.
—
In Table 5 there are
Costs of school maintenance.
presented statistics of the costs of maintaining schools,
shown by payments for salaries
and other employees and by payments for
supplies and materials used. These payments, however, do not include all the costs of school maintenance;
for the interest on the large amounts of money expended by the cities for grounds, buildings, and equipso far as such costs are
of teachers
ment
for school purposes
is
as truly a cost of school
maintenance as are the current payments for salaries
and for supplies and materials. But the interest
on the outstanding debt on account of schools can
not be used to represent the interest costs just mentioned in compiling, for the several cities, comparable
statistics of costs of school maintenance; because,
while for some cities the amount of such debt approximates the total cost of school properties, for others
no such debt is reported. The only way of securing
comparable statistics of the costs of school maintenance
by adopting the principles of commercial cost accounting and taking into consideration, for each city,
the interest on the total value of the lands, buildings,
This is done in Table
etc., used for school purposes.
is
38,
which shows the payments for
and for
salaries of teachers
other school expenses, together with the
all
on the values of school buildings, grounds,
and equipment. Those values are given in Table 30,
and the average rates of interest paid by the several
cities on city debt obUgations are presented in Table 8.
In computing the per capita figures for the groups
of cities and for the 158 cities as a whole, the population figures for Savannah, Augusta, and Macon, Ga.,
Jacksonville, Fla., and Mobile, Ala., were omitted
because no accurate statistics for schools could be
interest
obtained in these cities, the schools being operated as
parts of the school systems of the counties in which
the cities are located. Estimates for the expenses of
schools in these five cities are, however, presented in
connection with the text for Table 5.
The total per capita costs of school maintenance
were $5.21 for the 158 cities as a whole, and increased
progressively for the different groups from $4.67 in
Group IV to $5.50 in Group I. Among the different
cities
the per capita costs ranged from $1.82 in CharlesC, $2.14 in Montgomery, Ala., and $2.19 in
ton, S.
Knoxville, Tenn., to $8.22 in Denver, Colo., $8.84 in
Lake City, Utah, and $8.86 in Newton, Mass.
For the four groups of cities the per capita amount
of interest on the value of school buildings, grounds,
and equipment shows relatively small variations.
For individual cities, however, the variations are
marked. Among all cities the range is from 24 cents
in Charleston, S. C, to $1.51 in Newton, Mass.; in
Group I, from 28 cents in New Orleans, La., to $1.11
in Boston, Mass.; in Group II, from 25 cents in
Atlanta, Ga., to $1.50 in Denver, Colo.; in Group III,
from 24 cents in Charleston, S. C, to $1.35 in Duluth,
Minn.; and in Group IV, from 30 cents in Chester,
Pa., to $1.51 in Newton, Mass.
The extreme variations for individual cities emphasize the tnith of the
statement made in this and former Census reports on
statistics of cities that few cities have trustworthy
Salt
records of the cost or value of their public properties.
Any
truly comparable statistics of governmental costs
must be based upon fairly correct statements of the
costs of governmental properties.
Receipts
from
school subventions.
—The
per capita
from subventions, grants, charges,
the 158 cities were 77 cents. The averages
receipts for schools
etc.,
for
vary considerably, however, for the different groups,
being $1.17 for the cities of Group II and only 56 cents
for those of
Group
I.
The small amount
for
Group
I
due largely to the fact that the cities of that group
are in states whose cities received subventions smaller
than the average for all cities; the per capita average
for all cities in those states having one or more cities
is
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
Group
I was but 55 cents, while for all other cities
the average was $1.06. Another cause tending still
further to reduce the per capita receipts of the larger
cities is found in the dual system of city and county
government; Boston, Mass., and San Francisco, Cal.,
in
levy and collect city taxes, and St. Louis, Mo., receives trust fund income corresponding to what, in
the other cities of the same states, is received from
the counties as subventions. Furthermore, Washington, D.
C, received no subvention.
Table
39.
—
.
—
—
San Juan, P. R.) Table 39 presents an exhibit of the
extent and capacity, cost and present value, debt,
In
earnings, and costs of service of such systems.
some cities, as shown by the first two columns of the
table, water-supply systems have been in operation
The total value of these
for more than a century.
systems, as pointed out in the discussion of Table 30,
represents slightly more than 70 per cent of the total
value of all public service enterprises of the 158 cities
included in the report. It would seem unnecessary
view of the amounts invested and the importance
of this service to urge the need of complete, faithful,
and exact methods of accounting which would furnish
in
full and clear as to remove all uncercomparing city with city, and to afford a
ready test of differences in construction and management; but, in fact, there is no comparability to be
found in the statistics for different cities. It is even
possible for the advocate of any particular policy with
regard to the supply of public utilities whether by
information so
tainties in
—
—
the cities or by private corporations to make almost
any statement concerning the comparative results of
the operation of existing systems under public and
under private ownership, without opportunity
of veri-
fication or liability to correction by reference to actual
When cities can and do provide accounts
statistics.
that will furnish the information needed by an ac-
countant or student of municipal affairs for determiniQg the measure of success attained by municipal
enterprises there will be no such possibility.
By "net
Cost, present value, and outstanding debt.
the
upon
expenditure
cost" is meant the city's total
—
system for outlays, including the cost of first acquisibeen
tion, less the value of any property that may have
to
charged
properly
sold, and excluding all costs
operation or maintenance. By "present value" is
meant what is known as physical valuation, i. e., the
value of the property exclusive of any allowance for
franchise,
good
will,
or privilege;
it is
the estimated
as at
cost of replacing the system in as good condition
cost
net
the
from
present. The present value differs
by allowances
for changes
and cost
The
ciation.
and changes
of materials anct labor
last
for depre-
in land value usually increase, the present
value, while the other factors
Some
and
factor tends always to decrease,
may
act either way.
might, therefore, show a higher present
value than net cost, while others show a lower value,
though the cities of the two classes followed precisely
the
cities
same method
of accounting;
but a comparison of
the two columns in Table 39, in which the cost and the
present value of the water-supply systems are shown,
brings out more clearly than anything else the differ-
Financial data for water-supply systems. For the
over 30,000 inhabitants in 1907 which owned
water-supply systems 117 out of 158 (not including
cities of
of land
91
since construction in value
ences in accounting methods. Among such differences the following are conspicuous: (1) Many cities
make no
(2)
between cost and present value;
have purchased water-supply sys-
distinction
in cities that
tems, the value of the franchise is included in the reported cost in some cases, and in both reported cost
and present value in other cases; (3) the allowance
for depreciation, overlooked in the great majority of
cities, is excessive in a few cities; similarly, the appreciation of real property values is usually ignored, but
in a few cities furnishes an important addition to the
present value.
In a number
of cities tne present value of the water-
is considerably less than
the cost; thus, in Bay City, Mich., the present value
reported amounts to 79.2 per cent of the cost; in Cincinnati, Ohio, to 75.3 per cent; in Jersey City, N. J.,
to 75 per cent; in New Bedford, Mass., to 74.4 per
cent; in Newton, Mass., to 66.4 per cent; in Spring-
supply system as reported
to 64 per cent; in Lawrence, Mass., to 60.1
per cent; in Providence, R. I., to 60 per cent; in
Albany, N. Y., to 57.3 per cent; and in Everett,
On the other hand, for a
Mass., to 53.2 per cent.
more extended list of cities the present value as reported is considerably in excess of the cost, the ratio
being 133.8 per cent in Memphis, Term.; 134 per cent
in Youngstown, Ohio; 139.4 per cent in Portland,
Oreg.; 140 per cent in Pueblo, Colo.; 141.3 per cent
in Springfield, Ohio; 141.7 per cent in Lowell, Mass.;
field, 111.,
144.4 per cent in Mobile, Ala., and Joliet, 111.; 145.7
per cent in Yonkers, N. Y.; 146.8 per cent in Kansas
City, Mo.; 147.7 per cent in St. Paul, Mmn.; 148.8
per cent in Norfolk, Va.; 155.8 per cent in Nashville,
Term.; 160 per cent in Wheeling, W. Va.; 160.7 per
cent in Fort Wayne, Ind.; 163.7 per cent in Jackson177.8 per cent in Montgomery, Ala.; 179.5
per cent in Newark, N. J.; 193 per cent in Altoona,
Pa.; 196 per cent in Harrisburg, Pa.; and 222.8 per
cent in Lincoln, Nebr. For a large proportion of the
cities in the latter list the reported value is a round
ville, Fla.;
number, indicating no considerable attention to detail
in the estimate; and in these cases an inclusion of
"franchise value" with "physical value" is very
probable.
The
total cost reported for all cities
and the present value $647,334,495, a
is
$666,498,014
ratio of value to
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
92
cost of 97.1 per cent.
The
ratio for
Group
I
was 90.6
per cent; for Group II, 110 per cent; for Group III,
105 per cent; for Group IV, 109.5 per cent. Thus,
the excess of cost over value for all cities combined is
due altogether to the influence of Group I, which contains none of the cities noted in the last paragraph as
showing a large excess of present value, although
Group II shows no less than 6 of those cities.
The column showing "outstanding debt" includes
floating as well as funded debt.
For 3 cities Newark,
and Atlantic City, N. J., and Woonsocket, R. I.
—
this
amount
slightly exceeds the reported cost, each
of these cities having a large sinking fund,
whose
among
bonds still counted as part of the
outstanding debt. For Atlantic City, N. J., moreover, the debt includes a bond issue of $300,000 in
1907, unexpended at the close of the year.
Earnings. The amounts shown under this head
include, in addition to the receipts from the public for
services, an estimate of the value of services to the
city, computed on the basis adopted for the 1906
report of 44 cents per capita for all cities of Group I;
46 cents for Group II; 48 cents for Group III; and 50
cents for Group IV. The population figures used are
the estimates for 1907 as given in Table 1, but necessary adjustments in the estimated value of the water
used by the city were made where the water was furnished to a part of the city only, and the allowance
was doubled for Washington, D. C, to cover the value
of water used for buildings and grounds of the United
States Government.
Costs of services.
Under the head of "expenses of
assets are
—
—
operation" are included for every city, besides the payments appearing in Table 7 under the head "watersupply systems," an estimated charge for depreciation equal to 2 per cent of the present value, as shown
in this table, and a tax calculated on the same present
value at the rate of general property taxes for city
purposes on the "reported true value," as shown for
the several cities in Table 29. The life of each system
is thus assumed to be fifty years and each is put as
nearly as possible on the same standing with regard to
income and costs of operation as a privately owned
The
enterprise.
total costs of services are
of the expenses of operation
and the annual
made up
on
being cominterest
show an excess of earnings and 10 an excess of costs;
in Group II, 9 show an excess of earnings and 15 an
excess of costs; in Group III, 10 show an excess of earnings and 24 an excess of costs; and in Group IV, 15 show
an excess of earnings and 30 an excess of costs.
(2) The difference between total earnings and total
cities showing an excess
excess
of
and
10
an
expenses. In Group I,
of earnings
excess
of
earnings
and 2 an excess of
1 1 cities have an
expenses; in Group II, 23 an excess of earnings and 1
an excess of expenses; in Group III, 29 an excess of
earnings and 5 an excess of expenses; and in Group IV,
43 an excess of earnings and 2 an excess of expenses.
(3) The difference between total earnings and total
expenses, less estimated taxes, 112 cities showing an
excess of earnings and but 4 an excess of expenses,
expenses of operation, 106
exclusive of taxes.
The
between collections for services
and payments as reported in Table 7,
113 cities showing an excess of collections and but 3 an
excess of payments.
Since the distribution of the cities showing excesses
of earnings or of collections on the one hand and of
total costs, of operating expenses, or of payments on
the other does not for any of the four methods of comparison employed show any relation between these excesses and the size of the cities, it is reasonable to conclude that neither larger nor smaller cities have any
advantage with respect to the economical manage(4)
difference
to the public
ment
of water-supply systems.
Nor
is
the excess dis-
tributed geographically, although as stated in the re-
port for 1906 there
is
a slight tendency toward excesses
method of compariNortheastern states; that tendency is,
however, not strongly enough marked to permit the
of earnings, according to the first
son,
in the
making of any generalizations upon this point.
The statistics contained in the four columns under
the head "relation between earnings and costs of
services" have been prepared as an aid in deciding the
complex question whether or not municipal watersupply systems are on a paying basis. In view of the
by the different cities and
by them, a single table
provide for all the tests applied by
different policies followed
the diverse standards adopted
is
not sufficient to
city officials.
For example, the comparison
is
some-
the present value of the system, the latter
puted for each city by use of the mean rate of interest
made between the collections for services to the
public and the sum of payments on account of salaries,
paid on
wages, materials, and miscellaneous objects, together
with those for interest on outstanding water debt.
its
debt for water-supply.
Relation between earnings and
—Under
head
are given (for all cities except New Orleans, La., where
the system is not yet in operation) statistics showing
the relation between earnings and costs, calculated on
costs.
this
four different bases:
The
between total earnings and total
showing an excess of earnIn Group I, 3 cities
79
an
excess
of
costs.
and
ings
(1)
difference,
costs of services, 37 cities
times
The "water surplus"
in these cases consists of the ex-
payments. The
can not be precisely shown
payments for interest on debt for water-supply not
having been separately reported but a near approximation to it may be had by subtracting the annual
interest charge on such debt from the excess shown in
cess of the collections over all such
effeict
of applying this test
—
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
the fourth column under "relation between earnings
The interest charge for each
such proportion of the "interest on present
value" (tabulated in the last column under "costs of
services") as the "outstanding debt" represents of
the "present value of the system." Deducting the
interest charge from the total excesses referred to
would reduce them by about one-third, the grand
total becoming about $20,700,000, and those for the
individual groups about $12,500,000, $4,100,000,
$2,400,000, and $1,700,000, respectively. But, if the
city's object is to realize a profit over all expenses, including interest on investment and all such allowances
as would have to be made by a private enterprise, the
appropriate test is that used in the first column under
"relation between earnings and costs of services." In
and
city
costs of services."
is
many
instances, the figures there presented are unsat-
isfactory, being estimates instead of exact
amounts
obtained from records, and, further, the table faUs to
allow for appreciation in the value of the plant, a quantity not ascertainable but of unquestioned significance.
Earnings and
supplied.
—The
costs
per capita, and per million gallons
columns of Table 39 give a
last six
comparative exhibit of average earnings and costs
per capita, and second, per million gallons of
water suppHed to pipes. The average earnings and
expenses, and to a less extent the average interest, for
the several groups of cities show an increase with population at a rate more rapid than the increase of the
first,
population
itself.
The averages per
million gallons
93
express companies, companies operating a messenger
service, storage plants, and a few other public service
corporations not having special privileges in highways
were obtained, but this information being incomplete
excluded from this table. A more important
omission is that of steam railroads, whose transactions
are fully reported by the Interstate Commerce
is
Commission.
The
cities
are grouped
graphically, so as
more
of differences in tax laws
service corporations.
by
states,
arranged geo-
clearly to illustrate the effect
on the revenues from public
The corporations reported
for
each city are grouped in the table according to the
character of the service furnished; those with closely
related functions, such as companies furnishing light,
power, or heat, or telephone and telegraph companies
appearing together. Where a single corporation furnishes services or utilities not so closely related,
and
no separate statement for each class of business can
be obtained, the total receipts appear after some
designation combining the several functions, such as
"street railway and light" or "water and gas;" but
when
sufiicient
information
is
available, the receipts
from a given corporation on account of its several
functions are reported under separate heads.
—
The larger part of the taxes reported in the
column of Table 40 are "general property taxes,"
those taxes upon real and personal property
i. e.,
which are paid by all individuals or corporations. In
addition, this column includes for the Massachusetts
Taxes.
first
cities
the following "special property taxes" levied
capital stock of corporations
aU show a similar increase from Group IV to Group
II, but the figures for Group I are in each case the
smallest of the four groups, and the inference is that,
earnings and costs increase less rapidly than aggregate consumption of water. The city averages appear more regular on the first than on the second basis
of comparison; for example, in Group I, per capita
earnings vary from $2.17 to $4.75, and expenses from
$1.22 to $3.02, while earnings per miUion gallons vary
from $19.02 to $94.33, and expenses from $16.22 to
upon the
$106.06.
The taxes shown in the above statement are derived
wholly from street railway companies, except in
Boston, where the amounts contributed by the several
Table
Receipts
from
public service corporations.
and 17
as
—Table 40
Maiden
Cambridge
54,586
Chelsea
Lowell
Lynn
9,353
9,352 Newton
757 JHaverhill
New Bedford
13,
Springfield
24,451
Lawrence
Somerville
Salem
3,
Fitchburg
Everett
790
40,440
Taunton
6,600
4,984
4,973
5,905
822
17,597
4,070
classes of corporations are as follows: Street railway,
$354,582; light, $114,268; and telephone and telegraph, $61,523.
For Washington, D. C, there are included in the
first column of this table percentage taxes amounting
the streets and alleys. With these
utilities are naturally included toll bridges, ferries,
and subways for the transportation of passengers and
merchandise, and subways for pipes and wires. For
some cities reports of receipts from delivery and
in,
3,888
20,052
5,344
20,343
service
corporations, i. e., such corporations as furnish those
utilities which, in cities, are provided principally by
persons or corporations enjoying special uses of, or
privileges
$8,991
Brockton
$530,373
in Tables 11, 14,
shown
were contributed by public
includes such of the receipts
15,
40.
Holyoke
Boston
Worcester
Fall River
For some
column also includes taxes upon franchise
valuations, which are assessed in New York state as
real property and in Georgia, Kentucky, and California
to $333,351, considered as business taxes.
cities this
as personal property.
An
exhibit of the taxes so
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
94
included in specified cities of New York, Kentucky,
Georgia, Texas, Missouri, and California is given below
Table XXVII.
In the cities of Wisconsin licenses include percentage taxes on earnings of public service corporations, as shown in the following exhibit
ness.
Franchise taxes included in the column "taxes,"
in Table 40.
Table XXVIII.
in Wisconsin
Amount
AND CLASS OF
CORPOKATION.
STATE, CITY.
New
STATE, CITY,
of fran-
AND CLASS OF
COEPOKATION.
ctiise tax.
Amount
of franchise tax.
Kentucky— Continued.
York.
Newport
9526, 3S9
Buffalo.
Street railway
Light, power, andlieat
40,999
58,802
Telephone and
graph
24,757
$6,565
Street railway
Light, power, and heat
124,558
Telephone
Georgia
tele-
Rochester.
2,613
2,811
1,141
64,547
Atlanta.
44,021
164,493
Street railway, light,
Street railway
Telephone and
graph
and power
59,867
81,101
,
Light
Telephone and
graph
23,094
431
Water
32,498
7,605
Light
tele-
tele-
3,918
Savannah.
Syracuse.
10,508
82,634
Street railway, light,
Street railway
Light and heat
Telephone and
graph
and power
32,325
32,921
Light and heat
Telephone and
graph
tele-
14,619
2,769
Subway
4,280
4,549
tele-
1,679
Augusta.
Troy.
5,194
35,680
railway
and
Telephone and
graph
tele-
Street
Street railway
Light
Telephone and
graph
light
tele-
4,711
483
Macon.
4,824
Yonkers.
railway
and
Water and gas
Telephone and
tele-
Street
Street railway
light
Light and power
Telephone and telegraph
graph
Utica
Texas.
San Antonio.
Schenectady..
Street railway
Street railway. ...
Light and power
Telephone and telegraph
Light
Telephone and
graph
,
tele-
Water
Bingham ton..
Missouri.
Elmira
St. Louis.
Street railway
Light
Telephone and
graph
7,206
6,592
Street railway
Light and power.
tele-
Subway
1,973
1,754
Water
Auburn.
Bridge
California..
Street railway
Light, power, and heat
4,44-r
7,308
Telephone and
graph
2,267
Kentucky
Oakland.
Street railway
tele-
16,518
Light and heat
Telephone and
graph
tele-
Water
Covington.
9,953
Street railway
Light, power, and heatj
Telephone
1
Licenses.
3,407
6,029
517
Not reported by
Taxes on earnings of public service corporations
cities, included Under licenses in Table 40.
corporations.
—The term "licenses," as used in Table 40,
includes payments for the ordinary business licenses,
and also, in some cases, payments based on the num-
ber of cars, mileage of wire, or number of supporting
The last-mentioned class of payments is found
in Pennsylvania, where pole and wire taxes, paid by
poles.
corporations using streets and alleys and city squares,
are regarded as licenses when imposed under a state
law permitting the licensing of certain classes of busi-
AND CLASS OF
CORPOKATION.
ClTf
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
95
ments; and compensation for street repairs and replacing disturbed pavements, the receipts for which
constitute the largest class under "reimbursements."
way determined according to st^te lines. There are,
however, certain combinations of different types of
It is possible that in several cases the
states, for
as for street repair
may include
amount reported
receipts for bridges or
In some cases no separate account
has been kept of receipts from public service corporations, so that a complete report would doubtless rtiateriaUy increase the amounts shown in the column
headed "reimbursements." Receipts of another type
tabulated under "reimbursements" are those from
for street cleaning.
special assessments, as follows:
Me
Portland,
$2, 703
Cambridge, Mass
Somerville, Mass
New Britain, Conn
N.Y
Syracuse,
Utica,
Joplin,
N.Y...
Mo
Wichita,
Peoria, 111
204
Kast
5
2,730
231
1,249
Topeka, Kans
253
Kans
Omaha, Nebr
240
$3,
336
3,297
St. Louis, 111
Evansville, Ind
Columbus, Ohio
Kalamazoo, Mich
Denver, Colo
10,907
4, 229
14, 269
18,
003
1,044
Pueblo, Colo
1,042
963
—
Services.
In c9imection with the collection of data
on receipts from public service corporations, the
Bureau of the Census attempted to procure information regarding services performed free' of charge or at
A
rates for the city governments.
full
description of such services is needed to supplement
reduced
and explain the data on receipts, since special services
are sometimes performed by corporations as part
payment for privileges or for use of streets. The
returns for 1907 are too meager to justify their
pubhcation, but it is hoped that a report on this
subject may be made in the future. Of the different
types of services performed, the foUo^ng were
reported Lights furnished the city by a corporation,
either a certain number without charge or all that
are needed at a reduced rate; telephones furnished
the city under the same conditions; the free use of
poles owned by the corporation for stringing wires
which are especially common in particular
example, the combination of street railway
and electric light service which, though often found
in other states, is especially frequent in Georgia; and
service,
the
"public utility corporations" in
New
Jersey,
which are recently formed combinations of several
corporations performing different functions, rendering
the distinctions of the adopted grouping peculiarly
unsatisfactory for that state.
There are marked variations in both the form and
the amount of taxes imposed on pubhc service corpora-
amounts being unusually large in the
and Colorado, and above the average
in New York and Massachusetts, but remarkably
low in Pennsylvania and New Hampshire. The
exemption of corporations from local taxation is
largely due to their liabihty to taxes imposed by the
state.
As an almost universal rule, the tangible
property of corporations is assessed and taxed in the
same way and at the same rate as that of individuals,
tions,
the
Pacific states
although to this rule Pennsylvania furnishes a striking
exception, the general property tax, forming elsewhere
the most important source of municipal revenue
from corporations, being here denied by law to the
cities.
Wisconsin also exempts street railway and
telephone companies from the general property tax
imposing instead a "license fee" based on gross earnIn Connecticut, property actually used in street
ings.
railway business is almost altogether exempt from
general taxes for local purposes because street railway
corporations are subject to the state tax on capital
stock.
:
belonging to the city; free hydrants or reduced rates
for water used by the city; free transportation of
policemen or other city officers by street railways;
sweeping, flushing, or sprinkhng streets along the fine
of railways; and constructing and keeping in repair
the pavements between tracks and for a stipulated
distance on each side.
Types of revenue received
from puUic
part of the municipal revenues.
service corpo-
Table
—The
grouping adopted in Table 40 brings
out the degree of uniformity among cities of the same
state, and the differences between cities of different
states due to the statutes governing pubhc service
corporations. As a general rule, the same types of
service are provided by corporations throughout the
country, and the question whether any particular
service, as the water-supply, shall be furnished by a
private corporation or by the municipahty is in no
rations.
Another variation from ordinary conditions is found
the absence of license collections from pubhc
service corporations by cities of the New England
states, and from those of New Jersey, Indiana,
Nebraska, Colorado, Texas, and Washington, and in
the fact that only one city in each of the states of New
York, Iowa, Michigan, and California reports receipts
from this source. In the majority of states, however,
and more especially in the South, with the exception
of Texas, this form of taxation yields an important
in
90196—10
7
41.
—
and power works and gas worTcs. ^Table
41 includes only such works as were owned by the
Electric light
cities.
All of these systems
are operated
by the
municipalities with the exception of the gas works
which are leased to a private corporaand hence are classified as an "investment"
rather than an "enterprise" in the financial tables of
in Philadelphia,
tion,
this report.
—
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
96
,0f the 158 cities
from which reports were secured
and power works,
for 1907, 26 reported electric light
the Metropohtan pohce force, which has been termed
the first modern pohce force in the world, and which
while for 1905 only 22 cities reported such works.
has been satisfactorily maintained ever since its organi
This, however,
zation.
is
a net increase of only
3, as Fort
Worth, Tex., was not included in the report for 1905.
The Cleveland, Ohio, works, though acquired by the
city in 1902, were not reported till 1907; the Kansas
City, Mo., works were acquired by the city in 1905,
but not reported for that year; and the Fort Wayne,
Ind., works were in course of construction in 1907.
For 1905, gas works were reported by 6 «ities; for
1907, by 5. Toledo, Ohio, which reported gas works
in 1905,
is
not included in the report for 1907, that
city having sold its works
mains because
gas, while the
and the
larger part of its
of the failure of the
supply of natural
mains
still
owned by the
city are leased
to a private corporation.
Table
organization
42.
and methods of police departMENTS.
The following disciissjoii of the data relating to the organization,
methods, and employees of police departments is based upon a
critical study of Table 42, prepared by Richard Sylvester, major
and superintendent of the police force of Washington, D. C. Use
is also made of the study of Major Sylvester in the text accompanying Tables 43 to 47, which follow.
—
What may be termed a "poUce system" that is, a
system having as its principal characteristic complete
uniformity in the organization, equipment, and conduct of service of the pohce throughout the country
has never come into existence in the United States,
either through understanding or by the evolution of
affairs.
It would be next to impossible, under our
form of government, to create a machine of this kind.
What are termed local interests, or the varying social
and commercial conditions in the several states and
in the various municipaUties and towns throughout
the land, would operate against the attainment of such
uniformity, and, even if it were practicable, complications would follow which would soon eradicate every
vestige of a single system. Its establishment would
also partake too much of the monarchical form of pohce administration, which would be antagonistic to the
prevailing ideas of popular goverimaent.
The modern poHce was created on account of the
Society, in its endeavor to prevent
increase in crime.
the commission of offenses and in order to detect
criminals, provided pohce forces as its agents for these
purposes. In London crime reached its maximum
about the year 1828, when an enormous wealth and
population required protection. During -the seven
years preceding, committals had multipUed 41 per
cent, while the number of inhabitants had increased
somewhat more than 15 per cent. These conditions
resulted in the creation, against
much
opposition, of
The organization
of the
New York
terned, originally, after that of the
pohce was pat-
London pohce
to
be modified and adjusted in the years succeeding so as
The police forces of the printo become modernized.
cipal cities of the United States, and of many of the
lesser ones, were shaped fundamentally along the lines
of the New York organization; that is, with a chief,
inspectors, captains, lieutenants, sergeants, roundsmen, and privates as the factors constituting the
While a similarity exists in these respects, the
force.
method in which the head of the force is appointed has
not been the same in different jurisdictions.
In New York, until a few years ago, a board of pohce
commissioners determined upon the superintendent,
or chief. Later legislation abolished the board and
and placed a single commissioner,,
whose appointment and removal were within the kfeeping of the mayor, at the head of the uniformed as well
superintendent,
as of the detective forces.
The pohce department
of the city of St. Louis has a
pohce who is' amenable to a board of commissioners appointed by the governor of the state of Missouri, and the cities of Kansas City and St. Joseph are
similarly provided for under the law.
The forces of
these cities, with reference to classification of officers
and subordinates, are arranged much after the manchief of
ner of the New York force.
In Chicago, a general superintendent,
mayor
of the city, supervises
and
named by the
directs a force of
inspectors, captains, heutenants, sergeants,
and .prion the other hand, Cincinnati has a chief of
pohce guiding a force with a somewhat similar organization, the power of appointment being fixed in a bipartisan bo^ard of pubhc safety which is appointed by
the mayor.
Philadelphia and Pittsburg, with a somewhat similar
vates';
personnel in the composition of their police
have each a .superintendent of pohce, commissioned and operating under the director of pubhc
official
bodies,
who is appointed by the mayor.
There are other municipahties where the directing
agencies of the pohce forces are elected by the people,
some where they are named by the town selectmen or
safety,
town
council, while in the District of Columbia, the
seat of the Federal
Government, the superintendent
chosen by the commissioners, in whose hands the
conduct of all municipal affairs relating to that terriis
tory
is
lodged.
There is no general fixed term of service for members of pohce forces in the cities of the United States,
but in a number of the large cities they are insured positions
during faithful performance of duty, and re-
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
tirement on part pay when suffering from disability
incurred in line of duty. While the membership^ and
classification of the police forces are strildngly similar
in the different cities, the manner of creation and su-
and the mode of operation differ, as prompted by diversity of important interests.
The advance in every kind of achievement, progress
pervision
in all directions
—
—business,
the professions, science,
and art and the building up of immense industries
and valuable properties which have taken place within the past few years have made it compulsory thatmodern means and methods should be devised to
afford persons and property that safeguard and security which are warranted by such progress.
As a result, the officials in control of poHce forces have formed
an association, which convenes annually. Through
the instrument ahty of this association a close official
and personal relationship has developed; a more uniform method of expediting police matters has resulted; the latest equipment for prompt and humane
service has been adopted in many places; similar
methods of keeping records have been adopted where
come to be worn, in the
main; legislation has been enacted providing retirement funds; metric and finger print methods of criminal identification have been placed in operation; and
a keen rivalry has followed among the poHce departments of the different cities for a higher standard in
every way; all of which has brought the former greatly
dissimilar systems into closer touch and caused them
practicable; similar attire has
more in unison. Society enjoys the benefits
derived from the increased efficiency and material im-
to act
provements that have followed. Those engaged in
the work of civic advancement, and in the study of
criminology, penology, the treatment of the dependent
classes, and the betterment of mankind have been
active in their endeavors to obtain data and statistics
which might be utihzed to further the efforts toward
modernizing the methods employed in their respective
spheres the prevention of crime and the uphfting of
—
the unfortunate.
Within recent years facts and figures pertaining to
poHce departments have been gathered by the Census
Bureau in connection with several of its reports on the
statistics of cities having a population of over 30^000.
In connection with the report for 1907 it was endeavored to make the scope of the police statistics wider
than ever before, an attempt which called for the collection of
many
details
from
officials
and
records,
and the preparation of many interrogations and
accompanying explanations. The desire on the part
of police departments to attain to a higher degree of
excellence has evolved many new features, which, it
is expected, may be elaborated in connection with
Census reports and which can be reported with
greater accuracy after the experience gained by the
later
Bureau through the
97
efforts already
made, and
after
the importance of
the
undertaking on the part of the pohce authorities, who
have given the subject consideration in their yearly
a clearer understanding of
conventions.
The question
of
how
to secure high class
and ample
one which has caused a great
deal of thought on the part of good citizens, and the
many aspects of which have been carefully considered
by those immediately charged with devising and inaugurating satisfactory provisions. The procuring
of information bearing upon these subjects, whereby
comparisons may be made to enable the formation of
proper conclusions, has called for extended and careful
investigation, Avithout which the results would have
been deficient in important details.
The character of the deficiencies existing in the pohce
departments of some cities which appear to call for
remedial action on the part of the municipal officials
is such as to suggest that the practice and procedure
of the poHce departments in jurisdictions where such
deficiencies do not exist may have been acquired.
It
is, moreover, frequently impossible to remedy such
deficiencies when the attention has been called to
them, owing, perhaps, to insufficient revenues, differing social features, contrast in extent of area to be
patrolled, the hmited character of the poHce organizaprotective measures
is
tion, indifferent application of disciphne, insufficiency
of laws, inadequacy of facihties, and absence of encouraging factors, such as pension provision for the
faithful pohceman at the termination of an extended
service or in case of injury in fine of duty.
—
Employees of police departments. Table 42 presents
data pertaining to the number of employees of the
pohce departments of the cities covered by the present
much greater detail than that shown in the
corresponding table for 1905. In the report for that
year officers, patrolmen on special duty, and the
employees included under the head of "other regular
report in
employees" were not segregated into classes, as is done
These additional figiu-es
in the presentation for 1907.
show
to
some extent the
diversity in the organization
pohce departments of the larger cities of the
country. For example, of the 158 cities included in
of the
the report, only 34 reported inspectors as a. separate
grade; 114 reported captains; 74 lieutenants; and 148
sergeants.
Detectives, as a separate grade, were
reported by 134
cities
detective
men
detailed
cities,
while in the remaining 24
work was done by officers and patrolfor such duty.
The data presented
under the heading "other regular employees" also
show wide differences in the organization of police
departments, the duties performed in some cities by
the employees included under this head being, in
many cities, performed by patrolmen detailed for that
purpose.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
98
Of the 40,773 persons connected with the poUce
departments of the 158 cities included in the tables
of this report, 4,625 were commanding officers of the
several ranks from superintendent, or chief, to sergeant.
This total includes 200 commanding heads, or deputies, 69 inspectors, 435 captains, 1,112 Ueutenants,
2,626 sergeants, and 183 with various other ofl&cial
designations. These officers constituted 11.3 per
cent of the whole force; the detectives, numbering 887,
constituted 2.2 per cent; the patrolmen made up 79
per cent, and other regular employees 7.5 per cent of
the whole. In Group I, New Orleans, La., and Milwaukee, Wis., show relatively small niunbers employed,
as do Scranton, Pa., and St. Joseph, Mo., in Group II;
Utica, N. Y., and Brockton, Mass., in Group III, and
Lincoln, Nebr., Passaic, N. J., and South Omaha, Nebr.,
in Group IV.
The aggregate number of employees
shows an increase of 5,002, or 14.1 per cent, and the
nimiber of patrolmen an increase of 4,500, or 16.3 per
Buffalo, N.
Y., 3;
San Francisco,
Cal.,
3; Detroit,
Mich., 4; Newark, N. J., 4; Rochester, N. Y., 4; Denver, Colo., 1; Los Angeles, Cal., 2; Worcester, Mass.,
2; Omaha, Nebr., 2; Syracuse, N. Y., 2; St. Joseph,
Mo., 3; Richmond, Va., 2; Yonkers, N. Y., 4; Schenectady, N. Y., 2; Ehzabeth, N. J., 3; and Holyoke,
From 1905 to 1907 the number of police
Mass., 1.
mounted on horses increased 25.3 per cent, and those
on wheels increased 16.4 per cent. The totals for each
show corresponding increases, although
show decreases in the number of mounted
police.
The increased use of mounted men is not confined to any particular section of the country; for
example, in Group I, New York, N. Y., Chicago, 111.,
Philadelphia, Pa., Boston, Mass., and San Francisco,
Cal., show increases, while St. Louis, Mo., Baltimore,
Md., Pittsburg, Pa., and Washington, D. C, show
The designation " on posts " as used in this
decreases.
group of
cities
several cities
table refers to patrolmen
on
street duty, such as cross-
cent, over 1905.
ing and traffic duty, but not patrolling a beat.
The percentage which officers constituted of the
number of employees, by groups of cities, was as
follows: Group I, 11.6; Group II, 10.3; Group III,
11.2; and Group TV, 11.6, proportions which closely
correspond to those reported in 1905. The proportion for Baltimore, 17.3 per cent, was very much
greater than in the other cities of Group I, next in
Of the police employees designated "patrolmen,"
on special duties. Among
the number thus detailed, 1,146 were assigned to
wagon duty, an interesting indication of the development of the vehicle patrol as a police adjunct. The
number engaged in the work of enforcing sanitary
regulations, 125, would impress the student that the
development of the departments of health everywhere
has reduced the special employment of police for this
purpose. The demand for park and playground pro-
total
order being New York, N. Y., and Detroit, Mich., each
with 13.8 per cent, New Orleans, La., with 13.5 per
cent, and Buffalo, N. Y., with 13.1 per cent.
The
smallest percentages for cities of this group were in
Milwaukee, Wis., 5.9, Chicago, HI., 8.7, and Pittsburg,
Pa., 8.8.
In cities of Group II, MinneapoUs, Miim.,
leads with 20.4 per cent, followed by Richmond, Va.,
with 17 per cent, and Kansas City, Mo., with 13.6 per
cent; while Columbus, Ohio, and Grand Eapids,
Mich., reported only 5 per cent of the total number of
employees acting as officers. Elizabeth, N. J.,
Bridgeport, Conn., Cambridge, Mass., and Albany,
N. Y., show the [largest proportions of officers for
15.4 per cent were detailed
evidenced in the statement that out of the
of patrolmen 473 were giving attention
The use of plain clothes men, other than
to the parks.
those legally designated as detectives, has been in
practice for many years in the larger cities, and in 1907
there were 993 patrolmen employed in that capacity
in the 158 cities considered.
The failure of municipal authorities fuUy to provide
the proper number of employees about headquarters,
station houses, and in miscellaneous capacities connected with the operation of- a modern police departtection
is
total
number
group were in Portland, Me., and San Antonio, Tex.
Of the cities of Group IV, South Omaha, Nebr.,
ment
leads to the detailing of patrolmen for a variety
Joplin, Mo., and Wichita, Kans., reported the largest
proportions of officers, while Everett, Mass., Galveston, Tex., and Butte, Mont., reported the smallest
proportions.
Of the 32,190 patrolmen reported, 80.6 per cent were
on beats; 4 per cent on posts; and 15.4 per cent were
Of those on beats 93.8
detailed on special duties.
per cent were not mounted, while 4.3 per cent were
mounted on horses and 1.9 per cent on bicycles and
motorcycles. Of the 504 mounted on wheels, 395
were on bicycles and 109 on motorcycles, the latter
being reported by 19 cities, as follows: New York,
482
Group
III,
while the smallest percentages for this
N. Y., 20; Philadelphia, Pa., 40;
St. Louis,
Mo., 7;
Thus Table 42 shows, that in the 158 cities
that had been appointed as patrolmen were
serving as clerks and signal system operators; 290 were
detailed as doormen, turnkeys, jailers, or in permanent
reserves; 647 men were in attendance upon municipal
of duties.
men
buildings;
and 793 were assigned to miscellaneous occu-
pations.
A
grand total of 3,071 regular pohce department
employees, other than officers and members of forces,
is reported, including 528 working as station keepers,
doormen, and turnkeys; 324 as matrons caring for
women and
children,
one of the latest police innova-
tions; 59 at miscellaneous police duties too varied to
classify;
484 as drivers; 465 in the signal service; 69
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
as attending police surgeons; 365 as janitors; and 777
at special departmental duties, such as identification
work, pharmaceutical inspection, and the
like.
to Portland, Oreg., with 4.8; that for Group III
was from 123.6 in Hoboken, N. J., to 1.5 in Duluth,
Minn.; and for Group IV, from 71.4 in West Hobo-
ken, N.
Table
Number of police
—Table
43.
to 'population, area,
and
street mile-
ard, the police protection provided for the larger cities
is greater than that for the smaller cities,' and increases
all classes
of police indicated in the
from Group TV to Group I. There is considerable difference between the figures for Group I and
those for the other groups, although between the
table,
figures for the last three groups there
The range in the average number
is little
variation.
of officers, detectives,
and patrolmen per 10,000 population in Group I is
from 8.3 in New Orleans, La., to 23.4 in Washington,
D. C; in Group II, from 6.6 in St. Joseph, Mo., to 18.2
in Atlanta, Ga.; in Group III, from 7.5 in Kansas City,
Kans., and Utica, N. Y., to 18.8 in Charleston, S. C;
and in Group TV, from 4 in Lincoln, Nebr., to 25.1 in
Atlantic City, N. J. In calculating these averages the
employees not doing police duty, such as drivers, signal service men, and janitors, were omitted. The first
column includes aU employees of the police department who are engaged inpolicing the city, except in
those cities reporting "other regular employees" performing miscellaneous police duty; from the second
colunm officers and detectives are omitted; the third
is limited to patrolmen on beats, that is, those who
traverse assigned territories or districts; and the
fourth is limited to patrolmen on posts; that is, those
who are assigned to crossing or other street duty but
do not patrol a beat; while patrolmen detailed on speFor
cial duty are not separately shown in this table.
each 10,000 inhabitants of the 154 cities reported in
1905, there were on the average 14.8 police officers,
detectives, and patrolmen; while in 1907 this average
had increased to 16 for the 158 cities reported.
When measured by the number of men in proportion to land area, the amoimt of police protection
likewise increases progressively from Group IV to
Group I. Baltimore, Md., with 50.6 officers, detectand patrolmen to 1,000 acres of land, and Bos-
ives,
ton, Mass.,
Group
with 48.9, outranked the other
I in the
amount
of police in proportion to land area
considered by poHce officers a just basis for
determining the need of most American cities for
is
improved streets. As a measure of the adequacy of
protection, the figures showing the relation of the total
nimiber of officers, detectives, and patrolmen to population are very significant. Measured by this stand-
progressively, for
to 1.1 in Sioux City, Iowa.
J.,
The number
43 presents, for the first time in a census
report, certain data pertaining to the number of police
in proportion to population, land area, and length of
age.
99
cities of
of police protection
to
a
given area; while New Orleans, La., reported only
2.1, the smallest number shown by any city of that
group. The range for Group II was from Jersey
City, N. J., with 50.1, and Newark, N. J., with 35.7,
an increase of police
This basis
force.
is
one which
recognizes the broad principle that a given police
force can be used more efficiently in caring for a
large centralized population than for a population
—
over a large area each citizen and
no matter how far situated from the center
distributed
taxpayer,'
of population, being entitled to the
same protection
as a resident of the congested districts.
Table
XXIX, presented below, shows the protection
improved and
and is of interest when compared with the averages based on
improved streets only, the average number of officers,
detectives, and patrolmen for Chicago being reduced
by 62.2 per cent, while the corresponding average
afforded per 100 miles of
uaimproved, for the
for
Boston
is
Table XXIX.
City,
number.
reduced only
Number
all streets,
cities of
Group
1.1
I,
per cent.
of specified police to 100 miles of
1907.
streets:
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
100
and Grand Rapids, Mich., $796; Group III, Oakland,
and Kansas City, Kans., and Reading,
Pa., $780; and Group IV, Butte, Mont., and Sacramento, Cal., $1,200, and Kalamazoo, Mich., $699.
In any comparisons that may be made of the figures
in Table 43 showing the compensation of the memCal., $1,200,
bers of the police force in different cities the Tariations
made upon
in the
demands that
police,
such as those relating to their
are
the
modern
attire,
social conditions, cost of liviag, hours of service,
local
and
the like, should be taken into consideration. Unless
this is done, wrong deductions may readily be made
from the
comparaand patrolmen of the several
figures of Table 43 relating to the
tive salary of the, officers
the
cities;
Table
5 cities; the squad,
cities;
criminately used in describing a given system.
The table shows the great variety in the arrange-
duty in the different cities. In most
cases the night forces are stronger than those having
As the hours of duty were reported,
the day tours.
there appear for certain cities intervals between tours,
ment
of tours of
as follows: Pittsburg, Pa., 6 to 7 a. m.; Cleveland,
a.
m.; Milwaukee, Wis., 6 to 7
a.
m.;
m. Indianapolis, Ind., 6
to 7 a. m. and 6 to 7 p. m. Albany, N. Y., 6 to 7 a. m.
Reading, Pa., 4.30 to 7 a. m. and 5 to 6 p. m.; Troy
N. Y., 6 to 8 a. m.; Oakland, Cal., residence sections,
5 a. m. to 7 p. m., and semibusiness sections, 6 a. m.
to 12 m. (daytime); Evansville, Ind., 6 to 7 a. m.;
Covington, Ky., 5 to 7 a. m. and 6 to 7 p. m.; Altoona,
Pa., 5 to 7 a. m. and 6 to 7 p. m.; South Bend, Ind.,
5 to 6 a. m.; Davenport, Iowa, 6 to 7 a. m.; New
Britain, Conn., 7 to 8 a. m.; and Newport, Ky., 6 to
It is probable that in most
7 a. m. and 6 to 7 p. m.
of
protection is provided by
of these cases a measure
watches,
not reported, and by
dog
short tours, or
from their beats.
and
returning
to
patrolmen going
Louisville, Ky.,- 6 to 6.30 a.
44.
by 3
nation was reported.
The need of more exact terminology regarding police
organization is evident, as without doubt the words
"platoon," "section," and "shift" are now indis-
Ohio, 6 to 7.30
cities.
by
relief,
while the watch, division, turn, detail, and "men,"
were reported each by 1 city, and for 1 city no desig-
;
•
;
Patrolmen classified iy grade.—Tnhle 44 presents for
the first time in a census report data relating to the
grades into which patrolmen are divided, the basis of
promotion, and the rate of pay. Although the information presented is far from complete, it shows the
great difference in classification of patrolmen and in
the bases upon which promotions are made in the
cities for which data were obtained.
The names of grades reported are those used by
The Census
local officials in classifying patrolmen.
Bureau has made no attempt to reduce these terms
to a uniform nomenclature, although some standard
would seem almost essential to a satisfactory discussion of the subject.
;
Table
relief,
rule the different units alternate or rotate in
tours of duty,
In some cities, especially the smaller, patrolmen are
not graded while in other cities the number of grades
ranges from 2 to 7, the highest number being in New
York, N. Y., and Omaha, Nebr. In New York and
several other cities the highest salary is paid after five
years of service, while in Denver, Colo., the maximum
may be received after six months in the service. For
a majority of the cities the years of service required
to pass from one grade to another and the increase of
salary attached to such advancement are reported, the
highest salary, $1,400, being shown for New York,
N. Y., and Cincinnati, Ohio.
Police patrol,
As a
and
45.
reserve.
—
^Table 45 presents
thus dividing the hardships of the
service as equally as possible; but in
some
cities, as
Buffalo and Syracuse, N. Y., the day platoon is permanent, transfer thereto being regarded as a promotion, while the night platoons exchange tours at stated
Information pertaining to reserve duty,
intervals.
presented in the last column of
cities each unit furnishes the
reserve for its tour of duty, while in others the reserve
is drawn from a tmit the other members of which are
off duty at that time.
so far as obtained,
this table.
is
In some
The manner
of
employing police forces so as to
accord to the men the requisite rest and afford home
attention to their families, is a matter that has received a great deal of consideration, but it has always
been secondary to that of affording a proper protection
While regularity of employlife and property.
ment and time for recreation contribute to the health
for the first time in a census report, certain data per-
to
taining to the unit of police organization, and to police
The term "tour," selected
patrol, relief, and reserve.
of the force, the authorities in control of the police
from a number
of terms in local use in the different
used in this table as a designation of the hours
of duty of patrolmen.
In stating the unit of organization, the local terms
have been used, as it is impossible at the present time to
attempt :o describe police organization by the use of
The section was reported by
a uniform terminology.
87 cities; the platoon, by 45 cities; the shift, by 12
cities, is
have not been given that liberality by
power of discretion, that would
permit of the rendering of service always with defined
force generally
law, regulation, or
demanded are excesThe question has always been to obtain the
greatest force for duty when most needed under the
regularity; and, at times, duties
sive.
existing in a community, and, despite
attempts to divide forces into reliefs in such a way
conditions
'
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
that the
men may have
a generous personal allowance
numbers and the requirements
of the cormnunity have never permitted their working
with the regularity of those employed in the trades
and in business. The endeavor on the part of the
of time, shortage in
authorities to bring about such regularity has caused
the many differing plans or systems which exist in
respect
to
the
hours
of
employment
in
different
jurisdictions.
Table
46.
—
Equipment of police department. In addition to the
equipment reported for 1905, the 1907 report
shows the number of station houses, automobiles, motorcycles, and bicycles used by the pohce departments.
in the different cities and for the first time, the appropriations for such departments and the ave'rage expense of the departments per regular poUce employee.
Of the total of 608 station houses reported, 336, or
more than half, were in the cities of Group I, and of
these nearly two-thirds were in the first 5 of the 15
cities of that group.
A comparison of the equipment
for 1905 and 1907 indicates a normal increase, as
classes of
;
shown
in the following statement
101
——
.
;
.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
102
oners and juvenile delinquents in institutions."
To
indicate the sense in which the Census Bureau uses
certain terms which are possible of misinterpretation,
attention is called to the following statement of the
An increase of 50 per cent or over in the total number of arrests reported in 1907 as compared with 1905
Pittsburg, Pa.
is shown for each of the following cities
:
Indianapolis, Ind.; Seattle, Wash.; Albany, N, Y.;
kinds of offenses census agents were instructed to
include under these terms:
Oakland, Cal.; Manchester, N. H.
J.ssauZi includes those offenses designated "assault,"
"assault and battery," "criminal assault," "felonious
assault," "indecent assault," "assault on police,"
"mayhem," "assault with intent to murder," and all
other assaults except assaults to rob or rape.
decreases in the total
All other offenses against the person include all offenses other than those specifically described, such as
"abduction," "abortion," "cruelty to children,"
"false imprisonment," "peonage," etc.
iarceny includes all offenses designated as "larceny,"
"larceny from the person" (as distinguished from robbery), "larceny from buUdings," "larceny as bailee,"
"attempt
to commit larceny," "pocket picking,"
embezzlement," "buying and receiving stolen goods,"
"obtaining money or property under false pretenses,"
and kindred offenses which involve the unlawful conversion of, or attempt to convert, the property of
another to the use of the accused.
'
'
All other offenses a^gainst property include such offenses as "swindling," "maUcious injury to, and destruction of, property," and "unlawful interference
with another's business."
Disorderly conduct includes all offenses consisting of
disturbance or disorderly conduct not attributable to
the use of intoxicating liquors and spoken of in local
records as "disorderly conduct," "idle and disorderly,"
"disturbing the peace," "disturbing religious meetings," "disturbing schools," "disturbing public meetings,"
"common brawlers," "carrying concealed
weapons," "using profane, obscene, or abusive language," and all other offenses of a like nature. In a
few cities arrests of drunken persons are made on the
ground of "disorderly conduct" and so appear in the
statistics; but a distinction between the two offenses
seems desirable.
All other offenses against society include such offenses as "perjury," "bribery," "malfeasance in office," "extortion," "violation of election laws," "concealment of crime," "conspiracy," "rescuing prisoner,"
"suppressing evidence," "resisting officer," "violation
of Sunday laws," "violation of fish and game laws,"
"violation of license laws," "nonsupport of family,"
and offenses of like character.
The relative rank of the individual
cities in
regard
number of arrests reported is of chief importance when considered in connection with the poputo the total
lation,
which
is
and Tacoma, Wash.
Of the 31
;
San Antonio, Tex.;
which exhibit
cities
number of arrests in 1907 as compared with 1905, those reporting the most noteworthy
decreases are shown in the following comparative
statement, the cities being arranged in the order of
per cent of decrease:
Table
XXX.
Total arrests in specified
cities
showing
decreases
m
number of arrests: 1907 and 1905.
TOTAL AEKE3TS.
City
Per cent
num-
of
decrease.
ber.
Ill
144
91
94
85
2
24
Alleuiown, Pa.
Fitchburg, Mass,
Covington, Ky..
Altoona, Pa
Dallas,
Tex
Chicago,
~
111
City,
Mo
1907
1905
844
1,512
2,004
8,418
63,435
16,383
1,525
1,439
2,263
2,882
11,470
82,572
20,567
42.2
41.3
33.2
30.5
26.6
23.2
The decrease shown above for Chicago is due to the
establishment of the municipal court, before which
That noted in
cases are now directly brought.
Covington, Ky., is caused chiefly by a change in the
method of keeping the police records cases known
in police parlance as "safe-keeping" being now
omitted altogether from the report. It is worthy of
mention that in each of these cities except Covington
the decrease in total arrests is coincident with a decrease in arrests for drunkenness.
Table XXXI
shows, for^the 12 cities having the largest decreases in
the percentage of arrests for drunkenness, the total
number of such arrests for 1907 and for 1905 and the
per cent of decrease, the cities being arranged in the
order of the percentages:
—
Table XXXI.
decreases in
Arrests far drunkenness in specified cities showing
number of arrests on
this
ground: 1907 and 1906.
AEEESTS FOE
DEUNKENNESS.
City
num1907
Bayonne, N. J
86
24
144
111
10
15
68
2
94
90
1
Percent
of
decrease.
ber.
Dallas,
Tex
Kansas
City,
Mo.
ntcliburg. Mass
AUentown, Pa
San Francisco, Cal
Washington, D. C.
Yonkers, N. Y....
.
Chicago,
Altoona,
III
Pa
Brockton, Mass
New York, N.Y..
48
1,774
1,224
468
252
10,394
4,084
345
35,660
984
1,133
44,787
1905
204
3,804
2,489
931
459
15,767
6,945
466
45,847
1,195
1,360
52,316
76.5
53.4
50.8
49.7
46.1
34.1
31.3
26.0
22.2
17.7
16.7
14.4
discussed in the text for Table 48.
Even when so considered, the total number of arrests
made is rather a reflection of the varying local laws
In contradistinction to the above, the following comparative exhibit shows the number of arrests for
and conditions and of the activity of the police department than a criterion of morals.
drunkenness in 1907 and 1905 for the 26 cities which
in 1907 showed an increase of 50 per cent or more in
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
number
the
of arrests for this offense as
compared
with 1905:
Table XXXII.
increases in
Arrests for drunhmness in specified cities showing
number of arrests on this ground: 1907 and 1905.
ARRESTS FOR
City
number.
70
116
83
46
101
97
30
93
95
80
152
Manoliester,
N.
H
Davenport, Iowa.
Portland,
Me
Albany, N.Y
FaiHucket, R. I..
Biimingliam, Ala.
Seattle,
Wash
Lincoln,
Nebr
Spokane, Wash...
Taooma, Wash....
Sacramento, Gal.
28
20
Los Angeles, Cal.,
Indianapolis, Ind.
122
100
130
118
108
37
102
72
67
136
39
9
4
Springfield, 111....
Butte, Mont
Salem, Mass
Little
Bock, Ark.
Mobile, Ala
Paterson, N. J
McKeesport, Pa..
Evansville, Ind..
Peoria,
111
KocMord,
111
Atlanta, Ga
Buffalo,
St. Louis, Mo
N.Y
103
.
.. .
—
..
,
. ..
.
.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
104
Table XXXIV.
Comparative summary, by
states
and geographic
divisions, of arrests per 10,000 inhabitants in cities of over 30,000
population: 1907.
Number
of cities
report-
mg.
Continental United States.
North Atlantic division
New
England
Maine
New Hampshire.
Massachusetts
Bhode
Island
Connecticut
Southern North Atlantic
New York
New Jersey
. .
Pennsylvania.
South Atlantic division
Northern South Atlantic.
Delaware
Maryland
Dislrict of
Columbia .
Virginia
West Virginia
Southern South Atlantic.
South Carolina.
Georgia
Florida
North Central
division
Eastern North Central
Ohio
Indiana
Illinois
Michigan...
Wisconsin.
Western North Central.
Minnesota.
Iowa
Missouri...
Nebraska...
Kansas
South Central division
Eastern South Central.
Kentucky.
Tennessee.
Alabama..
Western South.Central
Louisiana.
Arkansas. .
Oklahoma.'.
Texas
Western division
Rocky Mountain
Montana.
Colorado.
Ba§in and Plateau.
Utah
Pacific
Washington.
Oregon
California..;
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
In the following statement, the per cent distribution
by principal offenses, is given
by groups of cities for those 88 cities reporting arrests
of arrests of females,
in detail
Table
XXXV.
Per cent distribution, for groups of cities, of arrests
offemales, hy principal offenses: 1907.
105
——
.
.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
106
ington, D.
ary
1,
C, July
1906;
1,
1906;
Syracuse, N. Y., Janu-
Fall River, Mass., September
Table XXXVI.
Juveniles appearing before the court in specified
1907 and 1905.
cities:
1906;
Manchester,
1,
Grand Rapids, Mich., Oct. 25, 1907;
N. H., July 1, 1907; Youngstown, Ohio, January,
1907; Saginaw, Mich., June 28, 1907; Mobile, Ala.,
March, 1907; Springfield, Ohio, May, 1906; Superior,
February 20, 1906; and Kalamazoo, Mich.,
October 24, 1907. Detroit and Bay City, Mich., are
included in the 1905 report, although the table for
1907 shows the juvenile courts in these cities to have
been established ia 1907. This is due to the fact that
the original juvenile court law in Michigan was declared unconstitutional and a new law was passed in
JUVENILES APPEABINO BEFOBE THE
COUKT.
Increase from 1905
to 1907.
Number.
Wis.,
1907.
In point of jurisdiction a majority of the courts
mentioned in Table 51 have authority to handle all
except capital offenses; the jurisdiction of some courts,
however, is limited to misdemeanors. In general, the
jurisdiction in cases of juveniles conforms to the jurisThe maximum age
diction of the judge presiding.
is generally fixed at 16 or 17 years, but in the more
recently estabhshed courts the limit has been raised
to 18 years, while in a
number
Total.
New York, N.Y...
Chdcago, 111
Piuladelphia, Pa...
St. Louis, Mu
Baltimore, Md
Pittsburg, Pa
Y
BurIalo,N.
,
San Francisco, Cal.
Detroit, Mich
Milwaukee, Wis
Indianapolis, Ind .
Providence, B. I...
Eochester, N. Y...
Toledo, Ohio,
Denver, Colo
Los Angeles, Cal.
Portland, Oreg
Atlanta, Ga
Y
Chester,
Pa
Eookford, 111
Oshkosh, Wis
Sacramento, Cal.
28,272
9,088
32.1
12,725
2,264
1,264
727
2,632
746
1,071
950
656
719
580
434
440
159
452
217
620
1,007
118
3,224
1,945
26.3
85.9
34.7
72.4
13.2
50.7
37.9
16.5
27.3
134.8
11.6
43.5
13.9
189.3
82.5
55.3
62.9
31.1
37,360
15,949
4,209
826
1,253
2,979
1,124
1,477
793
1,688
647
623
601
460
825
337
659
1,320
165
153
282
111
33
92
Albany, N.Y
Oakland, Cal
Utica, N.
Per cent.
1905
835
. -
Number.
1907
19
.
1438
526
347
378
406
1157
15
179
969
67
189
61
301
373
120
39
313
47
140
21
47
18
U9
127
13
261
64
39.8
«.J8.0
22.7
19
of cases the courts are
authorized to put juveniles on probation until they
have reached the age of 21 years.
very essential part of the juvenile court system
1
Decrease.
2
Per cent not given as base
is less
than
100.
who
the force of probation officers, including both those
are paid by the civil divisions and volunteers
Of
assisting in the work from a sense of civic duty.
the 815 probation officers reported, 165 were paid and
In the two years between 1905 and 1907 there was
an increase of 32.1 per cent in the number of cases
The 22
tried in the juvenile courts of these 25 cities.
cities showing an increase in cases tried reported
25,939 cases for 1905 and 35,649 for 1907, an increase
For the marked increases shown the
of 37.4 per cent.
650 were volunteers serving without pay. Provision
not made in all the states for the compensation of
probation officers, and in such cases it is necessary to
explanation lies in the extension of the activities of the
courts in the direction of caring for dependent and
neglected children rather than in an increase of crime
depend upon volunteers.
among
A
is
is
Complete and accurate
fig-
ures for the total number of juveniles released on probation since the courts were established and the number not again appearing before the court would fur-
nish a measure of the effectiveness of the probation
system. Only about one-half of the 48 courts report-
number released on probation, however, state
whether the offenders were rearrested. Of the cases
for which the desired data were reported, 26.6 per
ing the
juveniles.
A complete
segregation showing the sex of the juveappearing before the courts could not be obtained,
but the sex was reported for 49,078 juveniles, including
42,095 males and 6,983 females, or 85.8 and 14.2 per
By groups of cities the percentages
cent, respectively.
represented by each sex were as foUows
'niles
:
PEK CENT.
cent show rearrest of the offender.
In drawing any conclusion from the aggregate of
50,975 juveniles appearing before the courts in 1907,
it should be borne in mind that this aggregate includes
many dependent and neglected children in addition to
those accused of crime, since a primary object of the
juvenile courts is to care for children of these classes.
Since the addition of new courts will not permit a
comparison of the aggregate number
of juveniles be-
fore the courts as reported for 1905 with those re-
ported in this table, the figures for the following cities,
for which complete statistics for both years are available, have been selected for comparison:
Male.
Group I
Group II.
Group III
Group IV.
87.3
82.2
82.8
82.5
.
Owing
Female.
12.7
17.8
17.2
17.5
many courts, the
not indicate whether the offender
appearance before the court or
to the incomplete records of
statistics available did
was making his first
had appeared before it one or more times previously.
In 25 cities, however, the number of times that the
juvenile had already appeared before the court was
reported and is shown in Table XXXVII.
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
107
OF JUVENILES APPEARING BEFORE T;P^E COURT DURING
THE YEAR, CLASSIFIED ACCORDING TO NUMBER OP PREVIOUS APPEARANCES BEFORE THE COURT,
Table XXXVII.—GENERAL DISPOSITION OF CASES
IN SPECIFIED CITIES:
1907.
—
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
108
homes, but the percentages shown under this head
illustrate the tendency of the courts to greater severity
toward offenders who have appeared before them
previously than in the case of those who are in court
for the first time.
Table
Licensed
traffic
52.
in intoxicating liquors.
—Table
52,
which presents data concerning the licensed liquor
traffic, deals with the subject somewhat more in detail
than did the corresponding table in the census report
for 1905, especially in its differentiation between
saloons and clubs, and between the two classes of
saloon keepers those who sell all kinds of liquors and
those who sell wines and malt liquors only. A separate column has also been provided for hotels and
restaurants, and for each class of dealer, so far as is
—
possible, the license rate, as well as the
dealers, is given.
number of
show
It is not always practicable to
number of retail dealers coming under each head,
owing to the fact that in many cities the same type of
hcense is required for any one or all of the various
classes described, but in such cases all dealers selling
liquor by the drink are tabulated under the head of
the
"saloon keepers," with a footnote indicating the
impracticability of further segregation. The remaining columns of the table follow the lines of the 1905
report, with the exception that with "grocers" are
included
all other retail dealers not selling liquor by
the drink, while an additional column shows, for each
city, the number of inhabitants per dealer selling liquor
by the
drink.
In drawing comparisons between the figures for
1907 and those for .1905, it should be borne in mind
that only the data for the 141 cities reporting in both
years are comparable, and the figures for these cities
alone are used as a basis for generalization upon the
subject.
some
The
cities
fact that the
limited
by law
number
also affects
of saloons
more or
is
in
the
comparative standing of the several cities, the limit being in some cases proportionate to population as in
Massachusetts, where the state excise laws fix the proportion at one saloon per 1,000 inhabitants outside of
Boston, and at one per 500 within that city and in
less
—
—
others, absolute, as in Minneapohs, Minn.,
Los Angeles,
Cal., and Kansas City, Mo.
Although the form of the
inquiry in 1907 varies sHghtly from that used in 1905,
the latter asking for the
"number
of licenses issued"
and the former the "number in force
at the close of the
year," the figures obtained convey in each case approximately the same information.
Considered as a whole, regardless of proportion to
number of saloons shows a net decrease
between 1905 and 1907, as indicated in the following
comparative statement for the group totals:
population, the
Table
XXXIX.
Comparative statennent of
[Only the 141
cities
number of
and 1905.
the
liquor dealers, by groups of cities: 1907
reporting in both years are included.]
retail
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
Table XLI.—Decrease from 1905
to
1907 in the number of retail liquor
dealers in specified cities.
[The
cities are
enforcement of Sunday closing laws and others of
owing to the activity of reform admin-
similar nature,
arranged in the order of their per cent of decrease.]
istrations.
In the following exhibit the
EETAIL LIQUOK DEALERS.
ical distribution is
Table XLII.
Tenn
. .
Dayton, Ohio
Springfield, Ohio.
Cleveland, Ohio...
Columbus, Ohio. .
Akron, Ohio
Toledo, Ohio
Number. Per
San Francisco, Cal.
Dubuque, Iowa.
Youngstown, Ohio,
.
Chattanooga,
Yonkers,N.
Norfolk,
Tenn
Y
Va
Ky
Sacramento, Cal.
565
400
38
93
109
335
77
93
141
Saginaw, Mich
Wilmington, Del .
Louisvifle,
221
188
1,923
489
142
558
2,375
118
263
84
173
.
184
140
926
176
grouped accord-
made
the basis of comparison:
to 1907.
1907
Nashville,
cities are
ing to location rather than population, and geograph-
Decrease from 1905
Number.
Memphis, Tenn
Waterbury, Conn.
HavertuU, Mass
Lowell, Mass
109
185
209
616
166
3,177
762
208
776
3,280
162
350
111
228
179
230
173
1,114
344
212
39
92
100
281
73
1,254
273
66
218
905
44
87
27
55
38
46
33
188
32
cent.
60.9
53.0
50.6
49.7
47.8
46.6
44.0
39.5
35.8
31.7
28.1
27.6
27.2
24.9
24.3
24.1
21.2
20.0
19.1
16.9
16.4
The explanation for the marked decreases shown for
cities of Ohio lies in the increase in the license rate
from $500 in 1905 to $1,000 in 1907. Similar causes
were operative in the cities of Tennessee, where the
state license rate was increased from $250 to $500 and
the county rate from $85 to $150, but the decreases in
these latter cities are also due ijx part to differences in
methods of reporting in the two years, as are also those
shown for LoweU and HaverhiU, Mass. In San
the
Francisco, Cal., the decrease in the
number
of retail
was due not only to a_i increase in the
license rate from $84 to $500, but to a readjustment of
liquor dealers
the earthquake in 1906.
Because of the shifting of population across the bay,
the latter cause produced the opposite effect in Oakland, Cal., where an increase of 30.6 per cent is shown.
The increase of 19.3 per cent in Detroit, Mich., is due
probably to the annexation of Delrey and Fairview,
while that of 22.1 per cent in Seattle, Wash., is undoubtedly the result of conditions preceding the
Alaska-Yukon Exposition. The pronounced increase
shown for Omaha, Nebr., is due to an error in the 1905
report, as is also the decrease of 53 per cent shown for
Waterbury, Conn. The apparently large increase
shown in Dallas, Tex., is due partly to an incomplete
local conditions following
report for 1905; the city's record of liquor licenses for
that year having been destroyed, no accurate statement
was obtainable, and the number given is an estimate
by one of the city officials. In all increases
number of retail liquor dealers the growth of
population is undoubtedly a factor, and in some of the
Western cities this factor is almost whoUy responsible
for the increase. The reason for the decreases is, as a
furnished
in the
general rule, a change in the license rate, although in
some cities, notably in St. Louis, Mo., and Buffalo,
N. y., the decreases were due largely to the rigid
— Comparative statement of
dealers,
the number of retail liqiwr
by geographic divisions: 1907 and 1905.
:
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
110
that the individual increases are so small and the
individual decreases so large that the net eflPect is a
decided decrease.
The
final
column
number
the
city
which gives
of Table 52,
of
for each
inhabitants per dealer selling
Uquor by the drink, presents material for comparisons
of the number of liquor dealers in proportion to population.
The most striking change in this respect
between 1905 and 1907 is that in the relative rank of
the several groups. Their order in 1905 was I, II, IV,
and III, while in 1907 it was IV, I, III, and II. The
smallest numbers of saloons in proportion to population are shown for the cities of Pennsylvania and
Massachusetts; the largest for those of Texas, Ohio,
and Wisconsin; while the large numbers shown for
the cities of Alabama, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, New
and New York are also worthy of
The extremes between cities in the same group
Jersey, Kentucky,
note.
are as follows, the figure following the
city indicating in each case the
to each dealer selling liquor
number
by the
name
of the
of inhabitants
drink:
—
—
—
Group I. Milwaukee, Wis., 142, and Philadelphia, Pa., 761.
Group II.—Newark, N. J., 217, and Worceater, Mass., 1,222.
Group III. Houston, Tex., 158, and Springfield, Mass., 1,347.
Group IV. Galveston, Tex., 134, and Newcastle, Pa., 2,137.
"
In addition to the regular license rates charged the
different classes of dealers, manufacturers,
tabulated in Table 52, in
tlers,
are
made
many
for additional privileges,
cities
and botpayments
such as the sale of
liquor in bottles or permission to keep the place of
business open for a greater number of hours than are
authorized by the ordinary Hcense. Where two or
more
rates are
in the
same
shown
for
any one
class of retail dealers
the smallest rate represents the regular rate for that class, and the difference between this
regular rate and the higher rate represents additional
payment^ such as those mentioned above. In Boston,
city,
Mass., 28 hotel keepers paid an additional license fee
of $500 each for the privilege of selling liquor
from
11 to 12 p. m.; 671 retail dealers selHng by the drink
paid an additional fee of $300 for the privilege of selling
Uquor
in bottles;
and 70 wholesale
dealers paid
an
additional fee of $500 for the privilege of botthng
liquors; while 6 druggists, who paid a Hcense fee of
$500 each, are included in the table with wholesale
In New Bedford, Mass., 2 hotel keepers paid
dealers.
an additional fee of $300 each for the privilege of
seUing liquors from 11 to 12 p. m. In Fall Kiver,
Mass., 13 dealers paid an additional fee of $1,400 each
for the privilege of seUing at wholesale; and in Lowell,
Mass., 77 dealers paid an additional fee of $500 each
In Lynn, Mass., 4 dealers
for selling liquor in bottles.
by the drink paid an additional fee of $800
each for the privilege of bottling liquors; 1 dealer,
selling only malt liquors by the drink, paid an addiselling
tional fee of $1,000 for the privilege of bottling; and
8 dealers paid an additional fee of $1,200 each for the
In WashingD. C, 4 dealers seUing by the drink paid an additional fee of $300 each for the privilege of selling at
wholesale; and in Sacramento, Cal., 104 dealers paid
an additional fee of $40 each for the privilege of selling
from midnight to 5 a. m. In New York, N. Y., 3
dealers, not selling by the drink, paid an additional
rate of $150 each for the privilege of delivery from
wagon. In Montgomery, Ala., 38 dealers seUing by
the drink paid $200 additional for permission to locate
within certain fire limits.
In Philadelphia 49 brewers and brewers' agents paid
additional yearly rates, based on the number of barrels
brewed, which ranged from $250 to $5,000, as follows
privilege of selling liquors at wholesale.
ton,
Brewers.
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
Seventh class: Dealers in paints or chemicals to sell alcohol for
mecha^cal, manufacturing, or chemical purposes only, $1.
Club licenses: Bona fide clubs, not less than $50 nor more than
$500.
(Sec. 88, R. S., 1902.)
Of temporary licenses granted for a brief period, as
a day or a week, Chicago, III, reported 5,032 at $6
per day; New Orleans, La., 661 at $5 per day; Albany, N. Y., 7 at $10 per day; and Camden, N. J.,
8 at $10 per day.
The annual rates for licenses which are shown in
Table 52 represent the total rate paid. For many
cities
this
amount
includes fixed fees for licenses
granted directly by the state or county, as well as
for the license granted by the city, while in the case of
some cities a certain percentage of the license rate is
for the benefit of the state or county, or both.
The following summary gives a list of the cities in
which state or county licenses, or both, are required
of the various classes of liquor dealers in addition to
the fees paid the cities, together with the license rates
Table XLIII.
—Rates of
state
and county
cities:
1907.
licenses required in specified
Ill
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
112
Mo. (appointed by governor) Omaha and South Omaha,
Nebr., Providence, R. I., and Fall Eiver (appointed bygovernor), and Lowell, Mass.
(7) Comptroller in Indianapolis and Fort Wayne,
Ind., and Nashville and Knoxville, Tenn.
,
(8)
Treasurer, or collector, in Little Rock, Ark.,
Terre Haute and South Bend, Ind., Joplin, Mo., and
Houston, Dallas, Galveston, and Fort Worth, Tex.
(9) Mayor in East St. Louis and Springfield, 111.
In most cases a city official collects the city license
fees; in New Hampshire and New York, however, the
state collects the license fee; while for cities in Conr
necticut, Florida, Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania,
the county makes the collections.
In those states in which, in addition to city licenses,
state or county licenses are required, such licenses are
granted as follows By county judicial authority in all
the cities of Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Kentucky,
and Tennessee; by county boards of supervision, or
commissions, in all the cities of Georgia, Indiana,
Oklahoma, and in Kansas City, St. Joseph, and Joplin,
Mo. by the county treasurer in all cities in Michigan
and Montana; by the state treasurer in the cities of
Colorado; and by the county auditors in all cities in
Ohio.
The states of Maryland, Massachusetts, New York,
Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, and Washington share in the license receipts, but do not grant
state licenses.
In Delaware the state issues and collects all licenses, while the city grants no liquor
The number per 10,000 inhabitants is probably the best measure of fire prptection. The average
cities.
Group I was 10.1 men; in this group Detroit, Mich.,
had the largest number, 15.8, and Philadelphia, Pa.,
the smallest, 6.2. In Group II Portland, Oreg., led
in
with 19.7, while St. Joseph, Mo., reported the smallest
number, 6.1, the average for the group being 11.8.
The average for Group III was 9.6, the highest number,
16.9, being reported by Dallas, Tex., and the lowest,
The aver0.3, by Reading, Pa., and Wilmington, Del.
age for Group IV was 10.2, Atlantic City, N. J., having
the largest average, 31.8, and York, Pa., the smallest,
0.5.
The larger cities have the higher average number
of firemen per 1,000 acres of land area, the average for
Group I being 16; for Group II, 11.3; for Group III,
;
The
Table
Employees of
fire
—The inquiry
53.
department,
Group IV,
6.8.
$3,000 to $7,000 in Group I, and from $1,650 to $4,042
in Group II; in Groups III and IV the highest salaries
and $2,400, respectively. Some cities in
two groups pay salaries of $200 and $300 a
year to the officer highest in rank and others pay a
salary of $500, but these are salaries paid to callmen, who devote only a portion of their time to the
are $3,000
these last
fire
department.
The investment necessary
to furnish fire protection
to the cities included in this investigation
amounts
to
$70,284,861, this being the value of the land, buildings,
and equipment reported
in Table 30 of the financial
This valuation
statistics.
Group
is
distributed
by groups
$35,877,034, or $2.75 per capita;
Group II, $16,017,320, or $3.53 per capita; Group
III, $10,498,226, or $3.19 per capita; and Group IV,
fires,
and property
relating to the fire protection of
1907 was more extended than that for 1905,
two tables, 53 and 54, being necessary to present the
Table 53 shows the numstatistics secured for 1907.
ber of employees, expenses of departments, number of
In those 153 cities included in
fires, and firei losses.
the reports for both 1905 and 1907 the total number of
fire department employees in 1907 was 28,896 and
the number of members of the volunteer fire organizations 17,266, making an aggregate of 46,162 men in
the fire fighting force, which is an increase of 2,178
men, or 5 per cent, over 1905. In these same 153
cities the number of regular firemen increased from
21,606 in 1905 to 24,298 in 1907, a gain of 12.5 per
The volunteer firemen's associations in many
cent.
cities are at present largely social in nature, perpetuating associations, whose members once constituted
the fire fighting force of the city.
By presenting the number of regular firemen per
10,000 inhabitants, the number per 1,000 acres of
land area, and the number per 100 miles of improved
streets, an opportunity is afforded to compare the
effecti'^e strength of the departments of the individual
cities for
for
salary of the officer highest in rank ranges from
as follows:
licenses.
losses.
and
7;
:
I,
$7,892,281, or $3.02 per capita.
The appropriations for 1906
and 1907 as here given
include the anticipated expenditures for outlays and
for maintenance.
The total appropriations for 1907
amounted
to $38,529,636,
per
an increase
of
$3,648,856,
over the previous year. This,
however, does not mean tEat the expenses of maintaining the departments increased at that rate, for
a portion of this amount was appropriated for the
purchase of land, construction of buildings, and for
new apparatus. The per capita appropriation for the
158 cities reporting was $1.65. There is also an
additional expense connected with the fire departments in the form of the interest on bonds issued to
provide land and buildings, which is generally not
covered by the appropriation for the fire departments.
The interest on debt incurred for fire protection, however, is not an item which should be used in comparing
costs among the several cities, since one city with a
large investment in engine houses and equipment may
have no debt for fire purposes, while another city may
have a large amount of such debt. A more accurate
measure of costs is an allowance for interest on the
amount invested for fire protection. The actual
or
10.5
cent,
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
expenses of maintenance of the fire departments in the
158 cities covered by the investigation are shown in
Table 5 of this report.
The per capita
cost of maintenance of fire depart-
ments in foreign cities is much lower than in cities of
the United States, computations recently made by
the United States Geological Survey placing the per
capita expense in Berlin at $0.26, London at $0.19, St.
Petersburg at $0.22, Paris at $0.21, Milan at $0.17, and
Stockholm at $0.23. The inference should not be
drawn from these data that the fire departments of this
country are not economically administered. The low
per capita cost of maintenance abroad is the result of
stricter building regulations, more nearly fireproof
bundings, and greater precaution to prevent the occurrence of fires; the foreign municipalities also make
no payments for water for fire purposes, an expense
incurred by about two-fifths of the departments in the
larger cities of this country.
In those cities for which complete reports were made
there were 88,255 fire alarms during 1907 and 78,507
of which 52,343 resulted in losses; in other words,
only 59.3 per cent of the alarms were for fires which
occasioned loss. Similarly, disregarding those cities
fires,
with incomplete reports, the total loss through fires
was $48,676,730, on which insurance was paid amounting to $42,655,725, leaving a net loss of $6,021,005, or
12.4 per cent.
The total fire loss per capita was $2.28,
and the net loss per capita, $0.28. Of the total loss
reported, a separation of that on buildings and that on
their contents was returned for $48,308,081, showing
that $18,965,427, or 39.3 per cent, was on buildings
and $29,342,654, or 60.7 per cent, was on contents.
The data reported under the heads of "property
from fires" and "insurance paid" have been
compared with those shown in similar tables in. the Insurance Yearbook for 1907, the figures showing but
losses
slight variations
except in the case of three or four
where the differences are due to the fact that the
yearbook shows data for those cities for the period
ending April, 1907, while Table 53 covers the year
ending April, 1908. As shown by footnotes to Table
53, certain information which was not reported by
the census agents has been obtained from the Insurance Yearbook.
cities,
Table
54.
—
poses," "buildings for apparatus," "equipment,"
supplying water for fire fighting purposes. The data
pertaining to the water supply for fire purposes, as set
forth in this table, are closely related to the statistics
on water-supply systems, presented in Table 39 of this
report, and also to the information given in Table 9,
which shows the outlays for water-supply systems.
In assigning the costs of waterworks construction, it is
uncertain what percentage thereof may be legitimately
charged to domestic service and what percentage to
The consensus of opinion
engineers favors an approximately equal distribution of this cost, except in the larger cities, where
protection service.
fire
among
the percentage charged to domestic service should
largely exceed that charged to fire service.
cities, or slightly more than one-fourth of the
number covered by the investigation, the water
supply was furnished exclusively by privately owned
In 45
total
waterworks.
The sources of supply are, for the most part, natural
streams and lakes, though 11 cities reported artesian
wells, and 11 others reported wells the character of
which was not stated. The presentation of information on this subject is of interest in determining the
adequacy of the source of supply.
Between 1905 and 1907 there was an increase of
18,938, or 8.9 per cent, in the number of municipally
owned fire hydrants and of 3,277, or 10.9 per cent,
But little importance
in those not owned by the city.
can be attached to the annual rental per fire hydrant
reported in the cities with municipal waterworks systems, since the rate is arbitrarily established by the
city officials, the same appropriation in many instances
being made from year to year without reference to the
increase in the number of fire hydrants. The rates
charged by private corporations, however, represent
actual payments by the cities, and are usually based
on the number of hydrants.
Of the 15 cities in Group I, 7 have separate fire
mains to supplement the water service of the waterworks system, while New York, N. Y., and Philadel-
pumping engines for fire
mains. Of the remaining 143 cities, 6 have separate
fire mains, Rochester, N. Y., also reporting separate
pumping engines. The high pressure system for fire
phia, Pa., reported separate
becoming a necessity in the larger eitifes
not only is the water supply insufl&cient
to afford adequate protection, but the facihties for
directing a number of powerful streams against a fire
are too limited; and in addition, the engines lack the
force necessary to elevate the water sufficiently for
the protection of tall buildings. The water pressure
at hydrants, which is based upon the pressure in the
central business district, can be presented only in a
protection
is
for without
Equipment of fire department. Table 54 sets forth
the resources available in the several cities for fire protection, under the captions "water supply for fire pur-
and
"fire-alarm boxes."
In treating the subject of the water supply for fire
purposes, the ownership of waterworks and sources of
water supply are given, together with statistics of, and
information in regard to, fire hydrants and fire mains,
and cisterns, wells, and reservoirs used exclusively for
113
general
way
it,
in terms of the ordinary range.
For housing the apparatus
158
cities
of fire departments, the
reported 2,288 buildings.
The
1,776 steam
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
114
engines reported constitute the most important
part of the equipment. As presented in the table
these engines are classified by size, the first size including those having a capacity of 800 to 1 ,200 gallons
per minute; the second, those averaging 700 gallons;
Table
fire
and the
The
those averaging 500 to 600 gallons.
third,
show an increase
figures for 1907
in
equipment
over that reported for 1905, though a few cities show
a decrease in certain classes of equipment, due to
the installation of high pressure systems and more
powerful engines, larger apparatus, etc. In reporting
the equipment for each city, the apparatus held in
reserve
is
A
included.
new
feature in
equipment
which has been introduced in recent years
is
57.
—
and disposal of refuse. ^The disposal of
wastes
municipal
is a question of increasing importance
with which every city has to contend, and the figures
here given indicate the extent of the problem involved.
In the discussion of this table it is well to consider,
first, the nomenclature employed in distinguishing
Collection
To a large extent the
census terminology agrees with that used in the report of the New York Commission on Street Cleaning
and Waste Disposal from which the following definithe several classes of wastes.
tions are taken:
Refuse
the
is
a general term applied to city wastes, including garbage,
dead animals, and snow.
ashes, rubbish, street sweepings,
automobile, for the use of the officers of the depart-
ment on inspection
tours and in attending
total of 45 automobiles
was
ber 21 were in use in the
The number
of
cities of
pubhc
and of
Group I.
rerported,
fires.
this
A
num-
fire-alarm boxes increased
from 25,793 in 1905 to 27,493 in 1907. In 1905 only
9,407 private alarm boxes were reported, while ia
This apparently exces1907, .26,843 were reported.
the number of private fire-alarm
boxes is due to the fact that 11,500 private signal
boxes in use at the stock yards in Chicago were reported for 1907, while such boxes were not included
sive
increase
in
in the report for 1905.
Table
Garbage
is
animal, vegetable, and food wastes from kitchens,
markets, slaughterhouses, and some manufactories.
It is made up
and putrescible organic matter.
Dead animals. Under this name are included animals, mostly of
the larger size, that are left upon the street.
largely of water
—
Ashes
is
the residue from the burning of fuel, together with such
fuel, cinders, and clinkers as are discarded with the
unconsumed
ashes.
Rubbish
is
discarded trash of a heterogeneous character produced
and from trade wastes, and which can not be classi-
in the household
fied as garbage or ashes.
It is usually free
small percentage of water.
It includes,
from or contains but a
among
other things, dis-
carded paper, old clothing, shoes, bedding, rags, wood, leather,
furniture, boxes, barrels, empty cans, metal scrap, broken glass,
bottles, crockery, etc.
55.
the Census Bureau has attempted
paper apart from other rubbish, since
many cities collect it separately and seek to reahze
revenue from its sale. Of the city wastes mentioned
In
its statistics
to report waste
Inspectors and appropriations for health department. Table 55 presents an exhibit of the number of
persons regularly employed by the cities during 1907
for the enforcement of laws and ordinances relating
—
in the definition given
for
"refuse,"
street
sweep-
to
and snow are reported in Table 61.
Much difficulty was encountered in attempting to
place the reports from the different cities upon a com-
which they were paid, and also according to the
special duties on which they were engaged.
This
table presents data on pubHc health inspection in
parable basis, for while the city reports of garbage are
generally expressed in tons and are approximately
accurate, the ashes, rubbish, and other refuse are
frequently reported in wagon loads, cubic yards, cubic
pubhc health, and of the appropriations for the
health department for 1906 and 1907. The iQspectors
are classified according to the appropriation from
much
which
greater detail than those reported for 1905,
be found in the last three columns of Table
ings
feet,
will
40 in the report for that year. The group totals show
that the cities of Group I employ a smaller proportion
of the total number of inspectors in sanitary inspection
than do the cities of the other three groups, the percentages for the four groups being, respectively, 63.2,
72, 68.8, and 70.2; and that for the grand total, 66.9.
Table
56.
is
or sacks.
With the exception
of garbage, which
definitely reported in practically all cities, there
is
a
tendency to confuse terms and to classify improperly
the several kinds of refuse, or to make no classification
at all.
When the city ofl&cials did not furnish sufficient information to permit of reducing the measurements given in the city reports to a tonnage basis, the
following average weights to the cubic yard, as given
in "Disposal of Municipal Refuse," by Parsons, were
used:
—
MiTk and dairy inspection. The data presented in
Table 56 are fully considered by Doctor Baker in his
discussion of the "economic and sanitary supervision
of city nulk supplies," presented on pages 36 to 45 of
this report.
Garbage, 1,100 to 1,200 pounds to the cubic yard.
Ashes, 1,200 to 1,500 pounds to the cubic yard.
Rubbish, 130 to 225 pounds to the cubic yard.
In a majority of cities the refuse is collected and disposed of by the municipahty; in a small number, how-
"
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
ever, the refuse is disposed of
by the householders,
while several cities have a combination of both systems. The final disposition of the refuse is, however,
a municipal problem, regardless of the method of colIn many of the large cities where a system
lection.
of municipal collection prevails, private collection is
favored in certain residence districts because of the
additional opportunity given the residents to regulate
the service to their needs. Where service is provided
by the
city the extension of private collection is
checked by the additional cost which it involves to the
householders.
In 34 cities; or practically one-fifth of the total number covered by this report, the collection is entirely by
private arrangement, and in a few cities some portion
of the refuse
is
removed by the householders.
Several
things contribute to the difficulty of securing accurate
statements of the men and equipment employed. In
some instances the cities combined the work of street
cleaning and refuse removal under one department
and gave no data upon which to base a segregation of
the employees.
In regard to the average number of
must be borne
in mind that the force of employees varies greatly with the season of the year, and
men,
it
appHcable to the force required in
Other elements affecting the number of men employed and the extent of the task of
removing and disposing of the refuse are chmate, character of the population and principal industries, and
geographic location, the latter as affecting the conthis is especially
removing ashes.
Upon
the primary separation required by city regulation depends in a large measure the completeness and accuracy of that portion of the table which
relates to the tonnage of the garbage and other refuse
collected.
The garbage
and reported in
of refuse collection
and disposal in use
in the several cities, as far as reported, were as follows:
—
New York, N. Y. Separate receptacles were used tor ashes,
garbage and ashes, and rubbish.
Garbage was treated at reduction works, burned or dumped at
and at inland dumps. Ashes and rubbish were dumped at
sea, at Hikers Island, Staten Island, and Coney Island, and at various fills within 10 miles of the city limits. Reduction ^^orks were
in operation at Barren Island, and incinerators at Jamaica, Flushing, Ravenswood, Far Rockaway, and West New Brighton.
Chicago, III.
Garbage was kept separate from ashes and rubbish.
Dead animals were collected by a private rendering plant.
Garbage was delivered to a private reduction plant, and ashes and
rubbish were hauled to the city dumps on the lake shore.
Philadelphia, Pa. Garbage, ashes, waste paper, etc., were colsea,
—
—
lected separately.
Garbage and dead animals were disposed of at a reduction plant
within the city limits. Ashes, waste paper, etc., were placed on
city dumps or used for filling in lowlands within the city limits.
The average haul for all waste material was 2 miles.
St. Louis, Mo.
Only garbage and dead animals were collected
by the city.
Garbage was carried by the city on barges down the Mississippi
River about 20 miles to Ghesley Island, where it was dumped and
plowed under. Dead animals were reduced at a private plant on
the island.
Boston, Mass. In the city proper, north of Massachusetts avenue,
there were regular collections of garbage, ashes, and paper; in other
parts of the city only garbage and ashes were collected by the city.
The garbage collected by the city was carted to the wharves and
taken by scows to the reduction works of the New England Sanitary
Product Company on Spectacle Island. That collected by contractors was sold, to be fed to swine.
Ashes were taken by scows to
sea and dumped or used in filling lowlands. Waste paper was delivered to the City Refuse Utilization Company in the city.
—
—
—
venience of disposal.
rately
The methods
115
is
generally collected sepa-
tons, thus affording rehable
data for comparative purposes. Some few decreases
and apparently excessive variations are noticeable
between this table and the corresponding table in the
report for 1905. A more complete record of quantities handled and the employment by the cities of a
more uniform nomenclature largely explain these
variations.
The disposal of garbage by burning is
gradually gaining in favor, 42 cities reporting all or a
portion of the garbage as burned in 1907 as compared
with 33 in 1905. The expense involved in the adaptation of this system to the city's needs retards its speedy
adoption.
For compiHng the data on cost of collection the expense of collection and disposal used is that reported
The average
in Table 5 of the financial statistics.
cost per ton is based on the total tons collected and
the actual expense for the work, while in securing the
average net cost the total expense is reduced by any
receipts credited to the disposal of garbage.
Baltimore, Md. Garbage and ashes were collected separately,
waste paper being included with garbage.
Ashes were used for filling in lowlands; garbage was reduced at a
plant within the city limits. The average haul was about IJ miles.
—
Cleveland, Ohio.
Garbage was collected separately, and other
kinds of refuse were collected together. Rubbish was separated
from ashes at the dump and sold. Garbage was reduced at a plant
owned by the city, situated 6 miles outside the city limits.
Buffalo, N. F.-— Householders used separate receptacles for garbage, ashes, and other refuse. Large animals were collected by
private parties and taken to a rendering plant, small animals only
being collected by the city.
Ashes were used for filling purposes within the city limits. Garbage was taken to a reduction plant owned by the city, situated 1
mile outside of the city limits. Refuse was sorted at a plant within
the city limits. Dead animals and butchers' and market wastes
were reduced. The average haul for ashes was 2 miles; for garbage, 5 miles; for paper and other refus^, 2J miles.
Pittsburg, Pa.
Garbage was collected by contractors in wagons
and hauled in company's cars to reduction works, 35 miles from city.
Detroit, Mich.
Garbage and dead animals were collected to-
—
—
and other refuse separately.
Garbage and dead animals were transferred to fiat cars at a central
station and taken to a reduction plant about 20 miles from the city
limits. 'Ashes and other refuse were used for filling low places in
gether; ashes
the suburbs.
Cincinnati, Ohio.
—^Ashes,
waste paper, and other refuse were
collected together.
Garbage and dead animals were reduced at works just outside the
Other refuse was used to fill in lowlands. The average haul was IJ miles.
city limits.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
116
Milwaukee, Wis.
— Garbage was placed in metal cans and collected
by the healtb department.
Ashes and rubbish were collected by
receptacle.
the board of public works.
Garbage was burned at a municipal plant located at the mouth
of the harbor within the city limits.
Ashes and rubbish we're used
for filUng in lowlands.
New
Orleans, La.
—
Los Angeles, Cal. Garbage and dead animals were collected
Ashes and other refuse were collected in the same
separately.
—Garbage and ashes were collected in separate
Garbage was burned in an incinerator within the city
refuse, 2 miles.
receptacles.
Garbage was loaded on barges, taken down the river, and dumped.
Ashes were used for filling low places within the city. Dead animals were taken to a rendering plant.
Washington, D. C. Garbage, ashes, and rubbish were kept
—
limits,
and
owned by the city. Dead animals were burned in private furnaces.
Ashes and other refuse were used for filling lowlands in the city.
The average haul for dead animals was 3J miles; and for other
Worcester, Mass.
from the center
Seattle,
Wash.
—^Garbage Iwas hauled to the poor farm, 2J miles
of the city,
and fed
to swine.
— Refuse was collected by licensed scavengers paid
by householders, and was dumped on
tide-water
flats
within the
separate.
city limits.
Garbage was reduced at Cherry Run Hill near Alexandria, Va.
Ashes were used for filling lowlands in various parts of the city,
especially along the river front. Waste paper and other rubbish
was hauled to dump at Benning by a contractor.
Newark, N. J. Garbage, ashes, and all other refuse were collected
Memphis, Tenn. Refuse was collected in carts by the city.
Garbage was burned within the city, dead animals were thrown
into the river, and ashes were used for filling low places.
Omaha, Nebr. Kitchen garbage and dead animals were collected
by a contractor under contract with the health department, without
separately.
expense to the city or the householder.
Garbage and dead animals were reduced in a rendering plant
outside the city. All other refuse was disposed of by householders.
New Haven, Conn. Garbage was hauled out of the city to farms.
Waste paper and dead cats and dogs were collected by the street
—
Garbage was reduced at privately owned works, being carted
from 1 to 2J miles and then transported 1 mile in scows. Ashes
were used for filling lowlands within the city limits. Waste paper
was sorted, baled, and sold to paper manufacturers.
Minneapolis, Minn. Garbage and all other combustible material
were deposited in the same receptacle, ashes being kept separate.
Ashes were used to fill low places within the city limits, other
refuse being burned in a crematory located within the city near
The average haul to this plant was 3J
its northern boundary.
—
miles.
Jersey City,
N.
J.
—Garbage,
ashes,
and waste paper were
col-
—
—
department.
Cats and dogs were buried on dumps, and horses and cattle were
rendered in two reduction plants at AUington, Conn.
Scranton, Pa. Garbage and small animals were burned in a
plant owned by the city, and within the city limits. Ashes were
carted about IJ miles to lowlands. Large animals were taken to
reduction works, 5 miles outside the city limits.
Syracuse, N. Y. Garbage and dead animals were collected
separately; ashes, waste paper, and other refuse, together.
Garbage and dead animals were reduced at a plant within the
Ashes and other refuse were used for filling lowlands. The
city.
—
—
lected together.
All refuse except dead animals was carted to lowlands and
dumped. Animals were taken to a reduction plant about 4 miles
from the
—
city.
—
Ky. All refuse was collected in the same receptacle
and was dumped on lowlands both within and without the city.
The average haul was 1 mile.
Indianapolis, Ind. Garbage, waste paper, tin cans, and dead
average haul was 2 miles.
Garbage, ashes, waste paper,
Paterson, N. J.
animals were collected separately.
Garbage and dead animals were reduced at private works 3 miles
south of the city. Ashes were used to fill lowlands. Waste paper
and tin cans were sold.
Garbage was collected and sold for feed and
St. Paul, Minn.
All other refuse was disposed of by the
fertilizer by the city.
the city limits. Ashes were used for filling lowlands. Waste
paper was sold by the contractors. Small animals were buried,
householders.
grounds.
Louisville,
—
—
—
Providence, R. I. Garbage was collected separately, carted to
Rehoboth, Mass., and fed to swine. Dead animals were rendered
at works at Warwick, R. I.
Garbage was collected in covered metal wagons;
Rochester, N. Y.
ashes, waste paper, and other refuse, separately.
Garbage was reduced at the Rochester Company plant, within
the city limits, the average haul being 2 miles. Ashes, waste paper,
and other refuse were used for filling lowlands within the city
Dead animals were reduced at a privately owned plant
limits.
with butchers' and market wastes. The average haul was 2 miles.
Kansas City, Mo.- Refuse was deposited in metal cans, from
—
—
which
it
was collected and dumped into the Missouri river.
Garbage, ashes, waste paper, and dead animals
Toledo, Ohio.
—
were collected separately.
Garbage was burned within the city
filling
limits.
Ashes were used
for
lowlands.
—
Denver, Colo. Garbage was collected separately and fed to swine.
Ashes were deposited on dumping grounds. Dead animals were
reduced by a contractor. Other refuse was dumped into the
Platte River.
—
Columbus, Ohio. Garbage was collected separately and was
buried outside, and about 3 miles from the center of the city.
—
etc.,
were placed
by the householders and collected separately.
Garbage was reduced at a plant owned by contractors, within
in separate cans
Large animals were sold
outside the city.
Portland, Oreg.
—Garbage
owners.
collectors
by the
householders.
Garbage was incinerated.
paid
by
was collected by licensed
Ashes were dumped on crematory
—Garbage,
ashes, and waste paper were collected
and hauled to dumps within the city limits.
Dead animals were buried outside the city. The average haul was
Atlanta, Ga.
in the
same
receptacle,
1 mile.
—
Garbage was collected separately and burned
owned by the city, the average haul being 3J miles.
Waste paper was sold to a contractor. Large dead animals were
reduced by a private concern. Ashes and other refuse were used
Richmond, Va.
at a crematory
for filling lowlands.
—
Fall River, Mass. Garbage was collected by a contractor, ashes
and other dry refuse by city collectors at the city's expense.
Garbage was carted to piggeries in adjoining towns, and ashes
and other dry refuse taken to city dumps.
Nashville, Tenn.
Garbage, ashes, and rubbish were collected by
—
the city scavenger.
Part of the garbage was flushed out by sewer and part fed to hogs.
Ashes and rubbish were used for filling lowlands within the city.
Dayton, Ohio. Garbage and small dead animals were collected
together, as were ashes, waste paper, and other refuse.
Garbage and dead animals were treated at a reduction plant
inside the city limits, 2 miles from the city hall. Ashes, waste
paper, and other refuse were hauled 1 mile and dumped on lowlands in the city.
—
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
Orand Rapids, Mcft.—Garbage, waste paper,
separately
by
The
the city.
collection of aahea
were collected
was paid for by the
etc.,
Troy,
117
—All garbage, ashes, and other refuse were collected
N. Y.
Garbage, waste paper, and other rubbish were taken to a burner
on an island in the Grand River, below the city, but within the
city limits. Ashes were dumped on lowlands within the city
dumped on Center Island, in the Hudson River,
and the north end dump, except about 10 per cent which was
treated at a private reduction plant on Center Island.
Oakland, Cal. Refuse was collected by contractors, who delivered it at the city wharf, whence it was taken to sea and dumped
limits.
at the
householders.
Cambridge, Mass.
—All kinds
were collected separately.
Ashes were used for filling low-
of refuse
Garbage was sold in the^city.
lands in the city.
together,
and
all
—
expense
Lawrence,
of the city.
Mass.
—Garbage
and waste paper from
stores
were
Ashes, including waste paper from houses,
collected separately.
Albany, N. Y. Garbage was collected by farmers and market
gardeners. Ashes, waste paper, and other rubbish, were collected
together by licensed cartmen, and dead animals by city collectors.
Garbage was used for hog feed and fertilizer on farms and market
and dead animals were collected together.
Garbage was hauled in city wagons to the health yard, from
which it was taken by private individuals and fed to animals;
dead animals were given to reduction works; ashes were used to
fill in lowlands in adjoining towns; waste paper from stores was
gardens, outside the city limits.
sold.
cans,
—
Ashes, waste paper, and other
rubbish were used for filling lowlands within the city limits. Dead
animals were reduced in special works with butchers' and market
wastes. The average haul was 3 miles. Night soil was buried in
trenches, the average haul being 4 miles.
Hartford, Conn.
—Garbage, ashes, and waste
paper were collected
Garbage was spread on dumps in the outskirts of the city, animals
were buried, and other combustible, materials were burned.
Lowell, Mass.
Ashes and paper were collected in the same
—
receptacle; other refuse, separately.
Part of the garbage was burned in crematories, and part was sold
and ashes were dumped on public dumps, all within the
to farmers,
city limits.
Reading, Pa.
by the
Mass.
— Refuse
was taken from premises by city
Garbage was sold to farmers; ashes were used for filling in lowwas sold, and the remainder, with other
combustible refuse, burned.
Savannah, Ga. All garbage, ashes, and waste paper were collected by the city, the garbage and waste paper being collected
separately from ashes.
All garbage, ashes, etc., were shipped to the county poor farm
outside the city limits, and sold to the county for fertilizer.
Duluth, Minn. All combustible material was kept separate and
burned. Ashes and tins were dumped, inside the city limits, on
land adjoining the incinerating plant.
Norfolk, Va. Garbage was collected separately; other refuse,
lands; part of waste paper
—
separately.
rately
Somerville,
wagons.
—Garbage
and dead animals were
collected sepa-
—
together.
city.
Garbage and small animals were reduced in a plant owned by
the contractors, outside the city limits. Ashes and waste paper
were used for filling lowlands, mostly outside the city limits.
Trenton, N. J. Ashes were collected separately; garbage and
—
waste paper, together.
Garbage and waste paper were burned together at the city garbage
plant, within the city limits, being carted IJ to 3 miles. Ashes were
disposed of inside the city limits, being carted about 1 mile.
Bridgeport, Conn.
Garbage and dead animals were collected by
a contractor, and reduced at a plant 3^ miles from the center of the
—
cil^.
Wilmington, Del.
—
—Garbage, ashes, and waste paper were collected
separately.
Garbage and dead animals were burned at a crematory owned by
the city; waste paper was sold and other refuse was used for filling
All refuse was hauled, on an average, 1 mile and disposed of within the limits of the city.
Hoboken, N. J. Gajbage, ashes, and waste paper were collected
together and dumped on marsh lands; dead animals were reduced
at a plant 6 miles from the city.
Yonkers, N. Y. During the summer months ashes and garbage
were collected separately, but in winter all refuse was collected
in lowlands.
—
—
together.
Garbage and dead animals were burned; all other refuse was
taken to public dumps within the city limits.
Garbage and dead animals were collected sepaUtica, N. Y.
—
and other refuse, together.
Garbage and dead animals were hauled, on an average, 2J miles,
and reduced in a private plant just outside the city limits; ashes
and other refuse were hauled 2 miles, and used for filling in low-
Garbage and dead animals were reduced at a plant situated within
the city limits. Ashes were used for filling in lowlands, and waste
paper was burned.
Camden, N. J. ^Ashes, waste paper, and other refuse were col-
rately; ashes
lected together; garbage, separately.
lands within the limits of the city.
—
Garbage was hauled, on an average, Ij miles to the city crematory,
within the city limits. Dead animals were carted about IJ miles
to a dump within the city limits and burned. Ashes, waste paper,
etc., were carted about the same distance and used for filling in
lowlands within the city limits.
Lynn, Mass. Part of the refuse was sold and part was dumped
at sea, 10 miles from the city.
New Bedford, Mass. Garbage was collected in covered, watertight steel carts; dead horses and cattle, in special wagons; ashes
—
—
and dry
refuse, in carts.
Garbage, horses, and cattle were disposed of by reduction by
steam process; and ashes and dry refuse, at the city dumps, 3 miles
from the
city.
—
Garbage was collected separately; ashes
Springfield, Mass.
waste paper, together.
and
Garbage was sold to farmers, or dumped; ashes and waste paper
were used for filling in lowlands within the city limits.
Manchester,
N. H.
—Garbage
ashes, waste paper, etc.,
by the
was collected by a contractor;
city.
Garbage was fed to the contractor's stock; ashes, waste paper, etc.,
were used for filling in lowlands; and dead animals were buried.
Schenectady, N. Y. Garbage, ashes, etc., were collected together,
hauled, on an average, IJ miles, and buried in trenches on city
—
dumps within
the city limits.
—
Garbage was collected separately; dead animals were collected in covered wagons.
Garbage was hauled about 2 miles and burned in a crematory
near the city limits; dead animals were hauled, on an average, 6
miles, and reduced with butchers' and market wastes in a special
Evansville,
Ind.
reduction plant 4 miles outside the city limits.
San Antonio, Tex. Garbage was hauled to city dumps outside
the limits of the city and burned.
Elizabeth, N. J.
Garbage, ashes, and waste paper were collected
—
—
separately
by the city; dead animals were collected by a contractor.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
118
Garbage, ashes, and waste paper were carted from !{ to 2 miles
and marshes inside the city limits, and burned.
to lowlands
Waterbury, Conn.
—Garbage and dead animals were collected
contractor; waste paper, with sweepings,
by
by
the street department.
Garbage and dead animals were burned at a crematory owned by
the city; waste paper, ashes, and other refuse were taken to dumps.
Salt Lake City, Utah. In the business section all combustible
refuse was collected together; ashes and other noncombustible
refuse were collected together.
In the residential section, solid
materials only were collected together.
Combustible materials collected in the business district were
hauled, on an average, 3 miles, and burned at the city crematory
inside the city limits; ashes and other refuse from the business
district were dumped outside the limits of the city.
Solid materials collected in residential section were dumped.
HovMon, Tex. Garbage and waste paper were collected together.
Part of the garbage was burned; the reihainder, covered with
earth, was used for filling ravines inside the city limits.
Harrighurg, Pa. Garbage was collected in metallic cans; adies,
waste paper, and other refuse, in open wagons.
All refuse was taken to the city dump or used for filling iowlanda.
Charleston, S. C. Garbage, ashes,' and waste paper were collected together and were dumped on city lots or used for filling
lowlands within the city; dead animals were hauled outside the
—
—
—
—
city limits
and
bioried.
—Garbage was collected by the city, and was fed
to swine at a farm connected with the' city almshouse.
Youngstown, Ohio. —Garbage was collected separately; ashes,
Portland, Me.
tin cans, etc., together.
Garbage was burned at a crematory; ashes, tin cans, etc., were
hauled 1 or IJ miles to public and private dumps outside the city
limits.
Dallas, Tex.
—Refuse other than garbage, ashes, waste paper, and
dead animals were collected in double wagons by the city and
dumped outside the eity limits; dead animals were burned inside
the city limits.
Terre Haute, Ind.
Garbage and dead animals were collected in
the same receptacle and burned in a crematory outside the city.
Fort Wayne, Ind. Garbage was collected separately and hauled,
on an average, 2 miles, and, with dead animals, was burned at the
city crematory inside the city limits.
—
—
—
Holyohe, Mass. Each kind of refuse was collected separately.
Garbage was disposed of by the contractor; waste paper and ashes
were used fdt filling in lowlands within the city.
Brockton, Mass. Part of the garbage was fed to swine on the city
farm, IJ miles from the center of the city; the remainder was sold
to fanhers. Ashes were put on city dumps centrally located.
.Dead animals were rendered by the contractor at a plant near the
—
—
;
—
near the center of the city.
—Part
Butte, Mont.
part disposed of
of the refuse wag collected by the city and
by the householders, who must keep two cans one
—
dry refuse and one for wet garbage.
Dead animals, manure, etc., were burned; table refuse was taken,
by ranchmen; and all other refuse was used to fill in low places
for
inside the city.
—
—
Pawtucket, R. I. Garbage was collected separately and fed to
swine outside the city limits, and dead animals were rendered.
Johnstown, Pa. Refuse was collected by private individuals.
All combustible refuse was burned at an incinerating plant in the
suburbs.
Dubuque, Iowa.
other refuse was
Sioux
City,
—Garbage and dead animals were reduced, and
dumped
Iowa.
into the Mississippi river.
—^Ashes and garbage were collected separately.
Part of the refuse was dumped into the Missouri river and part
was burned on the river banks.
Augusta, Ga. Garbage, ashes, etc., were collected in the same
receptacle, dumped outside the linuts of the city, and burned.
Dead animals were reduced.
Mobile, .dfa.^-Garbage, ashes, and waste paper were collected
together, hauled, on an average, 1 mile, and used for filling in low
places inside the city limits
Dead animals were disposed of outside
—
.
the city limits.
—
Garbage, ashes, etc., were collected together,
Springfield, Ohio.
hauled about 2 miles, and dumped outside the limits of the city.
Dead animals were removed by a contractor.
Alleniown, Pa. Garbage was collected by the city, part being
fed to hogs owned by private, individuals and part; being burned
in the city crematory, IJ miles outside the city limits. Smaller
animals were removed by the city scavenger and were buried or
used for fertiUzer.
East St. Louis, III. Garbage was collected separately by the cityj
dead animals, by a contractor.
Garbage was diimped into the river; ashes were used for filling
in lowlands; and dead animals were reduced at a plant outside the
—
—
city limits.
—Kitchen garbage was collected by a contractor
Montgomery, Ala. —All kinds
refuse except dead animals were
Wheeling,
and burned
W. Va.
at the city crematory within the city limits.
of
collected together.
etc., were hauled, on an average, J mile and used
low places- within the city limits. Dead animals were
Garbage, aAes;
city limits.
—In
Covington, Ky.
summer, garbage, waste paper, and other
were collected together; ashes, separately. In winter all
was collected together.
Ashes weite used to fill lowlands inside the city, all other refuse
being burned at a crematory inside the city limits. The average
haul for all refuse was 1 mile.
Saginaw, Mich. From November 1 to March 1 ashes were collected by the city and were used in road building or dumped on
refuse
refuse
—
lowlands along the river.
Lincoln, Nebr.
—
^All
except dead animals
was disposed of by the householders,
unknown ownership and refuse from build-
refuse
of
owned by the city, which were removed under contract.
Spohane, Wash. Refuse was disposed of by the householders,
who were required to keep two cans one for combustible, the
other for noncombustible materials.
Lancaster, Pa. Garbage and small animals were collected by the
city, hauled about 1^ miles, and burned at the city crematory
ings
—
Birmingham, Ala. Garbage and ashes were collected together
and taken to a dump outside the city. Dead animals were buried.
Bayonne, N. J. Ashes, garbage, and waste paper were collected
together and dumped on marsh land animal refuse was reduced at
a plant at North Bergen, N. J.
South Bend, Ind. ^Waste paper and garbage were collected together, hauled from 3 to 20 blocks, aiud burned at the city crematory
—
—
within the city limits.
—
for filling in
buried outside the limits of the city.
Passaic,
N.
J.
—Garbage was
paper, etc., together.
collected separately; ashes, waste
i
Garbage and dead animals were buried within the city limits;
ashes, waste paper, etc., were us^d for filling in lowlands withia
the city limits. The haul for refuse was \ mile to 3 miles.
Davenport, Jotoa.—Refuse was transported about i mile by dump
boat and emptied into the Mississippi river.
Atlantic City, N. J. Refuse was collected by a contractor, hauled
about 1 mile to the city limits, and treated in a reduction plant.
Bay City, Mich. Ashes, waste paper, and other refuse were col-
—
—
lected together.
Ashes were used in repairing streets; paper and other refuse were
used as filling for lowlands.
York, Pa. Grarbage was collected in covered wagons; ashes and
other refuse in open wagons.
Ashes were used for filling lowlands.
—
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
Maiden, Mass.
Garbage was
—Refuse was collected separately.
sold,
city park!
Quincy, JZ/.— Garbage was collected separately from ashes and
rubbish.
Garbage was dumped on the river bank outside the city limits,
and ashes and rubbish were dumped in a ravine outside the city
limits.
—
—
Garbage, ashes, and other refuse were coland dumped on meadows. Small dead animals
were buried; large dead animals were reduced.
Sacramento, Cal. Garbage and waste paper, bottles, etc., were
collected together; dead animals and ashes, separately.
During the first ten months of the year garbage was hauled, on
an average, IJ miles, dumped, and covered with earth and lime;
during the last two months of the year garbage was burned at a
West Hoboken, N. J.
and ashes were dumped on lowlands in the
119
lected together
—
Pa. Garbage was collected separately; ashes, waste
and other refuse together.
Garbage was hauled about 3 miles outside the limits of the city
and fed to hogs; ashes, waste paper, and other refuse were dumped
crematory inside the city. From January to October, inclusive,
dead animals were buried; during November and December they
were burned. Ashes were dumped inside the city.
Pueblo, Colo. Garbage was collected by privatq individuals;
on lowlands within the city limits
Chelsea, Mass.
Garbage was collected separately and fed to
swine outside the city. Ashes were dumped on lowlands.
Salem, Mass. Garbage and dead animals were collected separately by the health department.
Ashes and waste paper were collected together by the street department.
Garbage was sold to private individuals. Small dead animals
were buried; large dead animals were removed by private individuals to reduction works; and ashes and waste paper were dumped
on lowlands within the city limits.
Newton, Mass. Garbage, ashes, and waste paper were collected
ashes,
Chester,
paper,
—
—
—
separately.
—Garbage
was collected separately and fed to
swine on a farm 7 miles from the city. Ashes were used to fill lowMass.
Jacksonville, Fla.
lected together;
—Garbage,
ashes,
and waste paper were
col-
dead animals, separately.
Part of the garbage, and dead animals, were burned in a crema-
The ashes together with garbage not burned were used
filling in
Garbage was fed
to hogs; ashes
for
lowlands within the city limits.
Rockford, III.
—Garbage was collected separately and hauled, on
an average, 2J miles outside the city limits and fed to hogs or spread
on the ground to be plowed tmder.
Ashes, waste paper, and other refuse were colKnoxville, Tenn.
lected by the city and hauled to dumps inside the city limits.
Galveston, Tex. ^Garbage and waste paper were collected by
scavengers, part of the refuse being placed in separate receptacles.
Both were hauled about 1 mile, on an average, to the city dump,
within the city limits.
New Britain, Conn. Garbage was collected separately and fed
to swine outside the city limits.
Chattanooga, ITenn.— Refuse was collected by the city scavenger
and hauled, on an average, IJ miles to the city dump on the bank
—
Everett, Mass.
Garbage was collected by contractors. Ashes
and waste paper were collected together by the city.
Garbage was sold to farmers. Ashes and waste paper were used
for filling lowlands,
Taunton, Mass.
istration
and fed
—Garbage was collected by the city farm adminto swine.
—
—
Tennessee river, at the city limits.
7.—Garbage was collected by farmers and fed to
swine, or dumped at the most convenient places. There was no
municipal system of refuse disposal.
Fitchburg, Mass. Garbage was collected by a contractor. Ashes
and other refuse were collected together by the city.
Auburn, N. Y. Garbage was collected in covered wagons and
buried in trenches near the city limits; dead animals were hauled,
on an average, 2 miles to special reduction works within the city
of the
Woonsocket, R.
—
—
and reduced with butchers' and market wastes.
Macon, Co.—All garbage, ashes, and waste paper were collected
in one receptacle and hauled about IJ miles to the city dump, inDead animals were buried outside the city limits, and burned.
limits
side the city.
/Z?.— Garbage, ashes, and waste paper were collected sepa-
rately.
Garbage was hauled, on an average, If miles to the city cremamile outside the city limits. Ashes were used to fill in low
places or were hauled to the dump. The greater part of the waste
paper was burned.
tory, J
Ashes were used
for filling
wherever
needed.
—
Newport, Ky. Garbage was collected separately; ashes, waste
and other refuse, together.
Garbage was hauled about f mile outside the city limits and
buried under 4 feet of earth. Ashes, waste paper, and other refuse
were hauled, on an average, 1 mile, and used to fill lowlands both
inside and outside the city limits. Dead animals were buried.
La Crosse, Wis. Garbage was collected separately; ashes, cans,
and paper,
together.
Garbage was partly delivered to farmers and partly.dumped into
Ashes, waste paper, etc., were used for filling lowlands
within the city limits.
San Juan, P. R. ^All refuse was collected in the same receptacle,
taken to swamps inside the city limits, and there burned or buried.
sewers.
—
Table
—
Joliet,
were dumped on low places with-
in the city.
—
lands.
tory.
contractors.
paper,
Garbage was fed to swine on the farm of the contractor, 5 miles
from the city. Ashes were dumped on lowlands in the city.
Haverhill,
—
by
58.
—
Sewerage and sewage disposal. In its relation to the
health of a city, the sewerage problem is second only
The first thing to be
to that of the water supply.
considered is the quick and complete removal of the
sewage as essential to the health of each city, after
which the disposal of the sewage becomes an important
question not only for the city itself, but for other cities
situated on the same body of water and drawing their
water supply therefrom.
There is an increasing desire on the part of the city
officials directly interested to
give serious considera-
on the sewerage systems and methods of sewage disposal. The Census
Report for 1905 presented a schedule designed to be
tion to the preparation of data
used as a basis for official reports. This schedule,
which was approved by the Boston Society of Civil
Engineers, aims to secure statistical information which
wiU permit of an intelligent study of the question of
sewage collection and disposal in its relation to the
health of the municipality, and will give an insight into
the various plans of sewage pm-ification and disposal.
It has been adopted by a few of the more progressive
New England
and it is hoped that as the mubecome more fully alive to the im-
cities,
nicipal authorities
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
120
portance of comparable statistics on the sewerage
and sewage disposal a standard schedule will
be generally adopted. The data presented in Table 58
are not as complete as desired, because many cities
have no accurate and complete figures relating to the
kinds and lengths of sewers and the number of house
systfems
connections constructed' in the earlier years of their
history.
A complete analysis of the data for 1905, by Mr.
Moses N. Baker, appears as an appendix in the census
report for that year, and his explanations of some of
the terms used in connection with the tables both in
the former and in the present report are here briefly
reproduced
—
Sewerage systems andmaterials of sewers. Sewerage systems convey
sewage either with or without surface or storm water from streets,
In the separate system of sewerage one set of
roofs, and yards.
conduits receives and conveys domestic and perhaps manufacturing
wastes, and a second and larger set of conduits conveys storm water.
These two sets of conduits are called sanitary and storm sewers,
respectively. In the combined system of sewerage a single network
conveys both sewage proper and storm water.
House connection. As here used, the term "house" means any
building, regardless of its use, which has separate connection with
—
the sewers.
—
Sewer flushing. In sewers of flat gradient or very gentle elope,
at the upper ends of small branch sewers, particularly sanitary
sewers, deposits of mineral and other heavy solids are likely to
Large combined sewers may be entered by men and the
occur.
deposits removed, or so loosened as to be carried along by the liquid
sewage. In the smaller sewers resort must be had to other devices,
the most common of which is some form of flushing. Where it is
and
desirable to have the flushing done at stated intervals, an automatic
flush tank
may be
used.
The
recurrent flushing action
is
here
secured by either a siphon or a tilting or tipping tank, fed and diaby a small stream of water from the city
waterworks mains. Automatic flush tanks were once considered an
chaiged, in either case,
indispensable adjunct of the separate system of sewerage, but of late
more reliance has been placed on flushing with hose attached to fire
hydrants or to special connections with the city water mains. Hose
Whenever
is also sometimes used for flushing combined sewers.
employed, the hose may be used either at regular intervals or only
when stoppages occur. By temporarily stopping off a portion of a
sewer, generally at a manhole, the sewage water may be backed up
to form a head, and when released a flushing effect is secured.
Water supplied from the city mains may be used in the same general
way, or water may be drawn to a manhole in a cart or wagon and
suddenly discharged into a sewer for flushing purposes.
Manufacturing wastes. A large part, and often the most serious
part, of the pollution of streams, lakes, and other waters that is now
attracting so much attention is due to the wastes from a number and
variety of manufacturing establishments. This is true, notwithstanding the extent to which the utilization of by-products has been
carried in some of our industries. In many cities large volumes of
manufacturing wastes are produced that never enter the public
sewers, because the plants that produce these wastes are on the
Some cities discourage
water front, and the pollution is thus direct
and others encourage the discharge of manufacturing wastes into the
public sewers, depending more or less upon the volume and character of the wastes, the available capacity of the sewers, the proximity of the flnal outlet or outlets of the sewerage systems, and
whether or not there is a desire to keep the manufacturing wastes
—
.
out of the adjacent natural waters.
A normal increase,
cities, is
indicated
consistent with the growth of the
by the portion
shows the length of sewers
in miles.
of the table
The
which
large appar-
is due to the fact that
the figures for 1907 include what was in 1905 reported
for both Pittsburg and Allegheny, the sewer mileage
ent increase for Pittsburg, Pa.,
reported for Pittsburg in 1907 representing an actual
increase of but 7.3 per cent over the combined total
for the
two
cities in 1905.
The
total length of sewers
of all classes for the 154 cities reported in 1905
and
in
1907 was 22,531.9 miles in 1907 and 20,381.5 miles in
1905, an increase of 2,150.4 miles, or 10.6 per cent.
Of the total sewer mUeage reported for 1907, 26.8 per
cent was built of brick, 69.7 per cent of tile, and 3.5
per cent of all other materials. Classified by character,
17,122.8 miles, or 74.9 per cent of the total mileage,
combined sewers; 4,563.2 miles, or 20 per
cent of the total, of sanitary sewers; and 1,180.4 miles,
or 5.2 per cent of the total, of storm sewers.
consisted of
Of the 158
132 reported 2,580,572 house conmany cases being estimates.
The disposition of the volume of sewage in some of
the cities in such a manner that the health and water
supply of the community may not be endangered
cities,
nections, the figures in
presents a serious engineering problem.
The geographic location of the cities occasionally increases
the difl[iculty of this disposal and necessitates methods
of purification and the pumping of all or a part of the,
sewage. The volume of sewage is also materially
affected by the nature of the manufacturing industries
within the city. An effort was made to secure th^e
percentage of sewage formed by manufacturing wastes,
but data were secured from only 39 cities, a majority
of the percentages for these cities being only estimates.
Not only do the manufacturing wastes incretee the
volume of sewage, but in some instances the nature of
these wastes complicates the application of 4)urification
processes.
In a majority of the cities no effort has been made
measure the volume of sewage. Although the
figures reported in answer to this inquiry are largely
estimates, they are approximately correct, especially
where a large portion of the sewage is pumped. In
England the average daily flow of sewage is about 25
gallons per capita, and in London it is 34 gallons. In
the United States, owing to the free use of water and to
manufacturing wastes, the average daily flow is much
higher; for a number of the smaller cities in Massachusetts it is estimated at 100 gallons, and for the
South Metropolitan District of Boston and nearby
cities it is over 250 gallons.
The average per capita
in a total of 24 cities in Group II is very close to
to
120 gallons.
In 33 cities the sewage is pumped and in 18 cities
methods of sewage purification have been installed.
121
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
Table XLIV. —Per cent of increase or dtcrease in character of paving:
purification an additional
In either pumping or
expense is involved, but in
many
cities
1905 to 1907.
one or both
of these processes are necessary in order to dispose of
the sewage satisfactorily.
The description already given of the several methods
of flushing sufficiently explains the terms used in the
table in describing the method of sewer flushing.
Sewers.
the
—^The following reprint from the Journal
Association
XLII,
is
deemed
of
Engineering
Societies,
of interest to city officials
of
Volume
and
stu-
dents of the problems pertaining to sewerage and sewage disposal
The sanitary section of the Boston Society of Civil Engineers has
compiled sewerage statistics for 46 cities, and of this number, 33
cities in the United States and 1 in Canada have over 30,000 population.
In support of a uniform standard
the bulletin has the following:
of reports
"The
by sewer departments
number of
increase in the
very encouraging and it is to be hoped
more general cooperation with the committee
cities furnishing statistics is
that there will be a stUl
in furnishing statistics for 1908.
While the information collected is of much value, the most benethe work of the committee should be the establishment of improved systems of recording important data, and the
committee takes this opportunity of urging upon city officials having
"
ficial results of
of, or connection with, sewer departments the importance
keeping their records in the form suggested by this society, so
that they may be always available. The statistics which might
thus be obtained will be of great value to engineers and officials
generally, but of much greater value to the local officials in charge
because of the more intimate and accurate knowledge which they
wUl have of the important data relating to their respective departments."
charge
of
Table
59.
—
Area and length of streets. Table 59 shows the area
and the length in miles of paved and
improved streets. The classification according to
character of paving or improvement is satisfactory for
but few cities, as the greater number keep no records
containing this information and therefore have
recourse to estimates whose accuracy varies. Streets
for which the character of the paving or improvement
reported was not such as to put them in any specified
class of streets are included in the column "all other."
It is probable that this column includes large areas
which might more properly have been assigned to one
or more of the preceding columns had sufficient information been obtainable, as well as other large areas
which, though graded, were covered with little or no
paving material and should have been classed as
"unimproved." The change in the character of
material used in paving is shown in the following table
in square yards
CHAEACTEB Or PAVING.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
122
more complete reports. Of these,. 13,596, or 76.8 per
cent, were on grade, the corresponding percentage for
1905 having been 78.7. In the cities of Group I, 61.1
per cent were on grade as compared \vith 65.7 per cent
in 1905 in those of Group II, 82.5 per cent as compared
with 79.9 per cent in 1905; in those, of Group III, 83.2
per cent as compared with 85.7 per cent in 1905; and
in those of Group IV, 91.6 per cent as compared with
91.4 per cent in 1905.
The most populous cities,
therefore, show not only the greatest progress, but the
;
an accompaniment, apparently, of more moderate
payments for outlays; for
increased expenses iu
Group
I,
with
while the cities of
in that year but 1.5
per
capita
outlays
1907, showed
average, the correfive-year
per cent higher than the
II was 93 for
Group
sponding percentage for those of
of
Group IV, 34.
those of Group III, 58; and for those
There is here a suggestion of varying municipal policy
in the care of highways, according to which some cities
spend comparatively large amounts from year to year
is
increases proportionately in
;
greatest rate of progress in the elimination of grade
for repairs, while others
crossings.
damage
Table
Payments for
way
outlays.
selected
—The
60.
highway expenses and for highhighway expenses for each
total
shown in Table 5, omitting those for snow and
removal,
street sprinkling, and miscellaneous purice
poses, and so includiag only those for supervision and
for repairs, are reported in the first two columns of
Table 60, the annual average for the five years from 1903
to 1907, inclusive, being compared with the expense
for 1907; the next two columns show the total outlays
for highway construction and renewal, the annual
average for the same period being compared with the
outlays for 1907. The following six columns show the
total expenses, total outlays, and total expenses and
outlays combined per capita for 1907 and the annual
average per capita for the five years from 1903 to 1907.
The last six colimins show the total expenses, total
outlays, and total expenses and outlays combined per
100 square yards of improved streets, and the annual
average per 100 square yards of improved streets for
the three years 1903, 1905, and 1907, the annual averages for these three years -differing in most cases from
those for the five years from 1903 to 1907, being in the
majority of cases smaller.
An examination of the table wiU show that the variation between the expenses and outlays reported for the
different groups of cities for 1907 and the annual averages with which these payments are compared is uniformly in the same direction, whether the comparison
related to total payments, payments per capita, or
payments per unit of area. Whichever basis of comparison is employed, the outlays for 1907 exceed the
annual average with which they are compared for each
group of cities; the expenses for 1907 exceed the annual
average for the cities of Group I, but are smaller for
each of the other groups; while in the case of expenses
and outlays combined the difference is in the same
The exception which
-direction as for outlays alone.
the cities of Group I constitute to the tendency which
is shown in the case of the other three groups for the
expenses of 1907 to be smaller than the average with
which they are compared, does not result from the preponderating influence of a single city, for it would not
be considerably altered were New York excluded. It
city, as
make
fewer repairs, allowing
to accumulate until resurfacing
is
required,
denominated "renewals" and treated as
Perhaps also the precise distinction between
outlays.
expenses and outlays has not been strictly observed
in all cases, the same work appearing as an "expense"
These unin one city and an "outlay" in another.
certainties, joined with the irregularities in group
averages of which the high figures for outlays in Group
II, resulting from extraordinarily extensive improvements in Seattle, furnish a striking example render it
impracticable to decide whether per capita expenses
or outlays for highways increase or decrease with poputhis being
—
—
The relation-appears, allowing for the country
road payments included in Group I, approximately conOn the other hand, the average outlays, as
stant.
well as the average expenses, per 100 square yards of
improved streets, clearly increases with population,
'as appears by the excess shown for the cities of Group I
as compared with the other groups, indicating that
either class of expenditure varies according to population rather than according to the street area of the
lation.
respective cities.
Table
61.
cleaning. —^That the
cities for which data are
Street
annually reported by the Bureau of the Census are
giving more attention than formerly to records of their
street cleaning operations is clearly shown by a comparison of Table 61 for 1907 with Table 40 for 1905, a
part of which presents the corresponding data secured
for that year.
The form of this presentation has been
changed in some particulars. Table 61 shows the
areas cleaned by hand, by machine, and by flushing,
under subheads indicating the number of times per
week the different methods were applied to stated
areas.
It also shows payments for the average expenses of street cleaning per 1,000 square
yards subject
to regular cleaning, per 1,000,000 square yards cleaned,
and per
entirely
capita.
The data obtained, however, are not
comparable in all cases.
Table.
Street sprinkling.
—Table
62.
62 presents data concernby the cities, either di-
ing the street sprinkhng done
by their departments or by contract, and by
private parties, and shows the number of employees
rectly
and the areas sprinkled under each of these systems.
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
This report is far from complete, because in many
cities property owners make their own arrangements
for street sprinkling, the cities having no detailed
record of the work done.
Some of the apparent irregularities in this table are
explained by conditions peculiar to the individual city
in respect to street sprinkling arrangements.
In
Baltimore, for example, the city sprinkles the entrances of parks only, while the streets are sprinkled
by the
railway company by means of car
The system of sprinkling by street cars
prevails in a number of other cities.
In addition to
the area reported for Chicago, there are more than 50
private associations making contracts with individuals
street
sprinklers.
for sprinkling,
from which no statements could be
secured.
The plan of using oil to lay the dust, which has been
inaugurated in the parks of several cities in recent
years, is reported as being successfully applied to
streets to a limited extent.
For Kansas City, Mo., it
was reported that the entire system of parkways and
boulevards was oUed in 1907 by the city park board.
There were two applications of oil on 375,415 square
yards, and one appUcation on 259,730 square yards.
In New Bedford, Mass., the city, as an experiment,
made one appKcation of an oil preparation on an area
In San Francisco
of 63,117 square yards of streets.
the driveways in Golden Gate Park were oiled; and
in Chicago many boulevards and park roads were'
macadam.
The method of sprinkling employed
oiled
in the cities re-
porting the same, exclusive of the large
sprinkling done by private arrangement,
ported by groups of
Table XLV.
— Number
amount
is
of
here re-
cities
of
street
cities,
by groups, reporting agencies for
sprinkling: 1907.
123
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
124
charged the
by the
city.
cost of coal
The rate for gas
and labor in the
the city pays the expense of
lighting
is
affected
Sometimes
lighting the lanij)s, and
cities.
in other cities these expenses are included as a part of
the contract covered
by the yearly
The yearly
rate.
rates per light are, however, of interest regardless of
the minor fluctuations caused by the conditions mentioned.
In using the yearly rates for lights as the basis
comparing the payments of one city with those of
it would be weU to know the rates paid by
private consumers in these cities. It is possible that
in some of the cities enjoying low rates for street lighting more than the average rate is charged for private
Ughting, the city being allowed a low rate for its street
lighting as partial compensation for the franchise, and
private consumers being charged a rate higher than
would otherwise prevail. The rates charged private
consumers are not available for the purpose of demonstrating to what extent this system prevails, but they
are essential to an exact statement of the relative
in
another,
merits of the lighting systems of different
Some
cities
districts
which
is
cities.
have a system of hghting the business
which is particularly effective, the credit for
due to the local merchants, who realize the
advertising possibilities of the plan in addition to its
utiUtarian advantages. Under this arrangement clus-
and four inclosed incandescent electric
upon heavy pedestals 8 to 10 feet
which are established three and four to the
ters of three
lights are installed
in height,
block on each side of the street in the business section
of the city.
The first city to install this system was
Los Angeles, and since then Minneapolis and St. Paul
have adopted it and other progressive cities have it
under consideration.
The
following table indicates the
which in 1907 had Hghts
Table XL VII.
Number of
cities,
by groups,
street lights:
GROUP OP
CITIES.
number
of cities
of the kind indicated:
1907.
udng
specified hinds of
DESCRIPTION OF GENERAL TABLES.
125
bureau, statistics on public libraries and on school
Included under the head of "public grounds inside
over 30,000 population are presented in Tables 66 and 67 of this report. These
tables are limited to those libraries which are supported in whole or in part by the city governments,
thus excluding all society libraries and such public
libraries as are wholly maintained by individual subscriptions or by income from endowments not under
In preparing Tables .66 and 67 the object
city control.
has been to present data showing the library facilities
supplied by the city governments and to correlate
these, tables with the others presented in this report.
The Bureau of Education's report on libraries is
Umited to those having 5,000 volumes or over, and
but little effort was made to obtain data from the
smaller libraries. In preparing Table 67 all available
information on school libraries was used by the
Bureau of the Census, regardless of whether the
Ubrary had more or less than 5,000 volumes.
which in some
compare in size and attractiveness with the city
parks.
For public grounds outside the city limits,
which frequently are of greater extent than public
grounds inside the city limits, no data are reported in
libraries in cities of
Table
Public parks and grounds.
68.
—This table
differs
from
the corresponding table in the 1905 report in distinguishing "parks" which are maintained by the city
or other division of
from
all
government as places
of recreation
city limits " are street railway parks,
cities
The grounds outside the city include military reservations, street railway amusement ^ parks,
parks operated by breweries, etc. The area of public
Table 68.
grounds inside the city is the more important, since
such grounds relieve the congestion and afford open air
places to the most crowded portion of the city's
population.
The mere statement
of area, of course, does not indi-
cate the improvements which are being
parks.
Data regarding the
made
in the
cost of park maintenance
and extensions are given in those parts of Tables 5,
9, 34, and 35 which relate to expenditures for recreation.
The expenditures
for acquiring additional lands
and for beautifying the tracts already owned are being
supplemented by expenditures for the entertainment
and amusement of the public for example, there have
been established, as part of the park systems of the
larger cities, athletic fields, bath houses, gymnasiums,
and boating and skating ponds.
;
other governmental grounds and from pri-
Table
owned parks and grounds which may be used
by the pubhc. The absence of an exact terminology
vately
parks and public grounds causes confusion of
thought and makes the collection of rehable statistics
UntU a definite nomenclature is generally
difficult.
adopted by students of this subject, the Census Bureau
will employ the word "parks" in referring to those
grounds which are set apart and maintained for the
sole purpose of providing, free of charge, a place for
outdoor recreation for the general pubHc. All other
grounds which were reported as open to the public
have been tabulated under the title "public grounds."
This term is not wholly satisfactory, but is tentatively employed as a general title for those general
recreation and ornamental grounds not coming within
the classification of "parks" as here explained.
In connection with the area of public parks, a statement is given showing the percentage of the city's land
area which is given over to parks. This includes only
those public parks which are within the city limits, and
does not include areas under "private ownership."
The cities of Group I report, on the average, the highest
Of the individual cities, those showing
percentages.
the highest figures are Lynn, Mass., 15.3 per cent;
Rochester, N. Y., 11.9 per cent; and Boston, Mass.,
for
10.4 per cent.
69.
PZaygrrourM^s .^Playgrounds are maintained in 76 of
the 158 cities covered by this investigation, the cities
in Group I, which have the greatest congestion of popu-
reporting the largest number. The playgrounds included in this report are limited to those
equipped with special apparatus. In many of these
lation,
the children are directed and instructed, in order
may secure beneficial exercise from their games
and contests. The average area of a playground for
all cities was 3.7 acres, while for the four groups of
cities
that they
cities
the averages were
3.6,
6.3,
1.9,
and 4
acres,
respectively.
The
number
of playgrounds are those for
the
while
greatest area is reported for
public schools,
situated
in
parks owned by the cities.
the playgrounds
largest
In many of the cities for which no supervisors of
playgrounds are reported, supervision is vested in the
park board or the school board. In Boston, for instance, 18 playgrounds are in charge of the school committee and 5 are under direction of the park department.
Out of 73 cities reporting, 12 have regulations that
boys and girls shall play separately, 3 have such regulations for a part of their playgrounds, and 58 have
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
126
no such regulations. In 10 out of 72 cities reporting,
the smaller and larger children are separated; in one
city they are separated in certain playgrounds only
;
;
The
large increases for various cities are explained by
the fact that the appropriations reported include provisions for outlays as well as for maintenance.
In
Washington, for example, $75,000 was expended in
1907 for the purchase of additional land for playgrounds. Private contributions for the maintenance
of playgrounds and contributions of private associations toward the salaries of supervisors, directors, or
Table
Baths,
hathing
collections.
beaches,
cities.
70.
and
zoological
paries
and
—Table 70 shows the number of baths and
bathing beaches, together with the attendance at the
same, and the data gathered on zoological parks and
collections.
From 1905 to 1907 the reported number
of bathing beaches increased from ^4 to 53 swimming
pools, from 56 to 61; and all-the-year baths, from 15
to 78; while the reported number of floating baths
decreased from 47 to 39, and the number of gymnasiums from 52 to 48. These changes are doubtless
;
due partly to differences in classification for the two
years for which -statistics are reported. The total bathing attendance increased from 19,158,562 in 1905 to
29,204,838 in 1907, an increase of 10,046,276, or 52.4
per cent. The number of cities reporting zoological
parks increased from 42 in 1905 to 52 in 1907, but this
increase is due partly to the fact that some parks were
reported in 1907 which were omitted in 1905.
Table
—
71.
Building permits issued. Table 71 shows separately
number of permits issued and the proposed
expenditures for new buildings and for alterations and
repairs.
The figures here reported cover the fiscal
year and thus vary somewhat from commercial
figures based on the building operations for the calendar year. Owing to some variation in the method of
reporting in a number of cities, and the lack of complete records in other cities, it is not possible to make
accurate comparisons between all the municipalities
included in this investigation. The following summary of building statistics is based upon the complete
reports from 87 cities
the
— Number
of permits and proposed expenditures /(yr
cities; 1907 and 1905.
new buildings in 87
in
one city only children under 12 years of age are admitted and 60 cities have no such regulations. Kindergartners are employed in 21 out of 73 cities.
The city appropriations for playgrounds show an
increase of 43.7 per cent for 1907 over 1906.
An increase is reported by each group, except Group IV.
leaders are of material assistance to the
Table XLIX.
GBOUP OF
CITIES.
LIST OF CITY NUMBERS.
Throughout the general tables of this report the cities are arranged and numbered according to the estimated population on June 1, 1907, with the exception of San Juan, P. E., which is placed at the end of each
table.
For convenience in finding any particular city, the following list has been prepared, the cities being
arranged alphabetically, by states and territories, and the city number assigned to each being indicated:
CITY
AND
STATE.
City
Alabama:
City
STATE.
Mobile
Montgomery
Kansas City...
97
108
114
Topeka
Wichita
55
109
135
Kentucky:
Arkansas:
Rock
Covington
118
91
19
156
Louisville
Los Angeles
Oakland
Sacramento
San Francisco...
28
60
152
10
Colorado:
Denver
Pueblo
Connecticut:
Bridgeport
Hartford
New Britain
New Haven
Waterbury
26
153
Newport
Louisiana:
New Orleans
.
Maine:
Portland
Maryland:
Baltimore
Delaware:
Boston
Brockton
Cambridge
.
Chelsea
Everett
Fall River
Wilmington
District of Columbia:
Washington
Florida:
Jacksonville
^
Georgia:
Atlanta
Augusta
Macon
Savannah
52
Fitchburg
Haverhill.
15
133
Holyoke
Lawrence
Lowell
Lynn
39
107
147
63
Maiden
New
Bedford..
Newton
Salem
Somerville
Illinois:
Chicago
East St. Louis...
Joliet
Peoria
Quincy
Rockford
Springfield
Indiana:
Evansville
Fort Wayne
Indianapolis
South Bend
Terre Haute
Iowa:
Davenport
Des Moines
Dubuque
Sioux City
90196—10-
2
112
148
67
123
136
122
72
87
20
99
86
116
54
105
106
Springfield
Taunton
Worcester
Michigan:
Bay City
Detroit
Grand Rapids.
Kalamazoo
law
Minnesota:
Duluth..
Minneapolis.
St. Paul
Missouri:
Joplin
Kansas City.
St.
St.
Joseph...
Loms
AND
STATE.
Montana:
Butte
Nebraska:
Lincoln
Omaha
South Omaha
City
number.
14
Atlantic City
83
Camden
Bayonne
Elizabeth
6
Hoboken
Jersey City
5
90
45
Newark
127
154
41
144
132
89
61
Trenton
48
56
121
57
131
130
62
58
155
29
Passaic
Paterson
West Hoboken
New
York:
93
32
128
Buffalo
Elmira
New York
Rochester
Schenectady
Syracuse
Troy
Utica
YonkeiB
70
Canton
119
11
Cincinnati
Cleveland....
44
142
92
Columbus
Dayton
Springfield
Toledo
64
17
21
134
24
36
4
117
98
53
74
66
18
16
115
37
50
151
46
146
103
9
138
1
23
71
35
59
69
68
Ohio:
Akron
Youngstown
Oklahoma:
Oklahoma City
Oregon:
Portland
Pennsylvania:
AUentown
Altoona
City
STATE.
nmnber.
Chester
Erie
Harrisburg
126
78
81
104
96
102
129
Johnstown
Lancaster
McKeesport
.
Albany
Auburn
Binghamton
AND
—Contd.
New Hampshire:
Manchester
CITY
Pennsylvania
100
New Jersey:
Massachusetts:
51
47
140
33
75
CITY
number.
Kansas:
Birmingham
Little
California:
AND
CITY
number.
88
124
12
8
27
43
110
25
84
Newcastle
Philadelphia
Pittsburg
Reading
38
49
34
77
120
Scranton
Wilkes-Barre
York
Rhode Island:
Pawtucket
101
22
143
Providence
Woonsocket
South Carolina:
Charleston
Tennessee:
Chattanooga
Knoxville
82
141
137
31
42
Memphis
Nashville
Texas:
Dallas
Fort Worth
Galveston
85
158
139
79
73
Houston
San Antonio
Utah:
Salt Lake City....
Virginia:
Norfolk
,..
Richmond
76
65
40
Washington:
Seattle
30
95
80
Spokane
Tacoma
West Virginia:
'
Wheeling
113
Wisconsin:
La
149
3
7
Crosse
157
Milwaukee
Oshkosh
13
150
145
125
Racine
Superior
Ill
94
(127)
GENERAL TABLES.
(129)
GENERAL TABLES.
Table 1.— DATE
131
OF INCORPORATION, POPULATION, AND AREA OF CITIES HAVING AN ESTIMATED POPULATION
OF 30,000 OR OVER ON JUNE 1, 1907.
[For a
list of
the
cities
arranged alphabetically
DATE or INCORPORATION AS
A CITY.
hy states, with
the
number
assigned to each, see page 127.]
AREA (ACBEa) JUNE
POPULATION.
1,
1907.
AREA (ACRES) ANNEXED
SrUCE JUNE
1,
1900.
City
numEstimated as
ber.
First.
June 1-
Decennial census
Juno
total.
1905
23,511,039 22,892,869 22,319,718
Group I...
Group II..
Group III.
Group IV..
1900
GROUP
I.—CITIES
Phaadeiphia, Fa.
St. Louis,
Mo
Boston, Mass
Baltimore,
Md
Pittsburg, Pa.«....
Cleveland, Ohio...
N.Y
Buffalo,
San Francisco, Cal
Detroit, Mich
Cincinnati, Ohio...
Milwaukee, Wis . .
New Orleans, La.
Washington, B.C..
1653
1837
1701
1822
1822
1901
1875
1854
1876
1854
1796
1816
1836
1832
1850
19011891
1891
1824
1819
1847
1805
1802
1883
1903
1874
1896
1878
2
4,225,681
2,107,620
1, 466, 408
661,666
2,308,967.8
1898,555.1
829, 543. 6
516, 425.
472,338.0
451,922.9
395,512.1
HAVING A POPULATION OF
M, 113,043
•609,175
2,049,185
1,441,735
649,320
2 602,278
84,000,403
1,990.750
1,417,062
636,973
8 595,380
561,120
531,527
475,864
'386,724
553,669
520,322
460,327
381,819
8
546,217
507,009
437,114
376,914
8
325, 563
1900
3
('5
8
367,
347,
3 322,
318,
('5
494
123
513
652
312,548
8
3
353,535
345,230
317,903
314, 146
307,716
('5
8
343,337
312,948
309,639
302>883
Water.
515
2,733,962
2,098,840
1,597,238
8, 328,
I
Chicago, HI
Land.
3, 437,
202
Total.
Land.
1118,856.7
114,263.1
Water.
1890
19,687,771 14,758,555
284
4, 375, 894
3,211,182
2, 526, 609
12, 779,
New York, N.Y..
1—
Total.
1906
1907
Grand
of
Latest.
476,625.6
1417,362.1
300,000
2, 153, 463.
OR OVER IN
6
1907.
155, 504.
69,011.5
44,087.0
24, 702.
21,850.0
18,776.4
44,048.7
1 34, 615.
21,416.0
18,776.4
40, 421.
34,138.0
20,927.4
3, 627.
477.6
488.6
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
132
OF INCORPORATION, POPULATION, AND AREA OF CITIES HAVING AN ESTIMATED POPULATION
OF 30,000 OR OVER ON JUNE 1, 1907—Continued.
Table 1.—DATE
[For a
list
of the cities arranged alphabetically
GROUP
by
states,
with the number assigned to each, see page
HAVING A POPULATION OF
III.—CITIES
DATE OF raCOEPOEATION AS
A CITY.
60,000
TO
100,000
IN
AREA (ACRES) JUNE
POPULATION.
127.]
1907.
1,
1907.
ABEA (ACRES) ANNEXED
SINCE JUNE
1, 1900.
City
numEstimated as of June
ber.
First.
1—
Decennial census
Junel—
Latest.
1907
1906
1905
1900
1890
Total.
Land.
Water..
Total.
Land.
166.0
283.0
110.0
790.0
1846
1686
1784
1836
1847
1891
1908
1884
1836
1847
>
99,653
199,268
98,484
195,167
93,171
198,544
198,637
96,822
196,173
91,141
"97,434
"97,806
93,160
"94,889
89,111
91,886
94,151
79,850
94,969
78,961
70,028
94,923
53,230
77,696
58,661
4,182.4
7,197.0
11,066.6
9,098.0
3,966.0
4,016.4
6,914.0
10,966.6
8,308.0
3,965.0
Trenton, N. J
Bridgeport, Conn...
Wllinington, Del. .
Camden, N. J
Des Moines, Iowa...
1792
1836
1832
1828
1857
1874
1828
1890
188,529
86,487
86,420
186,334
181,020
186,355
84,274
86,140
184,849
178,323
"84,180
82,061
83,860
"83,363
"76,626
73,307
70,996
76,608
76,936
62,139
57,458
48,866
61,431
<63,018
50,093
4,903.0
8,576.0
6,515.0
5,029.5
36,309.0
4,490.0
8,460.7
4,026.0
4,474.5
34,549.0
66
66
57
58
59
Kansas City, Kans
Lynn, Mass
1886
1850
1847
1852
1816
1886
1860
1847
1862
1900
"80,522
180,453
179,130
178,132
176,766
"77,912
178,748
176,746
175,836
176,513
"67,614
"77,042
"74,362
"73,540
"76,271
61,418
68,613
62,442
62,059
'75,057
38,316
55,727
40,733
44,179
1.6 73,360
6,760.0
7,248.0
12,373.0
24,662.0
5,964.4
6,460.0
6,943.0
12,173.0
23,964.0
5,021.4
300.0
306.0
200.0
698.0
943.0
60
61
62
63
64
Oakland, Cal
Lawrence, Mass
SomerviUe, Mass.
Savannah, Ga
Duluth, Minn
1854
1853
1871
1789
1870
1853
1899
1789
1900
173,046
172,323
69,880
169,731
73,812
171,548
170,798
68,596
167,337
72,670
"70,050
"69,272
67,311
"64,942
66,960
62,569
61,643
54,244
52,969
48,682
44,654
40,152
43,189
33,116
8,914.0
4.577.0
2; 700.0
4,320.0
43,116.8
8,750.0
4,185.0
2,600.0
4,042.0
39,276.8
164.0
392.0
100.0
278.0
3,840.0
65
66
67
68
69
Norfolk,
Va.
Hoboken, N.
1845
1855
1846
1872
1832
1884
1856
1892
1895
1908
68,530
167,709
67,704
66,806
166,552
66,931
166,689
66,365
164,110
165,099
68,006
"65,468
65,026
"61,414
"63,647
46,624
59,364
56,100
47,931
66,383
34,871
43,648
41,024
32,033
44,007
4,248.6
1,220.0
5,471.0
13,440.0
6,802.4
3,692.1
825.0
6,471.0
12,700.0
5,762.4
656.5
395.0
70
71
72
73
74
Manchester, N. H..
Schenectady, N. Y.
1846
1798
1847
1837
1855
1846
1908
1905
1903
1863
65,989
165,625
66,282
64,275
163,860
64,703
161,919
63,957
62,711
162,185
63,417
63,132
61,146
"60,509
66,987
31,682
69,007
53,321
52,130
44,126
19,902
50,756
37,673
37,764
21,700.0
5,021.4
4,116.0
23,040.0
6,850.0
21,065.0
4,966.4
4,085.0
22,913.0
5,811.0
635.0
56.0
30.0
127.0
39.0
75
76
77
78
79
Waterbury, Conn.
1853
1851
1871
1851
1839
1863
1888
1898
1851
1905
63,696
62,216
61,521
61,202
59,963
61,903
61,202
60,121
59,993
68,132
60,109
68,914
58,721
68,783
66,300
"61,139
53,531
51,721
62,733
44,633
33,202
44,843
37,718
40,634
27,557
18,048.0
27,951.1
3,444.0
4,919.6
10,162.0
17,981.0
27,406.1
3,172.0
4,739.6
10,036.0
1874
1860
1783
1832
1890
1874
1783
1863
51,962
54,807
56,232
64,330
37,714
50,167
65,807
60,145
36,006
39,385
64,955
36,425
21,920.0
56,663
66,402
56,003
65,392
65,735
56,317
55,167
3,276.8
14,826.1
19,168.0
2,870.7
2,406.4
13,790.7
2,752.0
2,091.9
870.4
1,034.4
1867
1856
1833
1839
1867
1907
1905
1894
64,402
54,338
53,707
62,219
52,710
62,793
62,806
60,947
51,.516
Terre Haute, Ind . .
Fort Wayne, Ind..
62,248
51,903
49,975
44,885
42,638
36,673
45,115
33,220
38,067
30,217
36,393
6,621.3
10,259.2
6,072.0
6,360.0
6,371.3
10,144.0
5,026.0
5,160.0
150.0
115.2
46.0
200.0
163.3
3,469.0
1,556.0
1,305.0
163.3
3,469.0
1,656.0
1,255.0
Akron, Ohio
Holyoke, Mass...
Brockton, Mass..
Covington, Ey..
1836
1873
1881
1834
1865
1897
1881
1894
52,073
161,622
160,886
50,495
50,738
150,778
149,340
46,436
49,403
"49,934
"47,794
45,877
42,728
45,712
40,063
42,938
27,601
36,637
27,294
37,371
7,468.8
10,464.0
13,790.0
1,797.0
7,380.8
9,849.0
13,770.0
1,796.0
88.0
616.0
20.0
1.0
300.0
300.0
Cambridge, Mass.
Albany rN.Y....
Hartford, Conn...
Lowell, Mass
Reading,
50
61
62
63
64
Pa
New Bedford,
Springfield,
Troy,N.
Y
.
Mass.
Mass
.
.
.
Peoria,
. .
J.
111
Yonkers. N. Y.
Utioa,
N. Y....
Evansville. Ind
San Antonio, Tex..
Elizabeth,
Salt
N.J
..
Lake City, Utah
Wilkes-Barre,
Erie,
Pa
...
Pa
Houston, Tex
Tacoma, Wash...
Harrisburg, Pa.
Charleston, S.C.
Portland, Me
Youngstown, Ohio.
Dallas,
Tex
m
m
1 Based on Federal census of 1900 and state census of 1905.
State census.
"Including 1,460 acres of marsh land.
* Estimated.
5 Including population of territory annexed in 1901.
"
.268,213
8
»
4,%2.6
Estimate not shown, but included in
3
50.0
413.0
116.3
2,489.0
556.0
760.0
19.8
2,637.0
2,547.0
1,056.0
1,056.0
(')
640.0
90.0
(')
'2J'62.'6
740.0
50.0
2,100.0
» 276.0
2,080.0
8 276.0
20.0
14,433.0
i» 279.0
14,376.0
i« 279.0
68.0
545.0'
272.0
180.0
126.0
4,403.0
4,403.0
67.0
"'496.'6'
totals.
'Not reported.
14 acres of land detached and 289 acres of land annexed.
" Population of Waterbury town.
Town and city made coextensive in 1902.
i» 2,523.6 acres detached and 279 acres annexed.
*
Water.
50.0
GENERAL TABLES.
Table 1.— DATE
OF INCORPORATION, POPULATION, AND AREA OF CITIES HAVING AN ESTIMATED POPULATION
OF 30,000 OR OVER ON JUNE 1, 1907—Continued.
[For a
list of
the
cities
GEOUP
arranged alphabetically
IV.—CITIES
Lincoln, Nebr
Altoona, Pa
1871
1868
1883
1818
Wash
Lancaster,
Pa
Birmingham, Ala...
Bayorme- N. J
South Bend, Ind
Butte, Mont
Pawtuclset, R.I
McEeesport, Pa
Binghamtdn, N. Y. .
Johnstown, £a
Dubuque, Iowa
Sioux City , Iowa
Augusta,
Ga
Mobile, Ala
Topeka, Kans
Springfield, Ohio.
Allentown, Pa
.
BastSt. Louis, 111..
Wheeling, W.Va...
Montgomery, Ala...
Passaic, N. J
Davenport, Iowa
AtlanticCity, N. J.
Little Bock, Ark.
Bay City, Mich
.
York, Pa
Maiden, Mass
Springfield,
Quincy
,
111
111
Canton, Ohio
Superior, Wis
Chester, Pa
Chelsea,
Mass
South Omaha, Nebr,
Newcastle, Pa
Salem, Mass
Newton, Mass
Haverhill, Mass
Jacksonville, Fla.
Joplin,
.
Mo
Wichita, Kans
Eooklord, 111
Knoxville, Tenn
Elmira, N.
Galveston, Tex
Y
New
Conn.
Chattanooga, Tenn.
Britain,
Kalamazoo, Mich . .
Woonsocket, R.I...
Fitchburg, Mass
Racine, Wis
Auburn, N.
Y
Macon, Ga
Joliet, HI
Oklahoma City, Okla
Oshkosh, Wis
West Hoboken, N.J
1907
1887
1868
1891
1818
1798
1814
1867
1850
1867
1798
1901
1903
1850
1889
1866
1836
1837
1873
1851
1888
1907
1905
1873
1851
42,530
41,929
41,847
Ml, 761
1854
1831
1865
1887
1881
1902
1875
1907
1887
1881
<
1840
1839
1854
1889
1866
1882
1895
1854
1891
1889
1857
1886
1869
1836
1873
1894
1903
1889
1836
1897
<
1869
1822
1873
1871
1852
1869
1887
1900
1886
*
1815
1864
1839
1871
1851
1907
1906
1903
1905
1861
1884
1888
1872
1848
1848
1907
1888
1872
1905
1906
1888
1893
1891
La Crosse, Wis
1864
1850
1856
Fort Worth, Tex...,
1872
1882
1894
1866
1907
1511
1902
Everett, Mass
Taunton, Mass
Newport, Ky
San Juan, P.
'
2
R
47, 129
1891
1907
1889
1840
1886
1888
1863
1873
1892
Sacramento, Cal
Pueblo, Colo
48,078
47,097
M6,078
<
*
<
«
6
4
46,005
46,492
46, 041
4
44,861
44, 475
44,340
4
44, 198
44, 088
4
4
43,739
43,642
42, 792
42,704
42,618
5
4
41,495
41,302
140,661
40,079
< 39, 786
4
39, 544
5
5
38, 575
38, 558
38,464
38,295
38, 123
4
4
4
4
38,092
38,049
37,279
36,898
36,701
4
6
38,440
37, 643
38,002
and
Based on Federal census
2,846.0
3,635.0
4,229.7
6,660.0
2,380.0
196.0
875.0
225.0
100.0
60.0
39,385
41,068
29,656
38,878
30,346
27,777
35,254
15, 169
5,200.0
2,050.0
4,050.0
2,087.7
6,170.0
1,345.0
4,050.0
2,069.2
6,013.0
30.0
705.0
2,776.0
6,309.0
7,071.8
2,250.0
3,072.0
2,775.0
6,048.0
6,316.8
2,220.0
3,062.0
4,252.2
4,262.2
3,716.1
5,760.0
23,400.0
3,000.0
36,252
30,667
31,091
33,988
24,963
31,494
'27,302
37,289
34,971
35,429
37,627
36, 827
34,072
26,001
28,339
35,956
33,587
27,909
8,062
11,600
30,801
24,379
1,440.0
4,160.0
4,886.0
5, 44o:o
11,406.0
1,265.0
3,960.0
4,800.0
4,827.0
11,106.0
175.0
200.0
85.0
613.0
300.0
37,830
535,301
34,063
37,175
28,429
26,023
24,671
31,051
27, 412
22,000.0
5,920.0
6,520.0
12,260.0
5,702.0
20,600.0
4,864.0
6,520.0
12,000.0
5,610.0
1,500.0
1,066.0
32,637
35,672
37,789
25,998
30,164
22,535
30,893
29,084
16,519
2,551.0
4,747.0
10.6
201.0
29, 100
8,438.5
3,724.0
2,641.0
4,546.0
4,989.0
8,418.0
3,304.0
24,404
28,204
31,531
29,102
30,345
17,853
20,830
22,037
21,014
25,858
6,122.0
6,632.0
17,728.0
2.960.0
6,440.0
5,031.0
5,532.0
17,528.0
2,900.0
6,390.0
23,272
29,353
10,037
28,284
22,746
23,264
4,151
22,836
4,906.2
2,554.0
3,190.0
5,221.9
23,094
29,282
11,665
26,386
24,658
11,068
546.0
2,890.8
7,280.0
110
34,621
5 31,
35, 482
35,724
33, 484
32, 472
1
6 32,
4
32,994
33,319
32,928
4
32, 963
6 32,
4
4
31, 491
4
31,477
31,311
31,190
31,021
527
530,575
31,033
6
4
31,022
30,824
30,066
4
30,940
30,667
4
30, 953
29, 151
4
30,329
29, 115
35,675
196
32,618
31,713
ci
4
31, 127
533,021
6 32,290
(»5
4
(»)
30. 178
34. 179
32,692
32, 185
32,765
32,657
32, 452
29,082
30,732
30,457
6 29,
6
6
m
28, 157
111
24,336
30,967
29, 991
29,078
31,036
28,301
28,895
26,688
(")
34,715
35,195
32,316
I
,
,,,,,.
j
and 475 acres of land detached.
and state census of 1905.
of 1900
18.5
34, 159
38,268
38,037
4
4
'
38,234
38,632
37, 907
36,661
37, 333
6
'
mean between
1880
Total.
Land.
Water.
20, 793
23,031
26, 189
11,983
17,201
9,943
23,853
23,584
25,448
24, 918
26,090
23,076
m
3. 715.
5,840.0
27,000.0
(6)
2, 176.
31,431.0
843.0
5,866,5
4,268.8
3,655.6
261.0
.755.0
30.0
80.0
3,600.0
20.6
420.0
5.0
188.0
6
136.9
136.9
'262.'4'
"262." 4'
2,496.0
16.0
2, 496.
848.0
2,995.2
740.0
2,617.6
131.0
1,600.0
131.0
1,600.0
632.0
16.0
108.0
377.6
632.0
6'
"'"ilo
"a' 4.'
518.0
518.0
4,858.0
832.0
4,855.0
832.0
1,191.7
1,191.7
(')
2, 944.
114.0
635.6
3,555.6
6
State census.
•
Not reported.
Estimated.
4 acres of land detached.
Estimate not shown, but included in
fi
1, 416.
2,000.0
91.0
100.0
200.0
60.0
50.0
'
B
5.9
125.0
457.6
(«)
546.0
2,890.8
7,275.0
1,988.0
729.0
5,330.9
4,268.8
1,416.5
2,000.0
260.0
192.0
4,810.6
28, 487.
s
(=)
133.0
15.0
411.3
3, 175.
5.9
126.0
467.6
10.0
4,856.6
2, 421.
3
227.0
13,065
25,874
40,820
1
4
34,522
21,883
13,028
26,872
2. 440.
1,361.0
1,272.7
27,838
38,307
40,747
33rV08
33,664
33,792
33,617
33,566
33, 399
4
1890.
125 acres of land aimexed
4
3,042.0
4,510.0
4,464.7
5,760.0
5
Based on Federal census of 1900 and state census of 1904.
Census of 1890 defective. Population for 1890 estimated as
»
33,300
31,076
31,007
31,895
25,228
37, 593
6
1, 1900.
300.0
30.0
39,441
38,469
33,608
38,253
35,416
ils^sis
4
240.0
2.6
33, 111
4
4
12,960.0
2,660.0
7,657.1
4,799.6
2, 114. 6
12,660.0
2,630.0
2, 114.
42,611
42,164
37,641
41,433
40, 571
35,744
35,224
34,641
34,416
4
7,897.1
4,802.1
46,322
26,686
30,337
19,922
32,011
3.2
324.0
200.0
390.0
625.0
5
6
36,051
35,734
34,355
33,722
34,297
2
2,236.8
6,620.0
2,703.5
7,290.0
28,020.0
39,79?
5
37,961
36,676
36,671
36, 641
36,051
Water.
2,240.0
6,844.0
2,903.6
7,680.0
28,645.0
37,837
6
37,932
36,766
36,847
37,961
37, 476
42,346
40,169
38,973
36,848
41. 469
Land.
20,741
35,006
21,806
30,311
37,806
5
39, 108
ANNEXED
1890
1900
34,227
39,647
35,936
36,297
5
6
AKE.A (ACRES)
SINCE JUNE
1
42,024
43,096
42,160
41,941
40,952
38,716
4
1907.
4,274.0
2,677.0
3,978.3
3,300.0
5,494.6
39, 769
38,912
1,
4,274.0
3,938.0
5,261.0
3,300.0
5,721.6
140,614
38,670
6
6
127.]
19,033
21,819
10, 723
27,633
39,969
4
•138,735
4
5
page
1907.
26, 178
43,204
41,757
43,381
140,687
39,168
39,631
39,683
38,972
4
5
IN
38,415
32,722
35,999
30. 470
39,231
44,640
'42,262
43,125
42,903
41,886
42,069
41,595
141,614
4
46,874
45,557
46,313
46, 184
43,438
43,785
43,260
43,070
42,620
40,958
41, 494
40,808
39,799
40,706
4
147,676
45,869
44, 170
44,606
43,624
44,211
to each, see
60,000
AREA (ACRES) JUNE
June
1906
148,742
48,232
47,910
47,006
1891
1867
1889
1840
1857
1876
1891
1853
TO
Deceimlal census
1
1906
149,808
49,590
48,878
1886
1832
1852
1890
1853
30,000
Total.
1871
1872
1901
1888
1886
1871
1869
1865
1879
with the number assigned
Latest.
1907
Saginaw, Mich
states,
POPULATION.
Estimated as of June
First.
by
HAVING A POPULATION OF
DATE OF INCOBPOBATION AS
A CITY.
Spokane,
133
total.
(«)
20.0
20.0
224.0
2240
3.0
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
134
Table 2
—PAYMENTS, RECEIPTS, AND CASH BALANCES, BY DIVISIONS AND FUNDS:
[For a
list of
the cities arranged alphabetically
by states, with
the
number
1907.
assigned to each, see page 127.]
PAYMENTS.
Aggregate of
CITY,
AND
FUNDS OF
AND
GOVEENMENT.
DIVISIONS
IIS
To
Date of close of fiscal year.
To the
divisions,
Cash on
handatclose
of year.
funds, enter-
public.'
Cash on
payments
and cash on
hand at close
all
hand
of year.
of year.2
prises, ofBces,
From
at
beginning
From
the
public'
and accounts.!
divisions
funds, enterprises,
offices,
and
accounts.'
Grand
total.
$1,009,484,964
$209,342,232
$145,242,918
$1,364,070,114
$152,612,361
680,545,579
157,629,496
101,693,510
69,716,379
148,547,784
36,810,021
14,958,329
9.026.098
87,698,252
29,801,501
14,457,175
13,285,990
916,791,615
224,241,018
131,009,014
92,028,467
98,338,962
26,821,439
15,405,134
12,046,826
670,260,900
160,636,011
100,634,814
71,108,229
148,191,753
Group I...
Group 11...
Group III..
Group IV..
GKOUP
I.—CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
New York, N. Y.
1
General treasury
Cash in transit
Foreign fire insurance tax.
Mortgage tax
Sinidng funds
Investment fund
Public trust funds
Private trust funds
Chicago,
2,985,702
12,757,113
111
General treasury
Dec. 31,1907
Deo. 31,1907
Dec. 31,1907
Oct. 1, Dec. 31, 1907;
$349)969, 529
$79,508,321
318,514,471
33,7S2,06&
151,297
613,934
2,901,076
152,274
1,884,712
12,138,515
31,1907.
May
1007.
10,196,586
299,259
7,522,778
151,297
31,1907..
31,1907..
31,1907..
31,1907..
15,069,066
8,873,412
$17,846,791
$14,044,611
31,085,852
299,259
127,163
1,547,681
46> 131,821
176,645
140,000
31,1907..
36,783,568.
362,462,123
450,566
279,437
3,432,293
61,226,762
176,645
3,638,636i
15,668,189
$79,508,321
City corporation.
Sinking funds
Investment fimds. .
Public trust fimds...
OK OVER IN
$353,771,809
Dec. 31,1907.
Dec.
Dec.
Dec.
Dec.
Dec.
Deo.
300,000
$1,002,539,954 $208,917,799
2,965,426
$447,324,641
279,437
3,432,293
3,077,614
14,389,^
43,758,388
617,053
3,757,379
176,645
1,276,013
11,900,810
""i,'846,"676'
83,185,059
4,510,251
14,973,310
102,668,620
13,219,095
84,939,307
4,510,218
45,184,233
2,762,191
7,968,483
56,914,907
6,344i310
46,894,842
2,675,755
44,708,143
2 j 707,603
4,146,602
3,051,056
51,662,348
3,101,056
3,451,127
2,392,906
46,804,238
1,306,9^
473>573
60,000
3,088
1,500
1,034
87,030
658,668.
708, 150'
3,088'
769,719
499,194
1,244,792
2,054
31 1908.
Private trust funds..
Dec!31,1907; May31il908
2,517
Cook county
General treasury.
Dec.
1,1907.
School, district
3,623
1,083
2,540
13,537
1,100,637
9,817,816
1,642,918
7,787,600
8,703,742
13,537
1,100,637
9,817,816
1,642,918
7,787,600
387,298
1,334,655
20,384,186
667,020
18,675,486
1,041,68»
1,096,149
187,260
34,036
17,220
17,984,175
333,250
1,332,640
734,121
371,960
266,689
14,410
13,961
16,686,337
925,878.
17,785,532
General treasury
Sinking fond
Public trust funds . .
Frlvate.trust funds .
June 30,1908
,1,2
16,703,105
184,921
146,000
933,078
Dee. 31,1907.
June 30,1908.
June 30,1908.
365,526
716,901
Park commissions
General treasury.
Sinking funds
Nov. 30,Deo.
Investment fluid.
Nov. 30,1907
31,1907.
Dec. 31,1907
Dec. 31,1907.
419,764
4,339,768
10,909,918
3,976,833
6,527,600
405,485
419,764
3,966,660
249,014
124,184
10,239,720
546,014
124,184
3,544,470
349,780
82,583
6,518,737
6,481
2,3S2
176,513
189,753
50,760
229,877
5,641,793
688,014
5,053,779
6,361,156
50,760
588,014
47,935,099
6,695,273
18,393,443
47,851,793
6,
693^497
18,381,068
5,366,552
1907.
1907.
1907.
19OT.
1907.
1907.
39,483,860
13,170
687,568
223, 057
138,579
4,783,353
9,967
2,454,120
Dec. 31, 1907.
94
Deo. 31, 1907.
Pa
City corporation.
General treasury
Dec.
Poll tax fee fund
Dec.
Special assessment fund Dec.
Library fund
Dec.
Museum fundDec.
Sinking fund
Dec.
Investment funds
Dec.
Public trust funds (mu- Dec.
31, 1907.
31, 1907.
31.,
31,
31i
31,
31,
31,
15,039,066
Poor districts.
General treasury.
St. Louis,
Mar.26, Apr.
General treasury
Clerk of court's fee fund.
Collectors'
commission
Apr. 13, 1908.
Dec. 31, 1907.
Mar. 1,1908..
331,773
1,903
19,987
85,145
5,000
336, 189
71
166
114
51
168,036
316,067
156,535
160,622
83,306
96,710
12,376
80,133
12,376
80, 133
4,202
970
22,644,373
7,814,217
158,700
1,000,282
177, 963
2,910
12,084
81,062
204
1,776
11,628
96,710
7,812,730
6,512,792
39,382,560
8, 923,
'
7,636,860
5, 983,
569
34,670,681
7,929,828
19,046,172
7,694,681
5,136,689
26,744,775
128,521
166,606
5,428,718
16,750,627
119,741
89,652
4,665,530
8,780
40,291
12,416
4,336,944
11,276
42,000
788,075
8,830
Apr.
13, 1908.
1,980,593
Apr. 13,1908
Apr. 13,1908
Apr. 13,1908
Aug. 31, Dec.
Apr. 13, 1908
259,737
Table
3.
6,811
134, 133
'
313,250-
3,146,397
11,935
76,883
Board of public improvement fund.
details, see
207,971
74,651
4,915,178
5,000
18,462,689
116,586
89,723
Library fund
Sinking funds
Investment funds
Public trust funds
Private trust funds
For additional
1,175,021
21,050,272
fimd.
31, 1907..
6,691,071
40,927,262
13,170
687,668
16,093
56,026
22,782
1,000,443
2,314,417
25,067,038
City corporation.
6,696,273
17,777,195
16, 1908..
Mo
39,219-
59,879,478
13, 170
587,56?
225,967
150,663
5,023,105
1,010,443
2,963,856
nicipal).
Public trust fund (nonmunicipal).
Private trust fund
66,561
49,241
1,268,989
720,160
5,853,396
6,361,156
General treasury.
387,298.
6,150)396
297,000,
Sanitary district.
Philadelphia,
1,106
8,703,742
35," 663
1,980,593
The same as the aggregate
47,996
2,969
of cash
on hand
1,060,228
4,345,774
18,086
224, 129
2,969
1,908,948
71,645
830, 118
61,256
1,666,810
8,850
66,956
2,713
168,854
2,778,964
9,236
106,566
266
at beginning of year
and
all receipts
during year.
60,617
GENERAL TABLES.
Table 2.—PAYMENTS, RECEIPTS,
[For a
list of
GROUP
the
cities
AND CASH BALANCES, BY DIVISIONS AND FUNDS:
arranged alphabetically by states, with the
1.— CITIES
135
HAVING A POPULATION OF
number assigned
300,000
J907—Continued.
to each, see page 127.]
OR OVER IN
1907— Continued.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
136
Table 2.— PAYMENTS, RECEIPTS,
[For a
list
AND CASH BALANCES, BY DIVISIONS AND FUNDS:
of tlie cities arranged alphabetically
GROUP
I.— CITIES
by states, with
HAVING A POPULATION OF
the
number assigned
300,000
1907— Continued.
to each, see page 127.]
OR OVER IN
1907— Continued.
GENERAL TABLES.
Table 2.— PAYMENTS, RECEIPTS,
[For a
list
GROUP
AND CASH BALANCES, BY
of the cities arranged alphabetically
I.—CITIES
by states, with
HAVING A POPULATION OF
the
137
DIVISIONS
number
300,000
AND FUNDS:
1907— Continued.
assigned to each, see page 127.]
OR OVER IN
1907— Continued.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
138
Table 2.—PAYMENTS, RECEIPTS,
[For a
list
AND CASH BALANCES, BY DIVISIONS AND FUNDS:
of the cities arranged alphabetically
GROUP
II.— CITIES
by states, with the number assigned
HAVING A POPULATION OP
100,000
TO
300,000
1807— Continued.
to each, see page 127.]
IN 1907— Conthiued.
GENERAL TABLES.
Table 2
139
—PAYMENTS, BECEIPTS, AND CASH BALANCES, BY DIVISIONS AND FUNDS: 1807—
[For a
list of
GROUP
the cities arranged alphabetically
II.— CITIES
by states, with the number assigned
HAVING A POPULATION OF
100,000
TO
300,000
to each, see page 127.]
IN 1907— Continued.
Continued.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
140
Table 2.—PAYMENTS, RECEIPTS,
[For a
list
AND CASH BALANCES, BY DIVISIONS AND FUNDS:
of the cities arranged alphabetically
GROUP
II.— CITIES
by states, with the number
HAVING A POPULATION OF
100,000
TO
assigned to each, see page 127.]
300,000
IN 1907— Continued.
1907— Continued.
GENERAL TABLES.
Table 2
141
—PAYMENTS, RECEIPTS, AND CASH BALANCES, BY DIVISIONS AND FUNDS:^ 1907—
[For a
list
of the cities arranged alphabetically
GROUP
II.— CITIES
by
states,
with the number assigned to each, see page
HAVING A POPULATION OF
100,000
TO
300,000
127.]
IN 1907-Continued.
Continued.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
142
Table 2.— PAYMENTS, RECEIPTS,
[For a
list of
AND CASH BALANCES, BY DIVISIONS AND FUNDS:
the cities arranged alphabetically
by states, with the number
GROUP m.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF
50,000
TO
1907— Continued.
assigned to each, see page 127.]
100,000
IN 1907-Continued.
GENERAL TABLES.
Table 2.—PAYMENTS, RECEIPTS,
[For a
list of
GROUP
AND CASH BALANCES, BY DIVISIONS AND FUNDS:
the cities arranged alphabetically
III.—CITIES
143
by states, with the number
HAVING A POPULATION OF
50,000
TO
1907
assigned to each, see page 127.]
100,000
IN 1907— Continued.
—Continued.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
144
Table 2.— PAYMENTS, RECEIPTS,
[For a
list of
GROUP
AND CASH BALANCES, BY DIVISIONS AND FUNDS:
the cities arranged alphabetically
III.— CITIES
by
states,
with the number assigned to each, see page
HAVING A POPULATION OF
50,000
TO
127.]
100,000-IN 1907— Continued.
1907— Continued.
GENERAL TABLES.
Table 2.— PAYMENTS, RECEIPTS,
[For a
list
AND CASH BALANCES, BY DIVISIONS AND FUNDS:
of the cities arranged alphabetically
GROUP
III.— CITIES
145
by
states,
with the number assigned to each, see page
HAVING A POPULATION OF
50,000
TO
100,000
1907— Continued.
127.]
IN 1907— Continued.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
146
Table 2.—PAYMENTS, RECEIPTS,
[For a
list of
GROUP
AND CASH BALANCES, BY DIVISIONS AND FUNDS:
the cities arranged alphabetically
lU.— CITIES
by states, with
HAVING A POPULATION OF
the
number
50,000
TO
assigned to each, see page 127.]
100,000
IN 1907— Continued.
1907— Continued.
GENERAL TABLES.
Table 2.— PAYMENTS, RECEIPTS,
[For a
list of
147
AND CASH BALANCES, BY DIVISIONS AND FUNDS:
the cities arranged alphabetically
by
states,
with the number assigned to each, see page
GROUP III—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF
50,000
TO
100,000
127.]
IN 1907— Continued.
1907— Continued.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
148
Table 2.—PAYMENTS, RECEIPTS,
[For a
list
AND CASH BALANCES, BY DIVISIONS AND FUNDS:
of the cities arranged alphabetically
GROUP
III.— CITIES
by
states,
with the number assigned to each, see page
HAVING A POPULATION OF
50,000
TO
100,000
127.]
IN 1907— Continued.
1907— Continued.
GENERAL TABLES.
Table 2.—PAYMENTS, RECEIPTS,
[For a
list ef
AND CASH BALANCES, BY DIVISIONS AND FUNDS: J907—Continued.
the cities arranged alphabetically
(JROtIP IV.— CITIES
149
by states, with
HAVING A POPULATION OF
the
number
30,000
TO
assigned to each, see page 127.]
50,000
IN 1907— Continued.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
150
Table 2.— PAYMENTS, RECEIPTS,
[For a
list of
GROUP
AND CASH BALANCES, BY DIVISIONS AND FUNDS:
the cities piranged alphahetically
IV.—CITIES
by
states, with the
HAVING A POPULATION OF
number assigned
30,000
TO
50,000
to each, see page 127.]
IN 1907— Continued.
1907— Continued.
GENERAL TABLES.
Table 2.— PAYMENTS, RECEIPTS,
[For a
list of
GROUP
AND CASH BALANCES, BY DIVISIONS AND FUNDS:
the cities arranged alphabetically
IV.— CITIES
151
by
states,
with the number assigned to each, see page
HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
TO
50,000
1907— Continued.
127.]
IN 1907— Continued.
PAYMENTS.
Aggregate of
CITY,
AND
FUNDS or
DIVISIONS
ITS
Cash on
AND
GOVEBNMENT.
To
Date of close of fiscal year.
divisions,
funds, enterprises, olGces,
and accounts.'
To the
public.
hand at close
of year.
payments
and cash on
all
hand
at close
of year.2
Cash on
hand
Prom
at
beginning
of year.
divisions,
From the
public.i
funds, enterprises,
ofhces,
and
accounts.'
Ohio— Continued.
City corporation Cont'd.
SpilDgfleld,
—
Waterworks fund
Dec. 31,1907.
J73,902
Cash in transit
Sinking fund
Public trust funds
Private trust fund
Dec. 31,1907.
Dec. 31,1907.
Dec. 31,1907.
115, 743
60,787
School district
755,283
City corporation
530,860
Apr.
Apr.
General treasury.
Sinking fund
6,1908.
6,1908.
School district.
June 30,1908.
June 30,1908.
General treasury.
Sinking fund
St. Louis, 111
33,698
28,698
118,034
8,609
86,090
269, 183
69,609
199, 674
86,090
269, 183
69,609
199,674
176,466
%5, 447
215, 140
716,609
161,631
711, 189
198, 505
455,619
29, 909
27,156
3,007
23,495
1,200
Dec. 31,1907.
Feb. 29, 1908.
June 30,
June 30,
General treasury.
Sinking fund
'.
1908.
1908.
W.Va.-.-
80,671
71,060
177,013
224,423
5,000
24,836
264,258
16,636
231,081
6,542
5,000
6,287
19,648
195,249
69,009
3,188
13, 447
192,061
39,020
6,542
248,870
1,287,338
270,698
1,012,950
3,690
176, 157
720,442
3,600
172, 620
3,690
778
3,690
137,694
729,095
32,600
134, 483
863, 578
3,111
35, 711
2,637
687,368
33,074
273, 083
111,276
388,049
95,541
292, 508
273,083
16,686
94, 690
293,359
94, 690
851
94, 690
292, 508
123,554
955,187
96, 113
743, 013
117,061
113, 988
804,101
74, 666
612, 484
117,061
55, 603
409, 609
368, 627
18,995
150,200
3,830
17,890
27,708
33,192
30,878
1,304
158,275
78,508
2,859
-674,330
General treasury
fund
Workhouse labor
ac-
27,156
28,698
714, 572
City corporation.
33,698
424,907
105,953
761,695
School district.
light
$16,330
15,330
49,280
600
78,557
119,948
1, 034,
General treasury.
Interest fund
Gas and
$105,329
634, 176
189,962
34,461
City corporation.
.
$6,087
700
1,761
61,728
700
183,093
AUentown, Pa
Wheeling,
$127,746
700
135,115
119, 517
1,200
$15, 549
183,093
Aug. 31,1907.
General treasury.
East
$38,295
700
16,365
35,235
May
May
May
31,1908.
31,1908.
31,1908.
243,222
131,205
May
May
May
May
31,1908.
31,1908.
31,1908.
31,1908.
156,971
42, 782
130
117,061
115,783
110, 784
"'3,' 830"
91,614
counts-
Waterworks fund
Sinking fund
Public trust funds
Private trust fund
Passaic,
N.
1,278
9,566
151,086
20,657
130, 629
132,069
8,173
1,244
34
4,298
5,268
137,611
13,476
15,806
4,761
121,806
8,724
1,293,457
10,050
1,333,031
34,902
1,288,079
3,750
6,300
770,996
6,300
6,735
649,000
34,687
736,309
'""2i5
2,770
649,000
Sept.
Sept.
Sept.
Sept.
30,1907.,
30,1907.,
30,1907.,
30,1907.,
740, 367
June
June
June
June
June
June
June
June
June
30,1908.
30,1908.
30,1908.
30,1908.
30,1908.
30,1908.
30,1908.
30,1908.
30, 1908.
570, 194
General treasury
fund
Criminal court fund
District court fund
Board of health fund. .
School fund
Library fund
Tree commission fund..
Sinking fund
1,644,884
97,066
821,626
726,192
51,
318
182
92, 690
124
372,307
435,929
4,167
2,110
1,096
4,786
494
733
4
441,371
2,793
276
663
56
906,268
436,089
4,456
2,204
7,929
271,541
9,608
2,733
4,056
264,043
1,669,816
347, 345
1,311,723
1,117,100
193, 669
1,310,769
230, 467
1, 079,
Feb. 29,1908.
Feb. 29,1908.
735,069
306,433
183,913
918,982
306, 433
188,658
730, 424
305, 685
Dec. 31,1907.
Apr. 1,1908.
Feb. 29,1908.
12,247
42,540
20,811
6,384
3,372
18,631
45,912
20,811
7,322
13, 776
11,309
32,136
70,374
349, 047
116,878
349,047
95
625
7,929
268,748
9,332
2,070
4,000
748
fund.
277,925
School distiict
General treasury.
June
General treasury
of health fund
School fund
Dec. 31, 1907
Dec. 31 , 1907
Llbraryfund
Dec.31,1907.
Dec. 31, 1907.
Sinking fund
1
For additional
details, see
June
Table
3.
'
94
768
2,927
114
6,065
163,828
9,000
2,000
564
20,811
232, 169
748
70,374
116,878
232,169
473,390
837, 652
3, 438,
738
393,359
2,571,989
473,390
1,736,375
8,864
370,013
10,769
1,675
364, 368
327,296
2,060
17, 444
399
46,160
2,311,318
7,696
57,247
1,624
104, 192
2,757,636
16,660
427,260
12,393
224,889
119,022
14,500
170,804
11,000
158,064
277,925'
30, 1908.
748
125
160
289
2,127,696
30,1908.
Atlantic City, N. J
Board
6,300
3,760
56,699
City corporation.
Library fund
Park fund
Private trust funds
645
10,050
284,766
435,907
4,075
1,454
Davenport, Iowa
General treasury
'2,'
49,161
726, 192
1,395,025
Local improvement
26,879
'
4,090
549,000
J.
Collector of taxes
760
168,275
1,149
2,869
60
28,198
140,242
July 31,1907.,
July 31,1907.,
Montgomery, Ala.
General treasury
Convict labor account. .
Library fund
Kefnnding bond account . .
1,560
800
20
School district.
General treasury.
Library fund
35, 726
The same
119,022
as the aggregate of cash
on hand at beginning
of year
and
all receipts
239,012
994
20, 665
during year.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
152
Table 2.— PAYMENTS, RECEIPTS,
[For a
list
AND CASH BALANCES, BY DIVISIONS AND FUNDS:
of the cities arranged alphabetically
by states, with
GROtiP IV.— CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF
the
number assigned
30,000
TO
50,000
1907— Continued.
to each, see page 127.]
IN 1907— Continued.
GENERAL TABLES.
Table 2.— PAYMENTS, RECEIPTS,
[For a
list of
GROUP
AND CASH BALANCES, BY DIVISIONS AND FUNDS:
the cities arranged alphahetioally
IV.— CITIES
153
by states, with
the
HAVING A POPULATION OF
number
30,000
TO
assigned to each, see page 127.]
50,000
IN 1907— Continued.
i907— Continued.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
154
Table 2.—PAYMENTS, RECEIPTS,
[For a
list of
GROUP
AND CASH BALANCES, BY DIVISIONS AND FUNDS
the cities arranged alphabetically
IV.— CITIES
by states, with
HAVING A POPULATION OF
the
number assigned
30,000
TO
50,000
to each, see page 127.]
IN 1907— Continued.
:
1907— Continued.
GENERAL TABLES.
Table 2.— PAYMENTS, RECEIPTS,
[For a
list of
155
AND CASH BALANCES, BY DIVISIONS AND FUNDS:
by states, with the number
the cities arranged alphabetically
GROU"P IV.— CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
1907— Conlinued.
assigned to each, see page 127.]
TO
50,000
IN 1907— Continued.
PAYMENTS.
Aggregate of
City
number.
CITY,
AND
DIVISIONS
Cash on
AND
To
Date of close of fiscal year.
FUNDS Or,ITS GOVERNMENT.
To
hand at close
divisions,
funds, enterprises, offices,
and accounts.!
the
public.'
of year.
payments
and cash on
hand at close
all
of year.'
Cash on
hand
From
at
beginning
of year.
divisions,
From
funds, en-
the
pubhc.i
terprises,
offices,
and
accounts.'
New
Britain, Conn.— Cont'd.
Sinking funds
Public trust fund (munic-
Mar. 31,1908.
Mar. 31,1908.
$23,260
1,392
$23,260
1,392
$5,260
Mar. 31,1908.
9,571
9,671
9,671
192
$18,000
1,200
ipal).
Public trust fund (nonmunicipal).
Chattanooga,
Tenn
General treasury
Convict labor account
Baroness Erlanger hospital
fund.
Library fund
Sinking fund
142
Sept. 30,1907.
Sept. 30,1907.
June 30,1908.
755, 428
$15,800
$848,601
1,619,829
$80,679
1,520,683
712,743
10,600
5,300
842,406
75,932
1,489,717
Kalamazoo, Mich
1«
Woonsoeket, R.
144
4,000
1,363,493
154,000
947, 557
261,936
57,719
1,066,025
124,720
807,500
133,806
141,771
111,500
11,914
45, 517
877, 488
68,115
66,405
200
679,685
127,660
129,688
4,117
Mar. 31,1908.
167
31,065
31,1908.
30,1907.
30,1907.
30,1907.
30,1907.
Nov.
Nov. 30,1907.
Nov. 30, 1907.
Nov. 30, 1907.
Nov. 30, 1907.
Nov. 30, 1907.
30, 1907.
Public trust funds (munic-
1,187
4,429
263,271
Fitchburg, Mass.
-
3,725
697
723, 803
Nov.
Nov.
Nov.
Nov.
General treasury
8,912
6,126
188,082
167
167
140,067
251, 384
36,084
287, 468
251,384
36,084
287,468
29,280
nicipal).
145
Nov.
30, 1907.
Aug.
31, 1907.
31, 1908.
118, 131
2,513,022
210,686
76,906
2,799,614
67,062
2,631,866
2,612,682
340
121,686
"89," 666
12,976
273
62, 369
2,647,344
613
161,369
288
3,431
265
53,138
238
2,531,034
368
424
50
"97,' 807
1,302,419
213, 443
84,986
1, 600,
847
62, 569
1,324,835
213,443
1,267,863
2,234
21,973
124, 108
61, 642
1, 453,
613
2,421
23,533
54, 515
1, 309,
"i,"555
567
2,421
7,378
13
336
88,748
65
364
111,767
6,038
,196
364
556
1,438
6,000
1,225
187
1,660
16
019
4,748
17,
112,879
107,908
1,404
3,111
3,111
3,111
Racine, Wis.
May
General treasury
Contingent audit fund
School fund
—
Waterworks fund
Cemetery fund
Sinking fimd
197, 860
825,609
225,677
585,432
14,600
562,205
7,113
159,693
8,615
6,532
23, 0?0
734,398
15, 728
17,463
58,020
188,721
7,695
6,241
23,020
645,677
633
4,222
35, GOO
7,500
7,000
525
58,355
857, 446
193,724
786
730, 607
33, 386
Aug.
31, 1907.
799,064
258,942
51, 519
June
Nov.
30, 1908.
513, 700
234, 616
30,462
778, 778
14,186
July
Dec.
June
31,
31,
31,
31,
30,
1907.
1907.
1907.
1908.
1907.
1908.
2,116
1,974
4,737
743
8,490
186
137, 877
126, 586
6,233
10, 743
10,606
June
30,1908..
55
4,311
4,366
20, ISO
1,000
19, 150
17,556
485,178
26,864
388, 578
May
Dec.
Public trust funds (munic-
615, 249
10, 931
35,000
Sept. 30, 1907..
Auburn, N. Y.
1,
132, 749
114, 612
1, 109,
4,326
10,000
1,496
10,000
nicipal).
20, 150
June 30,1908.
Private trust fund
Macon, Ga.
General treasury
Convict labor account.
Sinking fund
Dec.
Dec.
17, 1907.
17, 1907.
Nov.
1,
70,736
316, 206
63,
City corporation.
General treasury.
Library fund
Dec.
31, 1907.
May
31,
School district
General treasury
details,
June
30, 1908.
see Table
3,
2
The same
6,436
21, 118
4,086
283
6,427
4,220
7,260
4,293
90,663
2,148
10
3,179
7,600
98,236
26,864
"'9,'i36'
57, 418
848,960
117,939
730,344
588,833
66, 732
645, 565
98, 210
646, 688
660,658
28, 176
55,063
1,669
615, 721
29, 844
96,422
2,788
520,299
26, 389
203,385
19,729
183,656
203, 386
19,
729
183,656
538
202, 161
638
202, 161
638
I
as the aggregate of cash
on hand at beginning
of year
14,816
10,450
1,000
146
566
17,
6,926
127, 148
70,736
379,442
379, 442
236
7,600
680
790,994
Joliet, 111
For additional
396, 886
"'80,'
1907.
14,
14,
ipal).
Public trust fund (nonmu-
1
140,057
'
General treasury.
Library fund
Park fund
Sinking fund
14S
118,131
210,686
ipal).
Public
Pu^li trust fund (nonmu-
6,300
9,167
755,035
I
County dog tax fund
Burbank hospital fund
Library incidental fund
Sinking fund
871
5,126
26,350
Mar. 31,1908.
Mar. 31,1908.
Mar. 31, 1908.
May
General treasury
Library incidental fund.
Sinking fund
Public trust fund
8,041
253,271
School district
General treasury
i98
1,006,419
City corporation
General treasury
Sinking fund
Public trust fund (nonmunicipal).
Private trust fund
644
"'34,'
Sept. 30,1907.
Sept. 30,1907.
18, 467
1,565,649
5,300
34,842
and
all
receipts during year.
7,500
63,236
667
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
156
Table 2.—PAYMENTS, RECEIPTS,
[For a
list of
AND CASH BALANCES, BY DIVISIONS AND FUNDS:
the cities arranged alphabetically
by states, with
GROUP IV.— CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF
tlje
number
30,000
TO
assigned to each, see page
50,000
127.]
IN 1907— Continued.
1907— Continued.
GENERAL TABLES.
Table 2
157
—PAYMENTS, RECEIPTS, AND CASH BALANCES, BY DIVISIONS AND FUNDS: 1907—
[For a
list of
GROUP
the cities arranged alphabetically
IV.— CITIES
by
states,
with the number assigned to each, see page
HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
TO
50,000
127.]
IN 1907—Continued.
Continued.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
158
Table
3.-T0TAL PAYMENTS AND RECEIPTS, CLASSIFIED AS PAYMENTS OR RECEIPTS TO OR FROM THE PUBLIC,
[For a
list
of the cities arranged alphabetically
by states.
PAYMENTS.
To
To the public.
City
divisions, funds, enterprises, offices,
and
accounts.
number.
Grand
total.
For meeting
governmental
Total.
costs.i
Grand
Group I
Group II
Group III
Group IV
total
$1,218,827,196
829,093,363
194,439,517
116,551,839
78,742,477
$1,009,484,964
680,545,679
157,629,496
101, 593, 510
69,716,379
$703,835,941
463,497,811
116,181,670
73,110,249
51,046,211
For
all other
purposes.
$305,649,023
I.— CITIES
GROUP
II.— CITIES
transfer.'
and
investment
transfer.
<
General
transfer.'
$4,693,338
$112,540,850
$92,108,044
148,547,784
36,810,021
14,968,329
9,026,098
3,067,285
778,530
313,277
534,246
89,241,679
15,431,328
4,720,068
3, 147, 775
56,238,820
20,600,163
9,924,984
5,344,077
300,000
OR OVER IN
1907.
1
HAVING A POPULATION OF
Interest
$209,342,232
217,047,768
41,447,826
28,483,261
18,670,168
HAVING A POPULATION OF
GROUP
Service
Total.
100,000
TO
300,000
IN
1907.
GENERAL TABLES.
AND TRANSFER PAYMENTS AND RECEIPTS, TOGETHER WITH CASH BALANCES AND AGGREGAJ'ES:
with the
number assigned
Gash on
hand at
close of
year.
to each, see
page
127.]
159
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
160
Table
*
3.-T0TAL PAYMENTS AND RECEIPTS, CLASSIFIED AS PAYMENTS OR RECEIPTS TO OR PROM THE PUBLIC
[
GROUP
in.-CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
50,000
TO
For a
100,000
list
of the cities arranged alphabetioallj
IN
1907.
by states,
PAYMENTS.
To
City
To
the public.
divisions, funds, enterprises, ofHoes,
and accounts.
numbor.
Grand
total.
For meeting
governmental
Total.
For
all other
purposes.2
Total.
Interest
Service
transfer.'
costs.'
Cambridge, Mass.
.Albany, N.Y
$1,212,506
910, 415
$2,649,234
2,255,337
2,610,967
1,811,499
1,400,368
3,848,226
1,502,274
2,828,579
3,021,923
1,755,701
2,598,704
1,414,568
1. 712. 148
2,495,258
1,753,627
1,670,287
1, 329, 783
1, 451, 101
1,566,541
1,709,993
928, 417
84, 785
261,047
1,8^8,474
4, 106, 954
5,922,542
3, 430, 306
3,028,999
1,823,524
3,088,756
6, 171, 752
3,005,046
2,651,806
1,096,749
1, 977, 178
2,689,679
2,087,188
1,631,767
726,775
1,111,578
2,482,073
917, 858
1,020,039
4,950
1,018,198
750,790
425,260
Oakland, Cal
Lawrence, Mass.
Somerville, Mass.
Savannah, Ga
Duluth, Mirm
4,841,947
2,224,286
2,610,058
1,021,236
2,399,714
4,651,805
2,187,425
2,605,961
1,009,972
2,248,360
4,450,497
1,262,777
1,388,984
954, 803
1,940,172
201,308
924,648
1,216,977
55, 169
308,188
190,142
36,861
4,097
11,263
151,364
Norfolt,Va....
2,027,117
2,583,967
1,498,967
3,862,357
2,502,325
1,672,737
1,840,256
1,426,775
3,232,079
2,411,064
1,607,980
1,368,108
1,248,703
2,072,678
1,442,568
64,757
472,148
178,072
1, 159, 501
354,380
968,496.
630,278
91,261
1,734,003
2,414,349
1, 112, 694
1,365,402
1,697,198
149
2,217,903
1,054,982
1, 119, 564
1,455,649
895, 449
1,700,771
831,980
1,018,685
987,362
564, 700
517, 132
223,002
100, 879
468,287
273,854
196,446
57,612
245,838
241,649
2,874,284
690,344
1, 195, 998
1,941,825
1,410,421
2,866,889
688, 872
837,596
1,630,801
1,237,683
2,546,745
649,891
800,386
1,162,791
172, 838
320, 144
73,447
7,395
1,472
358,402
311,024
4,250,419
1,804,883
2,485,915
3,293,532
4,004,292
1,488,375
2,438,849
3,145,768
3,362,503
1,270,920
801, 416
1,524,208
641,789
217, 455
1,637,433
1,621,560
246, 127
316, 508
73,996
47,066
147,764
10,275
1,911,690
1,806,668
1,029,909
1,005,896
1,576,382
1,675,410
1,016,965
918,282
1,392,804
1,402,738
938,021
183,678
272,672
78,944
96
802, 103
116, 179
335,308
131,268
12,944
87,614
1,612,301
2,566,539
2,970,376
1,004,501
1,096,618
2,173,795
1,928,487
890, 997
1,270,328
1,093,971
776,056
127,920
903, 467
834, 516
114, 941
515,683
392,744
1,041,889
113,604
3,289,423
123
3,798,624
3, 784,
Reading, Pa
1,
Trenton, N.J
Bridgeport, Conn.
Wilmington, Del.
Camden, N.J
Des Moines, Iowa.
Kansas City, Kans..
Lynn, Mass
New Bedford,
Mass.
Spring&eld, Mass. .
.'
Troy,N.
Y
Hoboken, N.J.
Peoria,
111
Yonkers, N. Y.
Utica,N. Y....
Manchester, N. H.
Schenectady, N. Y.
E vansville, Ind
San Antonio, Tex.
Elizabeth, N. J
Waterbury, Conn
Salt Lake City, Utah.
Wilkes-Barre,
Erie,
Pa
Pa
Houston, Tex
Tacoma, Wash...
Harrisburg, Pa...
Charleston, S. C.
Portland, Me
Youngstown, Ohio.
Dallas,
87
$3,384
$809,079
456,355
495,341
61, 452
136,336
$3,861,740
2,833,068
3,288,782
3, 737, 172
1,774,079
J4, 670, 819
Hartford, Conn...
Lowell, Mass
Tex
Terre Haute, Ind .
Fort Wayne, Ind .
.
.
Akron, Ohio
Holyoke, Mass..
Brockton, Mass.
Covington,
Ky
.
1. 460.
For details, see Table. 4.
For details, see page 48.
'For details. see Tables 5,
577, 731
677, 815
1,925,673
373,711
928, 717
43,634
38,981
37,211
468,010
23,636
6,797
1,249,522
87,706
1,116,431
526,665
2,074
377, 193
743, 701
72, 192
18,
and notes
to Tables 7, 11,
General
transfer.'
$313,304
93,098
22,388
9,855
47,348
$492,391
363,267
449,317
44,800
547,597
63, 108
5,000
121,412
701,925
24,598
1,111,431
405,253
2,074
373,946
147,396
373,382
272,143
151,337
194, 146
1,663
3,505
14,049
42,654
108,700
1,437
1,462
34,385
7,263
26,324
221,149
731,684
64,019
540,477
83,998
86,470
76,090
2,640
56
118,899
161,060
120,356
54,972
245,782
122,650
36,167
37,260
2,410
5,982
and
16.
74,458
311,024
104,814
133,204
18,698
44,477
67,317
183,304
18,093
103,287
115,011
125,804
220,201
5,454
12,944
48,612
39,002
52, 164
100,142
21,149
592
11,263
133,231
10,580
6,711
55,416
1,472
283,944
'
and
transfer.*
4,960
616
3,462
5,721
2,918
1
6, 7, 9, 13, 14, 15, 17,
and
investment
205,654
100,575
107,578
310,029
240,005
928,329
112,972
GENERAL TABLES.
161
AND TRANSFER PAYMENTS AND RECEIPTS, TOGETHER WITH CASH BALANCES AND AGGREfiATES:
with the numljpr assigned to each, see page
GROUP
Cash on
hand
at
close of
year.
Aggregate of
all
payments,
and cash on
hand at close
III.-CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
Cash on
hand
From
50,000
TO
From
the public.
IN
100,000
1907.
divisions, funds, enterprises, offloes,
year.
ber.
total.
For meeting
govern-
mental
For
other
purposes."
all
Total.
Service
transfer.3
14,766,986
3,619,266
4,653,438
4,186,229
2,360,852
tl76,608
677, 129
768,867
300, 785
360,013
14,590,378
2,942,137
3,884,571
3,885,444
2,000,839
$3,781,299
2,485,782
3,288,658
3,823,992
1,864,503
$2,756,740
1,954,359
2,730,254
1,966,010
1,496,442
11,024,659
531,423
558,404
1,857,982
368,061
1809,079
456,355
595,913
61,452
136,336
302,246
253,007
132,448
638,716
392,988
4,150,472
1,765,281
2,961,027
3,660,639
2,148,689
618,574
156,259
304,074
376, 939
347,081
3,531,898
1,590; 022
2,656,963
3,283,700
1,801,608
2,310,666
1,611,316
1,556,022
2,756,586
1,799,634
1,392,087
1,466,531
1,292,975
1,826,315
1,755,900
918,468
44,785
263,047
930,271
43,634
1,221,343
87,706
1,100,931
627,114
342,659
193,302
166,628
494,832
290,428
2,171,133
4,300,256
6,089,170
3,926,138
3,319,427
290,208
393, 524
240,396
460,733
461,390
1,880,926
3,906,732
5,848,774
3,464,405
2,868,037
1,876,976
2,888,634
5,097,984
3,039,145
2,480,844
1,147,225
1,755,421
2,600,822
2,150,878
1,461,984
728,760
1,133,113
2,497,162
888; 267
1,018,860
4,950
1,018,198
760,790
425,260
377, 193
612,926
85,845
92,424
36,116
258,228
5,464,873
2,310,131
2,702,482
1,057,361
2,657,942
1,354,805
96,910
93,191
21,065
383,494
4,100,068
2,213,221
2,609,291
1,036,286
2,274,448
3,708,618
1,266,736
1,388,210
968,422
1,714,661
201,308
909,624
1,216,984
56,601
408,433
190, 142
2,176,360
2,606,194
1,025,023
2,123,094
321,151
188,665
256,059
416,563
173,363
2,348,268
2,772,522
1,755,026
4,278,920
2, 675, 688
346, 696
264,982
474,531
357,408
148,256
2,002,672
2,507,640
1,280,495
3,921,512
2,627,433
1,648,192
1,718,422
1,209,137
3,192,158
2,436,172
1,583,435
1,246,274
1,031,522
2,041,557
1,487,687
101,479
251,092
377,663
847,143
188,963
1,835,482
2,665,441
1,490,267
2,212,545
1,886,161
129,267
291,309
137,507
475,470
266,076
1,706,216
2,374,132
1,352,750
1,737,075
1,621,085
1,432,361
2,177,686
1,296,138
1,596,653
1,379,536
884,296
1,659,629
1,103,817
1,495,774
913,903
315,664
230,173
127,823
338,117
200,905
1,799,632
3,104,457
818, 167
1,534,115
2,142,730
340,896
629,090
69,502
257,386
174,469
1,458,636
2,475,367
748, 666
1,276,729
1,968,271
1,385,189
2,467,972
938,327
1,667,125
1,211,351
2,133,241
708,212
907,116
1,250,405
263,416
539,745
134,298
180,688
4,513,835
2,344,628
2,620,213
3,474,220
283,104
322,715
125,851
78,857
4,230,731
2,021,913
2,494,362
3,395,363
3,985,061
1,705,406
2,447,296
3,247,599
3,481,694
1,492,674
814,802
1,626,874
343,869
375,227
479,521
2,481,519
2,150,537
1,405,136
1,485,417
546,174
230,885
268,091
474,629
1,935,345
1,919,662
1,137,045
1,010,788
1,600,037
1,788,394
1,126,091
923, 174
1,417,221
1,491,263
1,038,886
804,806
350,480
276,115
50,079
133,025
1,962,781
2,842,654
3,020,465
1,137,526
262,740
301,772
87,813
179,624
1,700,041
2,640,882
2,932,642
957,902
1,184,368
2, 148, 138
1,890,753
806,921
1,014,656
1,222,871
1,056,237
691,318
747, 193
$3,384
23, 636
transfer.6
6,797
$313,304
93,098
22,388
9,855
47,348
$492,391
363,257
549,889
44,800
45
46
47
48
49
647,597
63,108
5,000
121,412
673,746
24,598
1,095,931
405,702
2,074
60
4,950
194,146
373,382
55
56
272, 143
68
2,074
616
3,462
6,721
2,918
823,436
373,946
147,396
222,938
36,861
4,097
11,263
151,354
1,663
3,505
14,049
42,654
108,700
1,150,601
948,486
364,380
789,118
71,368
729,354
91,261
1,437
1,462
65,375
7,263
548,065
518,067
191,321
100,879
466,633
273,854
196,446
57,612
140,422
241,549
26,324
173,838
73,447
7,395
1,472
338,402
311,146
20
4,985
38,981
31,211
406,720
503,367
212,731
1,632,494
1,620,725
245,670
316,508
47,066
147,764
73,539
182,816
87,205
118,368
335,308
131,258
10,954
87,614
169,702
926,267
834,516
115,603
515,683
392,744
1,041,889
150,981
64,767
472, 148
177, 615
334, 731
297, 131
For details oJ interest transfers, see Tables 6, 8, and 16. For details of investment transfers, see Tables
Exclusive of transfers between minor offices and accounts.
the aggregate of cash on hand at begiiming of year and all receipts during year.
The same as
ment
General
transfer.*
196,167
329,843
869,315
387,605
450,437
.
Interest
invest-
and
costs.i
*
City
numGrand
Total.
'
and
accounts.
at
beginning of
of year.6
6
1907-Coiit'd.
127.]
133,231
10,580
6,711
190,142
60
21, 149
61
592
11,263
62
63
64
221,149
66
777, 101
67
86,470
76,090
2,640
66
118,899
161,060
120,366
54,972
140,366
122,650
70
36,167
37,260
2,410
75
76
77
78
79
64,458
311,146
104,814
133,204
18,698
44,477
67,317
183,304
18,093
103,287
116,011
125,804
220,201
5,454
10,454
48,612
39,002
10, 21, 22,
57
161,337
55,416
500
52,164
5,982
532
52
53
54
63,185
608,563
1,472
283,941
10,275
51
205,654
100,675
107,678
and
23.
310,029
240,005
928,329
150,449
68
71
72
73
74
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
162
Table 3.—TOTAL
PAYMENTS AND RECEIPTS, CLASSIFIED AS PAYMENTS OR RECEIPTS TO OR FROM THE
[For a
GROUP
IV.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
TO
50,000
list of
IN
PUBLIC,
the cities arranged alpliabetlcally
by states
1907.
PAYMENTS.
To
Grand
For meeting
governmental
costs.
Pa
Spokane, Wash.
Altoona,
Lancaster, Pa.
.
Birmingham, Ala.
Bajronne, N. J
South Bend, Ind..
Butte, Mont
Pawtucltet, R. I
.
Dubuque, Iowa
Sioux City, Iowa
Augusta, Ga
Mobile, Ala
Topeka, Kans
all other
purposes.2
Interest
Service
Total.
and accounts.
transfer.*
11,115,790
740, 868
922, 056
2,306,928
540,047
1358,661
109,724
203,703
765,855
38,792
S341, 106
850,592
1,126,758
3,072,783
578,839
1,552,280
546
965,007
1,079,570
1,996,391
1,441,692
1,683,700
949, 470
1,077,666
1,627,469
1,127,842
963,466
743,046
853, 198
1,039,763
313, 860
730,244
206,424
224,468
687,696
110,588
439,845
16,537
1,904
933,483
1,074,599
619,817
741,064
749, 433
875,298
990,786
582,290
741,064
746,968
847, 801
768, 140
647,021
686,631
748, 302
27,497
232,645
35,269
166, 433
3,666
68,186
83,814
37,627
695, 642
665,078
564, 776
90,303
40,291
136,414
177,972
105, 183
40,464
192, 759
27,723
200,933
33,698
21,614
3,043
17,686
117,061
10,050
37, 131
828,998
.864,256
700, 118
688,635
650,100
S2,610
34,771
266
84,124
68,904
9,614
2,021
and
investment
transfer.'
SI, 474, 451
1,062,048
Springfleld, Ohio...,
For
$1,815,657
934, 716
1, 194, 662
3,082,397
680,860
2, 123,
McKeesport, Pa
Blnghamton, N. Y..
Johnstown, Pa
divisions, funds, enterprises, offices,
total.
Total.
Saginaw, Mich..
Lincoln, Nebr...
To
the public.
General
transfer.6
t286,226
42,912
64,219
476
S52,270
6,441
4,420
9,114
1,545
30,000
1,006
119, 759
16,953
183, 743
319,081
15,537
1,904
168,236
799
2,270
"'6,'i27'
2,465
500
55,116
83,814
31,400
1,627
18,860
189,716
10, 138
154,667
27,156
1,067,540
788,981
866,607
755,283
1,038,468
831,633
1,303,507
1,589,185
1,395,773
1,034,778
714,672
1,293,467
862,993
1,396,025
1,041,119
152,645
49,700
627,070
219, 602
353,906
2, 127,
York, Pa
Maiden, Mass
2,601,086
762, 414
1,002,139
508, 935
1, 734, 156
696
720,244
964,870
506,348
578, 263
1,695,974
574, 403
630,107
415, 964
1,035,738
631,722
146,841
334,763
90,394
542, 625
473,390
42,170
37,269
2,587
166,893
Springfleld, 111.
1,
871,836
460,197
658,616
627,703
319,813
393,426
146,818
191,479
77,837
297,243
36, 626
630,015
1,066,717
978,009
764,158
1,265,261
607, 015
850,096
705, 540
617,056
1,713,439
500,104
694,769
1,265,898
3,272,709
1,337,237
499,904
688,769
1,260,920
2,222,488
701,371
475,140
637,712
741,850
1,452,836
635,866
23,764
161,057
519,070
769,662
376,202
200
6,000
4,978
1,050,221
1,345,217
1,219,507
600,364
776, 429
1,144,195
732,093
1,207,094
426,214
701,103
657,376
613, 124
Wichita, Kans
Rockford, III
1,589,960
1,287,356
551,611
778, 170
1,182,424
244,743
67,849
61,267
2,741
38,229
Kaoxville, Tenn
Ehnlra, N.Y
Galveston, Tex
New Britain, Conn..
Chattanooga, Tenn..
749,893
730,049
2,283,310
1,027,167
771,228
676,633
672,015
1,734,886
997,866
765,428
527, 719
628, 699
1,644,177
894,963
665,399
190,709
102,913
100,029
Kalamazoo, Mich.
Woonsooket, R.I.
Fitchbure, Mass .
1,259,690
2,723,708
1,516,862
627,749
1,058,006
1,006,419
2,613,022
1,302,419
615,249
799,064
717,744
498,434
660,994
520,413
609,229
288,675
2,014,588
641, 425
94,836
189,835
12,500
268,942
467,622
791,532
1,396,399
640,190
790,994
1,392,399
633, 560
373,624
532,368
1,264,778
454,298
23,262
258,626
127,621
179,252
70,736
538
4,000
6,640
569,732
1,148,951
1,683,139
836,872
369,703
1,090,857
1,047,958
570,816
200,029
68,094
266,056
6,593
29,477
76,156
358,697
1,130,572
1,162,638
432, 412
619, 139
947,829
651,093
351,146
498,763
703,502
501,545
81,267
120,376
244, 327
241,418
82, 136
66,982
182,743
21,198
147,094
82,135
39,575
161,545
423,669
389,413
379,450
9,963
34,246
4.246
30,000
AJlentown,
Pa
East St. Louis, 111..
Wheeling, W.Va..
Montgomery, Ala.
N. J.
Davenport, Iowa...
Passaic,
Atlantic City, N. J.
Little Rock, Ark...
Bay City, Mioh
Qulnoy, 111
Canton, Ohio..
Superior, Wis..
Chester,
Pa
Chelsea, Mass
South Omaha, Nebr.
Newcastle, Pa
Salem, Mass
Newton, Mass
Haverhill, Mass..
Jacksonville, Fla.
Joplln, Mo
Racine, Wis
Auburn, N.
,
Y
Macon, Ga
Joliet, 111
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Oshkosh, Wis
West Hoboken, N.
J.
576,325
1, 178, 428
Sacramento, Cal
Pueblo, Colo
l,-759,295
Everett, Mass
1,195,469
Taunton Mass
Newport,
1,394,056
514,547
Ky
La Crosse, Wis
686, 121
Fort Worth, Tex.
San Juan, P.
1,
300, 887
R.
For details,
' For details,
' For details.
1
e Table
e
page
B
Tables
882,133
664,872
666,387
'
643, 391
12,413
74, 140
74,326
486,819
148,914
143, 316
636, 181
46,266
6,642
748
143,086
16,416
26,188
1,237
23,000
216, 622
64
18,
and notes
25,037
272,469
"
147, 102
253,271
7, 11,
14,224
6,000
3,325
864,311
171,686
48,154
194,897
19,692
255,660
18, 188
23,879
116,617
121,267
172,760
196
33,427
7,500
56,932
200
1,653
61,267
600
38,229
26,796
735
o, 300
210, 686
213, 443
4,733
23,000
191,531
272,469
53,383
311,283
2,141
73,260
58,034
548,424
29,291
16,800
to Tables
'93,'7i9
330,304
25,754
12,031
28
127,272
8,987
1,692
67,849
I
73,260
38,442
266,068
28,666
10,500
10,450
119,466
66,540
40,487
12,500
216,066
23,236
40,000
.638
4,000
3,320
6,067
38,086
2,694
3,581
344,240
90,7>3
"27,467'
48.
and
50
2,559
27,384
30, 893
4.
5, 6, 7, 9, 13, 14, 15, 17,
79,930
3,760
726,014
748
6,300
726, 192
and
16.
23,420
38,070
11,663
GENERAL TABLES.
163
AND TRANSFER PAYMENTS AND RECEIPTS, TOGETHER WITH CASH BALANCES AND AGGREGATES:
with the
number assigned
to each, see
page
127.]
GROUP
Cash on
hand
at
close of
year.
IV.-CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
TO
50,000
IN
1907.
1907-Coiit'd.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
164
Table
4.-PAYMENTS AND RECEIPTS FOR MEETING GOVERNMENTAL
COSTS,
[For a list of the cities arranged alphabetically
by states;
PAYMENTS FOK MEETING GOVERNMENTAL COSTS.
For revenue expenditures.
Expenses and
interest.
Total
payments for
On
meeting
,
govern-
mental
costs.
Outlays.
All expenses
and
interest.
General
and
special
service
expenses.
Grand
total
Group I
Group II
Group III
Group IV
York,
N.Y..
Baltimore, Md
Pittsburg, Pa
Cleveland, Ohio
.
.
N.Y
Buffalo,
San Francisco, Cal
Detroit, Mich
Cincinnati, Ohio...
Milwaukee, Wis.
New Orleans, La
.
.
Washington, D. C.
Expenses
Expenses
of
invested
funds.
enterprises.
of public
service
enterprises.
S27, 743, 561
$699,047,096
$457,345,308
$366, 787, 300
$2,051,727
$701, 028
463, 497, 811
116, 181, 670
73, 110, 249
460,680,041
115,692,475
72,362,853
50, 411, 727
303, 806, 131
245,007,901
57,209,795
38, 202, 560
26, 367, 044
1,628,652
221, 737
628, 650
61,046,211
Chicago, 111
Philadelphia, Pa.
St. Louis, Mo
Boston, Mass
Expenses
of munici-
pal service
$703, 835, 941
GROUP
New
acooimt
Expenses.
All revenue
expenditures.
$202,332,888
I.— CITIES
71,162,671
48,318,027
34, 068, 479
201, 338
HAVING A POPULATION OF
300,000
49,977
12,800
9,601
OK OVER
072
460, 795
704, 287
725, 397
16, 853,
4,
3,
2,
IN
1907.
ofdebt.i
Interest.
S60, 061, 702
$241,701,788
$4,788,846
856
9, 210, 367
6, 398, 380
4,766,099
166, 873, 910
44, 439, 804
2,817,770
24,044,826
16, 343, 248
747,396
634,484
39, 687,
689, 196
GENERAL TABLES.
BY PRINCIPAL CLASSES,
1907;
with the numbgr assigned to each, see page
COMPARATIVE SUMMARY,
127.]
BECEIPTS FOE MEETING GOVERNMENTAL COSTS.
1902
TO
1907.
'165
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
166
Table 4.—PAYMENTS
GROUP
in.-CITIES
AND RECEIPTS FOR MEETING GOVERNMENTAL
HAVING A POPULATION OF
60,000
TO
(For a
list
100,000
IN
PAYMEKTS FOR MEETING GOVERNMENTAL
COSTS,
of the cities arranged alphabetically
by states,
1907.
COSTS.
For revenue expenditures.
Expenses andinterest.
City
Total
num-
payments for
ber.
On
meeting
govern-
mental
costs.
Outlays.
All expenses
and
interest.
'
General
and special
service
expenses.
Cambridge, Mass..
Albany, N.Y....
Hartford, Conn...
Lowell, Mass
Reading,
Pa
Trenton, N.J
Bridgeport, Conn.
Wilmington, Del.
Camden, N.J
Des Moines, Iowa.
Kansas City, Kans.
Lynn, Mass
New
Bedford, Mass..
Springfield,
Troy,N.
Y
Mass
Oakland, Cal
Lawrence, Mass. .
Somerville, Mass..
Savannah, Ga
Duluth, Minn
Norfolk,
Va
Hoboken, N.
Peoria,
J..
111
Yonkers, N. Y..
Utioa,N.Y....
H
Manchester, N.
Schenectady, N.
.
Y
.
Evansville, Ind
San Antonio, Tex.
Elizabeth, N. J
Waterbury Corm
Salt Lake City, Utah.
,
Wilkfis-Barre,
Erie, Pa
Pa
Houston, Tex
Tacoma, Wash..
HarrisbuTg, Pa..
Charleston, S.C.
Portland, Me
Youngstown, Ohio.
Dallas,
Tex
Terre Haute, Ind
Fort Wayne, Ind
Akron, Ohio.
Holyoke, Mass...
Brockton, Mass..
Covington, Ky..
. .
. .
account
Expenses.
All reVenue
expenditures.
Expenses
of munici-
Expenses
Ezpi
Interest.
of public
of
invested
funds.
enterprises.
service
enterprises.
pal service
12,649,234
2,255,337
2,610,967
1,811,499
1,400,368
12,649,234
2,098,422
2,610,967
1,811,499
1,400,368
12,091,733
1,523,483
1,818,366
1,663,609
894,818
11,541,565
1,208,441
1,456,563
1,318,916
718,656
1525
300
67
10
189,879
166,687
103,080
162,942
69,335
1459,764
158, 155
268,665
191,742
106,827
1657,601
674,939
792,602
147,890
506,650
1,670,287
1,329,783
1,451,101
1,566,541
1,709,993
1,670,287
1,329,783
1,451,101
1,566,541
1,709,993
1,078,906
1,060,702
898,709
1,181,464
1,069,621
838,723
996,640
660,194
908,560
998,717
573
100
69,218
1,410
110,486
121,824
17,474
170,391
62,562
128,030
150,863
63,330
591,382
269,081
562,392
386,077
640,472
1,096,749
1,977,178
2,689,679
2,087,188
1,631,787
1,096,749
1,810,054
2,689,679
2,087,188
1,631,767
704,261
1,465,331
1,395,543
1,510,343
1,317,828
543,930
1,120,033
1,091,694
1,276,327
1,052,742
'304
494
1,680
154,631
79,232
137,312
104,368
169,533
187,087
224,167
96,429
160,382
392,488
344,723
1,294,136
576,845
313,939
4,460,497
1,262,777
1,388,984
954,803
1,940,172
4,450,497
1,262,777
1,388,984
912,486
1,940,172
1,755,695
1,028,918
1,197,987
737,463
1,242,722
10,032
85,387
64,987
69,210
177,669
93,480
100,218
180,441
165,142
300,849
2,694,902
233,859
190,997
175,023
897,450
1,607,980
1,368,108
1,248,703
2,072,578
1,442,568
1,607,980
1,368,108
1,125,989
2,072,578
1,376,179
1,196,494
1,172,869
849,448
1,393,586
939,551,
97,047
231,749
11,946
108,792
233
283,444
78,968
60,241
191,368
71, 156
411,488
196,239
276,541
678,992
436,628
895,449
1,700,771
831,980
1,018,686
838,503
1,700,771
831,980
1,018,686
987,362
62,063
51,368
76,788
12,484
62
61,602
109,442
96,469
125,238
108,703
166,460
903,866
173,538
188,023
324,780
1,237,583
2,546,745
649,891
800,385
1,162,791
1)237, 683
2,546,745
649,891
800,385
1,123,646
26,465
137,601
2,266
106,094
82,282
64,619
203,661
39,406
22,641
245,634
450, 100
1,192,523
156,700
173,475
196,818
3,362,503
1,270,920
801,416
1,524,208
246,223
68,119
2,902
50,731
275,317
75,663
136,796
136,471
2,090,800
804,443
109,564
502,268
77,442
98,747
10,162
60,676
64,233
112,212
22,392
35,810
658,017
631,340
358,591
272,266
2,392
246,964
44,966
47,489
62,194
115,511
123,523
87,842
283,566
260,719
269,012
248,864
,
660
275
336
1,652,083
843,313
962,569
523,111
764,504
816,003
861,991
777,222
1,094,821
867,615
161
39
605
672,053
796,906
658,442
830,662
662,682
558,388
635,707
485,803
692,942
662,813
382
787,483
1,354,222
494,191
626,910
696,909
1,012,960
462,520
498, 175
698,912
3,362,503
1,270,920
801,416
1,524,208
1,271,703
666,477
691,852
1,021,950
751, 163
1,392,804
1,402,738
938,021
802,103
1,392,804
1,402,738
938,021
780,874
734,787
871,398
679,430
508,608
692,004
660,439
646,662
1,270,328
1,093,971
776,056
894,081
1,270,328
1,093,971
776,056
610,525
1,009,609
824,959
527,202
656,561
847,059
656,470
391,871
1
522,705
651,912
834,748
412, 115
647
'i,664'
600
243
1,108
224
108
378
75,
Excess of payments over receipts on account of debt, shown in column 8 of Table 10.
over payments on account of debt, shovni in column 8 of Table 10.
2 Excess of receipts
of debt.i
1156,916
167, 124
42,317
122,714
"66,'389'
56,9*6
39, 145
21,229
74,617
GENERAL TABLES.
BY PRINCIPAL
CLASSES,
1907;
with the uumber assigned to each, see page
COMPARATIVE SUMMARY,
1902
167
TO 1907—Continued.
127.]
GROUP
III.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
50,000
TO
100,000
IN
1907.
RECEIPTS FOR MEETING GOVERNMENTAL COSTS.
EXCESS OF RECEIPTS
FROM REVENUES OVER-
From
Excess of
revenues.
payments
Excess of
payments
for
Commercial.
Total
revenue
expenditures
over receipts
Payments
for
for
tures over
receipts
revenue
expendi-
expenses
from com-
and
tures.
interest.
mercial
revenues.
receipts for
On
meeting
account
from
ofdebt.2
revenues.
govern-
mental
costs.
AH
revenues.
General.
Total.
»2, 756, 740
Revenues
from
special
services.
Revenues
Interest.
11,900,002
1,354,531
2,022,307
1,516,367
898,775
$635,869
599,828
472,488
381,907
585,790
$146,386
167,710
166,661
96,258
353,830
$92,727
67,155
46,116
60,773
1,887
$396,766
364,963
269,711
224,876
230,073
$220,869
1,392,087
1,466,631
1,292,975
1,826,315
1,755,900
1,174,107
1,355,027
1,032,693
1,113,894
1,661,986
856,603
1,280,033
760, 745
778,685
1,306,153
317,604
74,994
271,948
335,209
356,833
95,301
68,029
46,504
74,021
334,788
15,613
6,886
10,556
18,848
4,067
206,590
79
214,888
242,340
16,988
217,980
111,504
260,282
712,421
93,914
1,147,225
1,755,421
2,600,822
2,150,878
1,461,984
1,040,118
1,755,421
1,905,894
1,883,426
1,442,528
679,721
1,231,844
1,486,203
1,434,264
1,185,053
360,397
523,577
257,475
353,866
173,960
115,836
133,328
73,196
6,541
32,403
52,454
22,603
6,579
317,224
251,401
293,231
178,700
3,708,618
1,266,736
1,388,210
968,422
1,714,661
2,813,440
1,125,958
1,356,686
968,422
1,675,934
2,055,750
922,522
1,000,068
774,772
1,067,311
767,690
203, 436
356,618
193,650
608,623
729,725
60,698
113,553
38,389
266,031
12,935
11,933
9,803
10,123
6,276
1,583,435
1,246,274
1,031,522
2, 041,.557
1,487,687
1,368,240
1,098,548
1,031,522
1,470,023
1,487,687
1,111,421
810,213
879, 700
1,186,412
1,253,712
256,819
288,335
161,822
283,611
233,975
71,774
59,666
109,904
89,608
194,417
884,296
1,659,629
1,103,817
1,495,774
913,903
884,296
1,133,029
1,004,147
1,040,664
838,566
736,865
771,030
732,321
996,208
699,687
147,441
361,999
271,826
44,456
138,879
1,211,351
2,133,241
708,212
907, 116
1,250,405
1,085,716
1,935,771
636,613
890,664
1,260,405
841,493
487, 113
602,432
607,023
1,011,862
3,481,694
1,492,674
814,802
1,626,874
2,771,971
1,150,572
814,415
1,282,477
1,417,221
1,491,263
1,038,886
804,806
1,014,656
1,222,871
1,056,237
691,318
235,459
67,736
11,877
15,030
140,805
233,262
146,138
337,316
895,178
140,778
31,524
1,637,057
136,819
32,298
38,727
264,238
451
4,195
20,861
11,231
36,922
184,694
224,674
21,067
182,772
3,636
215,195
147,726
239,740
269,660
94,467
602,555
9,327
210,548
132,772
21,026
133,792
5,532
24,789
964
4,619
6,019
132,582
126,662
138, 100
18,811
244,223
448,658
34,181
283,641
238,553
38,093
266,847
31,665
67,393
41,360
20,630
7,369
1,480
14,859
6,066
1,173,504
696,237
775,032
1,126,470
1,598,467
454,335
39,383
156,007
1,088,305
234,092
24,219
57,239
i,ioo;i93
1,333,024
813,087
804,806
741,937
1,055,127
665,007
564,515
368,256
277,897
148,080
240,291
1,014,666
1.222,782
1,001,366
689,941
853,492
782,082
713,621
483,772
161,164
440,700
287,735
206,169
55,936
1,362,783
1,254,789
1,179,163
1,231,332
1,354,160
50
335,867
290,090
510,361
373,083
.124,700
736,352
1,286,477
2,269,988
1,638,026
1,374,292
55
56
57
58
59
1,057,845
97,040
158,699
230,959
433,212
3,692,807
1,059,341
1,032,366
718,836
1,331,549
60
171,746
•74,321
182,074
76,437
648, 136
1,361,161
1,079,773
974,167
1,788,967
1,142,204
65
66
67
212,243
336,123
346,706
210,002
176,984
691,062
1,338,772
660,154
974,229
848,483
70
'
111,508
45,793
526,600
99,670
455,110
75,337
567,742
185,600
174,442
1,046
201,389
191,127
125,635
197,470
71,599
16,462
151,867
610,974
13,278
6,947
7,189
11,176
56,157
504,215
213,054
3,989
42,611
709,723
342,102
387
344,397
690, 632
241,731
213,140
64,771
128,479
133,328
9,273
16,567
1,488
6,880
136,843
206,669
18,113
100,083
317,028
168,239
226,799
292,611
69,714
124,934
153,402
26,606
142, 176
86,386
5,897
13,819
18,553
1,865
400,275
127,006
119, 783
for
95,202
294,325
133,984
"67,670
692,465
25,244
418,408
452,647
48,007
56, 631
172,167
21,979
90,279
126,759
120,348
23,932
120, 575
64,881
1,377
4S
46
47
48
49
496, 1«0
54,633
783,785
203,762
189,239
671,534
$2,013,365
1,498,594
2,138,479
1,429,692
814,578
$86,775
84,197
694,928
267,452
19,456
Excess of payments
ber.
$444,138
430,876
676,430
234,665
589,747
$113,363
144,063
116,172
107,107
"
City
num*
service
enterprises.
12,535,871
1,994,359
2,494,795
1,898,274
1,484,565
1,
Payments
from public
1,954,359
2,730,254
1,966,010
1,496,442
419, 691
449, 162
revenue
expendi-
for
47,546
92, 616
86,116
expenses and interest over receipts from revenues.
581,549
142,422
263,764
323, 677
993,360
2,098,087
615,710
516,744
51
52
53
54
61
62
63
64
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
1,600,268
484,096
122,563
260,527
1,764,036
816,586
762,033
1,368,201
80
366, 406
1,034,648
1,124,841
789,941
540,583
84
85
732,917
829,628
806,236
669,887
88
461,626
233,657
296,198
404, 131
213, 173
176,397
162,739
81
82
87
90
91
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
168
AND RECEIPTS FOR MEETING GOVERNMENTAL
Table 4.— PAYMENTS
[For a
GROUP
IV.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
TO
list
IN
50,000
PAYMENTS FOR MEETING GOVERNMENTAL
COSTS,
of the cities arranged alphabetically
by states,
1907.
COSTS.
For revenue expenditures.
Expenses and
Total
interest.
payments tor
On
meeting
govern-
mental
costs.
Outlays.
and
interest.
General
and
special
service
expenses.
$1,115,790
740,868
922,065
2,306,928
540,047
$1,115,790
740,868
922,055
2,306,928
540,047
1,127,842
953,456
743,046
853,198
1,039,763
1,127,842
953,456
743,046
853, 198
1,039,763
847, 801
758, 140
Dubuque, Iowa
Sioux City, Iowa
847,801
758,140
547,021
585,631
743,302
Augusta, Ga
Mobile, Ala
Topeka, Eans
Springfleld, Ohio
Allentown, Pa
$642,463
497,911
479,267
1,235,512
432,611
$609,218
366,722
387,766
960,211
312,810
707,366
476,689
652,841
833,987
546,222
533, 163
391,814
603,565
693,750
547,021
585,631
682,096
621,076
633,434
378,709
435,840
622,606
408,679
441,572
359,614
322,809
418,283
564,775
828,998
700, 118
688,635
650, 100
660,890
700,961
673,711
688,635
650,100
427,722
644,920
605,356
623,332
362,082
306,202
273,804
345,013
443,389
288, 408
East St. Louis, 111
Wheeling, W. Va
Montgomery, Ala
Passaic, N. J
Davenport, Iowa
882,133
664,872
666,381
643,391
1,041,119
882,133
635,502
666,387
643,391
993,632
576,835
581,884
423,585
567,042
419,749
637,210
Atlantic City, N. J
1,595,974
674,403
630, 107
415,954
1,035,738
1,595,974
674, 403
630, 107
415, 954
1,036,738
1,029,315
291,443
474,334
325,236
722,621
805,440
259,235
341,364
283, 162
660,211
871,835
460, 197
658,616
627,703
319,813
839, 455
371,223
658,616
595,020
319,813
674,099
322,386
465,338
305,996
416,062
276,471
346,870
434,098
271,037
701,371
476,140
537,712
741,850
1,452,836
701,371
476,140
537,712
741,850
1,452,836
622,676
360,048
301,846
595,782
1,105,646
486,998
301,669
275,835
512,365
831,307
732,093
1,207,094
426,214
701,103
657,376
732,093
1,207,094
426,214
701,103
657,376
634,781
659,316
239,117
366,878
408,125
534,831
367,873
201,711
300,235
329,104
527,719
628,699
1,544,177
527,719
497,315
1,544,177
894,953
656,399
366,048
423,637
608,707
479,925
450,655
282,193
373,496
377,295
367,864
381,405
717,744
498,434
660,994
520,413
609,229
717,744
498,434
660,994
520,413
609,229
398,227
432,464
548,271
329,444
439,101
317,271
291,073
418,861
296,194
352,388
373,624
532,368
1,264,778
454,298
281,424
530,889
1,264,778
420,004
286,687
379,984
411,050
305,873
238,977
321,356
301,728
284,102
369,703
1,090,857
1,047,958
570,816
369,703
1,090,857
1,047,958
670,816
284,196
591,405
772,666
499,619
253,031
525,704
500,713
373,070
651,093
351,145
498,763
703,502
651,093
317,457
498,763
703,602
538,603
278,193
341,548
512,486
362,739
195,844
280,025
249,193
379,450
379,450
254,682
190,833
Spokane,
Wash
Lancaster,
Pa
Birmingham, Ala
Bayonne, N. J
South Bend, Ind
Butte,
Mont
Pawtucket, E.
I
MoKeesport, Pa
Y
Binghamton, N.
Johnstown, Pa
Little Rock, Ark
City, Mich
Bay
York, Pa
Maiden, Mass
Springfield,
.
111
Qulnoy,Ill
Canton, Ohio
,
Superior, Wis
Chester, Pa
.<•
Chelsea, Mass
South Omaha, Nebr
Newcastle, Pa
Salem, Mass
Newton, Mass
Haverhill, Mass
Jacksonville, Fla
Joplin,
Mo
Wichita, Kans
Rockford, 111
Knoxville,
Elmira, N.
Galveston,
Tenn
Y
Tex
New Britain, Conn
Chattanooga, Tenn
Kalamazoo, Mich
Woonsooket, E. I
Fitehburg, Mass
Eacine, Wis
Auburn, N.
Y
Macon, Ga
Joliet.Ill
Oklahoma City,
Oshkosh, Wis
Okla....
West Hoboken, N.
Sacrajnento, Cal
Pueblo, Colo
Everett, Mass
Taunton, Mass
Newport, Ky
La Crosse, Wis
Fort Worth, Tex
San Juan, P.
E
J
of debt.i
All revenue
expenditures.
All expenses
Saginaw, Mich
Lincoln, Nebr
Altoona, Pa
account
Expenses.
806, 572
451, 467
467, 109
.
490, 489
331,356
Expenses
of
munici-
pal service
enterprises.
Expenses
of
Expenses
of
invested
funds.
pubhc
service
enterprises.
$44, 770
60,628
15,619
60,018
77,282
$14,386
40
61, 494
62,783
64,935
500
46,948
27,688
59,614
26,474
18,695
68,083
76,635
326,726
224,706
168,312
149,791
169,490
47,696
92,339
32,724
29,341
32,426
73,926
176,353
111,221
50,403
41,248
133,168
156,031
168,355
166,303
288,018
410
194,431
45,907
85,936
23,568
81,712
31,718
306,298
53,618
242,802
191,924
426,590
""'i99'
508
295, 966
1,675
36,460
2,636
27, 197
96,689
2,938
64,418
125,611
17,411
68,504
42,074
120,639
345
41,426
2
67,671
1,864
39,058
"545'
4,712
26,796
6
100
16,992
519
19,631
408
156,773
90,718
313,217
3,166
43,169
20,666
110,150
68,389
22,856
40,097
248,961
78,795
116,092
236,868
146,068
347,190
25,877
202,636
25,772
1,495
48,664
73,973
88,808
11,634
64,148
30,387
97,312
547,778
187,097
335,225
249,251
4,391
7,452
53,139
26,640
1,344
79,464
42,689
151,477
85,416
67,806
161,671
73,878
936,470
415,028
204,744
28,266
16,720
58,908
7,494
42,771
35,698
124,671
67,993
25,756
24,305
319,517
66,970
114,723
190,969
170,128
8,865
36,994
52,704
2,928
38,250
21,634
66,618
18,843
S5,263
160,905
853,728
123,131
49,823
90,675
29,194
31,185
16,878
181,188
97,355
85,507
499,462
275,402
71,197
86,275
32,710
27,489
141,468
89,081
49,639
34,019
95,589
112,590
39,284
157,215
191,017
27,477
38,372
124,768
1,420
10.
10.
3,885
128,047
28,407
666,659
265,356
48,837
193,278
127,911
13,817
24,432
$81,206
282, 9iO
58,188
44,051
79,866
33,011
33,639
Excess of payments over receipts on account of debt, shown in column 8 of Table
> Excess of receipts over payments on account of debt, shown in column 8 of Table
'
420,476
146,884
266,367
200,357
205,776
156,241
95,960
49,246
49,276
178,703
2,424
26,265
$473,327
242,967
442,788
1,071,416
107,636
177, 171
16,398
32,276
$88,476
56,175
75,882
215,283
42,419
$288
169
4,903
32,023
Interest.
32,380
88,974
92,200
1,479
25,294
33,(
GENERAL TABLES.
BY PRINCIPAL CLASSES,
COMPARATIVE SUMMARY,
1907;
with the number assigned to each, see page
•
1902
169
TO 1907—Continued,
127.]
OROUP
POPULATION OF
IV.—CITIES HAVING A
30,000
TO
IN
50,000
1907.
EXCESS OF RECEIPTS
RECEIPTS FOR MEETING GOVERNMENTAL COSTS.
FROM REVENUES OVER-
From revenues.
Excess of
payments
Excess of
for revenue
Commercial.
Total
for
receipts for
meeting
govern-
mental
costs.
All
revenues.
General.
Total.
$988,626
730,001
620,191
1,871,406
481,655
$l,22i),547
742,997
831,891
2,346,937
532,118
Revenues
Irom
special
services.
Revenues
Interest.
Payments
Payments
On
for
for
tures over
receipts
account
from
revenue
expendi-
expenses
from com-
and
tures.
interest.
mercial
revenues.
of debt.2
from public
service
enterprises.
$730,756
535,752
464,892
1,093,464
340,117
$257,870
194,249
156,299
777,942
141,538
$162,97.'i
74,901
34,317
392,275
6,.596
$6,916
13,246
10,561
40,163
8,224
$87,979
106,102
110,421
345,504
127,718
$240,921
12,996
211,700
476,531
50,463
$127,164
10,867
301,864
435,522
68,392
136,362
311,000
5,187
141,684
39,230
153,584
131,800
93,253
111,920
36,778
6,006
182,046
61,962
63,164
33,137
'
expendi-
revenue
expenditures
over receipts
$346,163
232,090
140,924
635,894
49,144
$857,920
546,619
766,766
1,628,986
398,509
266,892
16,084
301,880
66,239
124,010
847,861
648,328
473,680
722,070
764,420
144,679
162,754
106,158
116,654
228,598
700,900
588,386
536,472
478,039
562,609
133,732
81,670
261,927
139,364
187,543
365,906
522,367
480,787
517,621
632,877
216,501
111,389
108,947
20,261
412,192
758,904
376,172
509.653
561,715
662,891
263,207
142,995
235,957
75,336
73,416
1,249,011
621,783
476,133
397,631
805,571
267,283
170,833
167,945
264,089
39,976
573,141
323,742
522,481
463,638
299,920
69,782
88,747
159,319
248,088
283,611
611, 143
447,839
460,368
421,914
1,158,074
98,105
187,364
161,212
90,645
132,385
543,411
814,049
282,634
604,386
528,905
1,110,620
1,132,656
783,756
860,664
997,227
974,258'
821,656
778,569
719,080
957,997
694,277
516,528
509,203
587,952
682,654
279,981
306,128
269,366
131,128
275,343
257,141
75,316
186,103
130,469
37,710
19,315
3,146
1,796
659
15,561
3,626
226,666
81,467
759,008
808,108
520,645
558,499
751,204
665,755
696,188
483,867
552,494
751,204
518,854
526,434
473,318
444,902
631,717
146,901
169,754
10,649
107,692
119,487
62,444
42,725
9,555
49,989
44,683
12,675
6,428
696
851
71,782
120,601
298
56,752
74,804
561,454
626,590
757,283
773,758
621,335
561,454
626,590
757,283
662,696
549,625
366,470
447,996
564,359
491,682
432,402
194,984
178,594
192,924
171,114
117,223
50,778
40,457
103,848
72,220
17,426
92
144,114
138,137
84,686
81,234
97,236
859,864
693,273
661,009
606,024
979,234
793,336
693,273
532,532
471,728
979,234
«70,107
433,943
375,798
390,052
638,493
123,229
269,330
156,734
81,676
340,741
112,012
6,410
65,830
80,816
333,470
11,090
2,608
5,976
1,296
2,029,767
617,797
975,159
436,759
958,066
1,292,522
434,438
710,291
400,572
795,937
945,559
381,818
556,317
382,149
565,770
346,963
52,620
153,974
18,423
230,167
181,344
44,651
77,748
10,248
76,220
18,943
1,769
1,154
8,176
48,693
146,676
6,200
75,072
831,382
493,219
712,184
721,198
400,572
831,382
493,219
623,283
721,198
345,972
566,068
446,738
487,148
589,816
326,079
266,314
47,481
136,135
131,382
19,893
127,680
31,017
49,569
126,934
17,374
15,401
5,736
4,448
1,829
744,256
646,498
476,651
847,177
1,479,644
692,358
448,795
461,165
843,870
1,389,257
502, 130
190,228
28,301
87,344
319,936
294,762
41,468
19,360
82,640
199,302
118,856
12,249
8,941
4,556
15,669
22,607
136,511
420,494
373,821
523,934
1,094,495
148
104,965
153,300
61,898
197,703
15,486
3,307
90,387
783,026
940,529
509,761
696,797
668,108
732,886
846,670
400,329
456,523
640,510
544,204
453,625
266,649
359,806
412,039
188,682
393,045
143,680
96,717
128,471
52. 173
86,809
112,785
94,243
50. 174
31,154
348
12,095
1,102
1,316
105,355
306,888
18,800
1,372
76,981
50,140
93,859
109,432
240,274
127,598
490.756
531, 718
1,375,372
918,735
1,417,485
484,284
531,718
805,660
627,602
492,715
453,877
486,811
696,572
455,208
461,930
30,407
44,907
209,088
172,294
30,785
18,023
25,870
49,468
49,411
25,445
1,572
9,639
37,618
6,082
2,789
10,812
9,498
122,002
116,801
2,651
6,472
43,435
569,712
291,233
924,770
738,517
267,451
162,684
118,236
108,081
196,953
147,577
42,060
497, 312
452,408
1,335,089
722,659
624,614
631,544
616,293
683,410
490,596
695,734
697,532
441,775
651,094
487,866
532, 110
419,436
326,381
524,671
449,339
391,652
178,096
115,394
126,423
38,527
140,458
124,530
33,707
31,357
26,536
40,054
7,728
2,097
6,763
3,451
3,060
45,838
79,590
88,303
8,640
97,344
34,012
74,518
32,316
2,730
163,624
120,212
56,659
9,900
32,647
77,119
199,305
9,311
104,823
158,422
93,009
539,648
383,040
534,671
481,886
468,771
361,241
471,718
1,288,553
453,274
361,241
471,718
924,260
463,274
329,297
383,868
246,274
407,202
31,944
87,850
677,986
46,072
17,802
53,917
598,468
41,480
5,012
3,931
130
2,787
9,130
30,002
79,398
1,805
364,293
59,171
340,618
74,554
91,734
513,210
147,401
249,480
443,039
586,792
382,932
419,074
1,241,552
1,058,874
590,749
396, 143
953, 136
329,523
686,688
666,111
427,267
66,620
266,448
374,696
149,280
64,888
132,210
165,187
41,199
1,732
2,174
9,952
12,002
111,947
361,731
267,261
76,918
303,083
824,409
673,262
421,536
151
152
153
154
IM
165
156
>
1,039,807
576,537
643,826
357,609
513,470
615,607
357,609
495,271
789,895
419,879
269,116
375,897
606,211
196, 728
433,3.53
370,891
274,861
96,040
88,493
119,374
183,684
3
N
35,338
23,637
62,986
21,838
4,390
17,660
2,561
222,072
$35,523
134,118
81,766
69,108
664
74,361
83,572
25,939
100,475
111,062
71,710
66,528
88,797
128,477
134,296
133,855
171,663
14,398
303,462
139,965
105,254
737,245
183,369
264,868
36,187
162,129
138,634
1,063
80,830
88,901
127
260,412
90,904
690
57,771
0,184
15,382
239,801
8,073
121,996
"
'35,'333
126,178
26,159
"54,'66d'
9,013
27,345
76,547
102,020
63,579
793
360,424
25,885
244,580
116,866
34,403
79,817
24,270
26,440
22,931
288,416
19,067
14,212
137,721
8,161
28,219
35,486
8,763
317
138,651
64,856
47, 626
161,529
11,002
277,410
455,365
228,964
379,389
519,818
9,472
81,614
62,462
116,209
283,410
21,739
132,064
199,557
96,079
Excess of receipts from sales of real property over payments
5,721
77,
40, 152
18, 199
for outlays.
"3,'
492
79,416
153, 723
157
158
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
170
Table 4.—PAYMENTS
AND EECEIPTS FOR MEETING GOVERNMENTAL
COMPARATIVE SUMMARY FOR
i
PAYMENTS POK MEETING GOVERNMENTAL
148
CITIES,
COSTS,
GROUPED
COSTS.
For revenue expenditures.
Expenses and
Interest.
Total
payments lor
On
meeting
govern-
mental
Outlays.
All expenses
and
Interest.
General
and special
service
expenses.
Grand
of public
service
enterprises.
$27,267,126 $69,258,172
65,183,134
25,742,767
41,665,586 51,953,496
41,736,494 47,819,221
43,099,919
23,379,190
42,215,391
19,913,687
$238,965,393
192,601,828
185,803,366
183,466,119
173,136,348
128,086,754
$4,662,957
5,721,240
7,220,166
5,123,418
6,025,517
6,672,881
16,853,072
16,127,819
27,298,391
28,120,202
15,256,516
13,181,903
39,687,856
35,975,661
33;260,876
29,910,068
26,007,111
25,357,862
156,873,910
131,266,896
130,384,420
131,113,011
126,023,251
90,956,790
2,817,770
2,071,526
2,983,112
2,211,335
3,600,936
2,034,851
49,977
50,733
49,278
42,676
50,046
40,421
4,460,795
4,287,226
6,976,350
6,517,812
3,831,682
2,893,346
9,210,367
9,197,218
9,074,997
8,562,302
8,385,741
8,416,328
44,439,804
31,700,308
29,278,783
27,203,077
24,557,220
18,680,800
589,195
1,729,949
1,265,861
1,567,032
492,743
2,433,878
12,800
8,643
6,232
7,717
5,794
4,908
3,704,287
3,307,638
4,576,775
4,240,053
2,540,375
2,322,777
6,398,380
6,096,939
5,824,765
5,794,152
5,362,834
5,199,439
24,044,826
17,567,829
14,880,562
15,175,830
14,528,409
11,448,892
747,396
960,240
1,783,308
782,820
1,210,873
1,123,297
8,953
7,288
7,699
7,525
7,023
5,945
2,248,972
2,020,084
2,814,069
2,857,427
1,760,618
1,515,661
961, 669
3,913,416
3,792,867
3,562,699
3,344,233
3,241,762
13,606,853
12,076,795
11,259,601
9,964,201
8,027,468
7,000,272
1,187,885
562,231
720,965
1,080,866
$696,18S,S36
606,571,901
601,377,482
572,056,346
524,554,294
469,648,327
1691,525,579
600,850,661
584,157,316
566,932,928
518,528,777
462,975,446
$452,560,186
408,248,833
398,353,950
383,476,809
346,392,429
$363,326,038
326,820,035
304,144,500
293,510,607
278,473,508
272,616,313
$2,008,470
$700,380
502,897
690,370
411,487
439,812
143,301
463,497,811
404,050,640
394,967,852
386,256,300
356,296,263
315,220,895
460,680,041
401,979,115
391,984,740
384,044,965
352,695,327
313,186,044
303,806,131
270,722,219
261,600,320
262,931,954
226,672,076
222,229,254
246,007,901
218,182,506
200,513,892
194,648,115
185,031,501
183,697,462
1,628,652
628,650
436,333
527,161
363,569
376,949
92,027
116,181,670
98,854,539
96,244,963
90,768,700
80,905,346
73,632,791
115,592,475
97,124,590
94,979,102
89,201,668
80,412,603
71,198,913
71,152,671
65,424,282
65,700,319
61,998,591
55,855,383
52,518,113
67,209,795
61,889,105
49,599,694
46,875,801
43,587,914
41,168,018
221,737
73,110,249
62,962,235
60,310,795
58,502,551
54,599,150
50,236,754
72,362,853
62,001,995
58,527,487
57,719,731
53,388,277
49,113,457
48,318,027
44,434,166
43,646,925
42,543,901
38,859,868
37,664,565
38,202,560
35,021,046
33,239,153
32,501,979
30,950,865
30,137,441
43,398,806
40,704,487
39,853,872
36,528,795
32,753,535
30,557,887
42,890,210
39,744,961
38,665,987
36,966,564
32,032,570
29,477,032
29,283,357
27,668,166
27,406,386
26,002,363
24,005,102
22,476,760
22,906,782
21,727,378
20,791,761
19,584,712
18,903,228
17,713,392
II:
1907
1906
1905
1904
1903
1902
Group
of
of municipal service invested
funds.
enterprises.
Interest.
I:
1907
1906
1905
1904
1903
1902
Group
Expenses
Expenses
of debt.!
total: <
1907
1906
1905
1904
1903
1902
Group
account
Expenses.
All revenue
expenditures.
III:
1907
1906
1905
1904
1903
1902
Group IV:
1907
1906
1905
1904
1903
1902
<
,
158,081
i?,
1 In this summary, payments and receipts, except those on account of interest and debt, include certain payments and receipts which were not
mental costs, but which could not be segregated for 1902, 1903, or 1904.
2 Excess of payments over receipts on account of debt, shown in column 8 of Table 10.
for
meeting govern-
GENERAL TABLES.
BY PRINCIPAL
CLASSES,
1907;
ACCORDING TO POPULATION IN
COMPARATIVE SUMMARY,
1907: 1902
TO
1907.
RECEIPTS FOR MEETING GOVERNMENTAL COSTS.
1902
TO 1907— Continued.
171
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
172
Table 5.—PAYMENTS
I
For a
CLASSIFIED BY DIVISION OF THE
GOVEENMENT OP THE CITY PAYING.
list of
the cities arranged alphabetically
CLASSIFIED
Payments
FOR GENERAL EXPENSES
by
states.
BY PAYEE.
to public.
Total
payments
and
special
service
expenses.
Classified
Other
lor general
by
character.
Classified
Payments
by
object.
divisions
City cor-
School
poration.
districts.
of the
offices,
and
govern-
ment
of
accounts
Total.
the city.
(service
transfers).
For meeting
govern-
Payments
mental
in error.i
Miscella-
and wages.
costs.
Grand
total
Groupl
$371,944,424
248,638,781
57,857,719
38,540,612
26,907,312
Group II
Group III
Group rv
GEOUP
New
York, N. Y..
Chicago, 111
Philadelphia, Pa.
St. Louis, Mo
Boston, Mass
Baltimore, Md
Pittsburg, Pa
Cleveland, Ohio...
N.Y
Buffalo,
San Francisco, Cal
Detroit, Mich
Cincinnati, Ohio...
Milwaukee, Wis. .
New Orleans, La.
Washington, D. C.
Louisville,
Ky
Indianapolis, Ind. .
St. Paul,
Minn.
209, 689, 748
46,409,066
33,239,717
21,702,054
$100,733,879
9,776,593
22, 326, 526
8,629,084
17,451,866
7,007,963
8,948,873
7,128,645
6,095,354
7,840,984
7,007,963
4,701,228
3, 806, 263
5,227,639
7,840,984
5,480,651
5,727,212
4,814,998
3, 427, 364
7, 443, 878
4,791,612
154
3,419,815
3,427,364
7, 443, 878
3, 105,
II.— CITIES
$4,614,617
3,260,095
2,541,515
2,515,269
2,446,203
$4,814,617
3,260,095
2,541,616
2,515,269
1,445,098
2,180,219
3,056,860
2,694,622
2,776,982
Toledo, Ohio
1, 610,
127
2,180,219
3,056,860
2,694,622
1,768,686
1,039,893
Denver, Colo
Columbus, Ohio..
Los Angeles, Cal..
Worcester, Mass.
3,265,013
1,628,129
3,692,302
2,013,243
2,208,251
1,085,227
875,750
2,040,559
2,013,243
828,933
696
1,214,666
1,531,360
1,016,493
1,811,302
1, 194,
.
Providence, R. I.
Rochester, N. Y..
Kansas
Seattle,
Mo.
City,
Wash
Memphis, Tenn
Omaha, Nebr
New Haven, Conn..
Scranton, Pa
Syracuse, N.
Y
Joseph, Mo..
Paterson, N. J..
Portland, Oreg.
Atlanta, Ga. .
St.
.'
Richmond, Va.
Fall River, Mass
Nashville, Term
Dayton, Ohio
Grand Bapids, Mich..
19,922,565
10,968,478
5,212,435
5,170,608
$9,991,283 $13,238,362
61,807
2, 613, 459
2,866,182
2,677,944
1,874,697
1,382,463
644,438
867, 715
689, 139
747, 361
1, 395,
$368,232,136
$366, 787, 300
246,291,617
67,282,708
38,245,229
26,412,682
245,007,901
57,209,796
38, 202, 660
26,367,044
183
$1,027,192
39,864
87, 102
5,970
18, 277
6,982,258
8,688,879
6,967,228
8, 680, 558
7,048,109
5,988,611
7,835,388
16,030
8,321
8,722
4,490
3,625
5,421,215
6,718,774
4, 761, 103
3,366,906
7, 434, 303
44, 102
831
5,993,001
7,839,011
7, 056,
6,465,317
6,727,212
4,751,676
341
HAVING A POPULATION OF
100,000
$4, 607, 163
TO
300,000
8,438
673
2,436
9,676
IN
78, 959, 169
40,979,277
25,738,211
18, 180, 475
16,303,431
12,607,018
8, 232, 107
$67,036,323
24, 467, 452
13,306,684
7,935,629
11, 671, 649
$33, 604, 426
031
665
$93, 130
1,333,136
2,746
64,883
244,762
6, 132,
4,663,946
6,765,914
846
3,644,104
5,454,883
2,328,312
2,932,965
1, 923, 985
2,348,897
2,384,128
269,994
71,814
102,363
1,973
4, 309, 987
3,687,197
3,416,618
2,397,184
4,663,232
1, 155, 330
2,140,016
1, 336, 168
962, 167
2,880,646
7,206,661
9,078,903
3, 142,
6, 536,
$4,606,698
3,254,168
2, 537, 989
2,514,812
2, 445, 398
$1,567
2,996
3,526
457
$3,270,455
2,476,771
1,791,409
1,748,190
1,631,125
$1,336,708
780,392
760,106
767,079
815,078
$1, 001, 105
2, 164,
1,020,396
570,234
2,165,089
3,007,468
2,686,908
2,752,059
1,810,127
444
3,006,236
2,686,818
2,749,368
1,607,859
645
1,230
90
2,691
2,468
1,658,720
2,001,280
1,685,394
2, 135, 348
1,138,619
1,006,206
1,001,514
616, 713
473,608
3,259,987
1,581,191
3,662,258
1,984,733
2,121,785
3,255,823
1,560,745
3,661,560
1, 984, 104
2, 104, 453
4,164
446
2,271,459
1,281,408
2,881,273
1,301,288
1,867,786
279,785
780,985
683,445
463, 999
319
1,177,512
1,631,380
1,016,493
1,811,302
1,
1,690
840,233
873,587
1,083,988
729,617
1,180,017
353,086
303,925
447,372
286,876
631,285
506, 117
890, 121
$486, 711
1,379,318
558,613
9,366
745,370
718, 484
166, 497
552,987
1,313,288
1,463,489
1,372,994
1,169,733
1,313,288
911,290
1,372,994
1,169,733
1,236,638
869,088
1,202,085
1,249,987
1,236,638
869,088
726,928
1,249,967
1, 193,
'548,'735
475,167
3,484
17,332
192, 511
1,175,706
1,631,147
1,016,493
1,809,612
213
692,613
1,313,288
1, 461, 374
1,325,923
1,163,051
1,312,898
1,439,129
1,326,241
1,160,053
69
392
22,245
882
2,998
1,084,577
937,080
750,907
186, 496
423,167
378,797
388,843
402,144
1,238,172
800,660
1,202,041
1,188,684
1,236,143
800,618
1,201,815
1, 186, 706
29
44
226
1,978
863,914
627,726
872,663
922,230
382,258
172,936
329, 378
286, 464
692, 554
Snbsepuently corrected by refund receipts.
2,347,164
575,011
296,383
494,730
26, 705
15,334
63,322
68,023
1907.
3,267,163
2,541,615
2,515,269
2,446,203
1,693,076
762,379
743
$3,712,288
167, 332, 448
1907.
$99,613,557
31,633,239
22,298,485
11,071,690
17, 188, 837
7,443,878
1, 651,
•
1,283,716
72,913
42,669
45,638
OR OVER IN
300,000
neous
objects.'
$252,230,411 $116,001,725
$1, 444,
$100,640,749
31, 673, 103
22,385,587
11,077,660
17,207,114
3, 359,
695
666,043
1,621,994
271, 123
1,811,302
1, 194,
468
490, 175
88,460
34,650
19, 026,
HAVING A POPULATION OF
I.— CITIES
$100,733,879
33,006,238
22,388,333
11,142,543
17,451,866
GROUP
Newark, N. J
Minneapolis, Miim..
Jersey City, N. J...
$311,040,585 $41,264,086 $19,639,753
to enterprises,
$7,464
2,932
16,130
49,394
7,714
24,923
5,026
66,938
30,044
28,510
86,466
1,376
37, 144
25,871
2,115
47,071
8,682
68,428
44
81,283
GENERAL TABLES.
AND SPECIAL SERVICE EXPENSES:
with the number
173
1907.
assigned to each, see page 127.]
BY REVENUES FROM
WHICH PAID OR PAYABLE.
CLASSIFIED
CLASSIFIED
Commercial.
BY DEPARTMENTS,
I.
OFFICES,
AND ACCOUNTS.
— General government.
Council and legislative
Chief executive
offices.
City
Aggregate.
Council, board of
aldermen,
Qeneral.
assess-
Departmental
ments.
receipts.
Special
Total.
and
wages.
Miscella^
neous.
237, 808, 143
55,016,275
36,884,916
25,264,339
614,571
266,911
196, 620
10,481,955
2,326,873
1,398,785
1,446,463
$43,717,379
32,927,849
5,163,925
3,311,865
2,313,740
GKOUP
$99,294,959
30,936,038
21,047,760
10,416,665
16,346,918
6,801,274
8,616,502
6,052,241
5,592,686
7,371,970
5,023,471
5,518,068
4,666,926
3,195,994
7,028,791
$2,040
265, 211
11,317
34,791
$1, 436, 880
2,071,200
1,340,683
460,767
1,093,631
206, 689
432, 371
1,076,404
467,877
469,014
467,180
35, 324
209, 154
113, 748
231, 370
415,087
etc.
City clerk.
Mayor's
office.
Executive
boards and commissions.
All other.
Salaries
$354,973,673 SI, 316, 685 $15,654,066
offices.
$12,035,914
Service
trans-
I.— CITIES
8,363,059
1,268,423
863, 438
626,020
All
other.
and
wages.
All
other.
Salaries
and
wages.
All
other.
Salaries
and
All
other.
fers.
$31,972,836 $11,120,940 $623, 603
23,964,310
3,884,329
2,441,822
1,682,375
and
wages.
600,480
11, 173
6,605
5,345
$1,283,817 $385, 208 $799,476 $149, 344
764,266
261, 859
125, 475
132,228
215,836
60,530
67,077
41,765
HAVING A POPULATION OF
300,000
213,005
251,150
182,725
152, 596
57, 106
39,243
32, 307
20,689
OR OVEE IN
$787, 610
345,
169,
147,
124,
1907.
845
857
170
738
$138,815 $173,726
$14, 686
121,917
2,600
30,020
19,189
12,791
105, 425
11,434
15,143
6,813
1,875
20
number.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
174
Table 5.— PAYMENTS
GROUP
III.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
50,000
TO
GOVERNMENT OF THE
of the cities arranged alphabetically
[For a
list
100,000
IN
BY DIVISION OF THE
CLASSIFIED
Payments
by
states,
1907
CLASSIFIED
CITY PAYING.
FOR GENERAL EXPENSES
BY PAYEE.'
to public.
Total
Payments
payments
City
Other
for general
num-
and
special
service
ber.
expenses.
Classified
by
character.
Classified
City cor-
School
poration.
districts.
'
accounts
Total.
(service
transfers).
For meeting
govern-
Payments
Salaries
mental
in error.'
and wages.
costs.
Camden, N. J
Des Moines, Iowa..
Kansas City, Kans.
Lynn, Mass
New Bedford,
Mass.
SpringSeld, Mass
Troy, N. Y....
Oakland, Cal
Lawrence, Mass.
$1,542,892
1,209,640
1,480,844
1,324,489
718,656
11,542,892
1,209,640
1,098,607
1,324,489
447,954
838,773
996,640
660,203
908,562
999,378
838,773
996,640
660,203
908, 5b2
556,532
544,205
195
1,093,248
1,280,385
1,053,857
844, 186
Savannah, Ga
Duluth, Minn
523, 121
Norfolk,
Hoboken, N.
Peoria,
807,610
Va
816, 168
J..
111.
Yonkers, N. Y..
Utiea.N. Y....
H
Manchester, N.
.
Schenectady, N. Y.
Evansville, Ind
San Antonio, Tex...
Elizabeth, N. J
Waterbury, Conn
Lake City, Utah.
Salt
Wilkes-Barre,
Erie,
Pa
Pa
,....
Houston, Tex
Tacoma, Wash
.
Harrisburg, Pa..
Charleston, S. C.
Portland, Me
Tex
Terre Haute, Ind . .
Fort Wayne, Ind . .
Akron, Ohio
Holyoke, Mass
..
Brockton, Mass.
Covington, Ky..
838,723
996,640
50
660, 194
9
442,846
838,773
996,640
660,203
908,562
999,378
908,560
998,717
661
559, 527
617,756
408,531
647,014
699, 749
279,246
378,884
261,672
261, 648
299,629
544,205
1,120,947
1,092,030
1,276,973
1,053,521
543,930
1,120,033
1,091,694
1,276,327
1,062,742
275
914
436
646
779
711,327
680,572
867,266
646,533
1,652,493
844,016
962, 943
1,662,083
843, 313
962, 659
410
703
384
523. 121
523, 111
764,956
764,604
10
462
1,182,413
567,214
638,631
348, 548
564,802
816, 168
816,003
861,991
777,222
1,094,821
867, 515
635,741
485, 907
693,086
552, 876
65,007
252,600
816, 168
863, 412
863,412
786,708
1,129,282
874,793
480,206
1,129,282
874,793
586,781
635,741
485,907
693,086
552,876
586,781
636,741
270,813
693,086
552,876
266,804
$39,698
696,980
637, 164
480,809
205,800
226,704
247,000
272,621
825,636
522,774
563,136
835,379
456,647
283,802
491,066
833, 570
322,036
238,972
72,070
412, 149
360,902
676,645
306,371
176,969
232,462
676,645
546,725
555,635
698,677
660, 548
392,643
249,450
698,677
660,548
392,643
306, 185
599,103.
1
240,354
235,180
46,953
2
150,937
409,620
411,458
409,707
$734
23,459
5,430
248
1,218
3,412
336
470,080
276, 802
170
324,312
174,673
200,154
3,046
42,654
8,686
76
15
565,815
604,236
569,776
663,200
462,006
250,363
257, 755
226, 132
441,697
405,524
1,421
800
34,385
7,263
558,388
635,707
485, 803
692,942
552,813
2,786
34
104
144
63
362,341
426,100
369,283
474,747
362,782
198,833
209,641
116,624
218,339
190,094
25,607
696,960
1,013,070
452,800
499, 325
599,103
696,909
1,012,960
452,520
498, 175
598,912
51
110
280
1,150
191
448,674
783,797
327,362
358, 417
455,903
248,286
229,273
125,438
140,908
143,200
20
4,903
751,640
522,774
552,861
835,379
688,736
309,349
502,764
162,905
193,607
243,512
332,615
73,996
622,706
551,912
834,748
408,686
495,225
369,427
312,585
184,678
181,420
177,298
99,664
359,694
464,736
453,740
283,064
192,386
202,889
109,047
861,991
785,908
1,094,897
867,530
561, 174
215,094
1,017,973
452,800
499,325
599, 103
Youngstown, Ohio.
Dallas,
$473,516
380,552
533,649
419,248
316,484
634,392
1, 118,
905,989
270,702
$1,068,642
829,088
923,736
899,811
402, 172
101
844, 186
965,989
523, 121
555,010
1,652,493
Somerville, Mass..
$593
1,199
822
144
232,181
1,
neous
objects.'
$1,541,565
1,208,441
1,466,563
1,318,915
718,666
312,024
121, 195
1,093,248
1,280,385
998, 850
1, 121,
Miscella-
$1,542,158
1,209,640
1,457,385
1,319,059
718,656
$382,237
offices,
and
governof
the city.
Trenton, N.J
Bridgeport, Conn.
Wilmington, Del..
to enter-
object.
of the
ment
Cambridge, Mass
Albany, N.,Y
Hartford, Conn...
Lowell, Mass
Beading, Fa
by
divisions
593,364
676,645
546,725
412, 149
555,635
647. 122
656,629
392, 111
Subsequently corrected by refund receipts.
751, 163
692,004
660, 439
546,662
412, 115
555,561
647,059
666,470
391,871
477
69
949
631
1,360
16,206
-
63
34
74
63
159
240
329, 167
10,276
195,941
51, 555
3,919
632
GENERAL TABLES.
AND SPECIAL SERVICE EXPENSES:
175
1907— Continued,
'
with the numl)er assigned to each, sec page 127.]
GROUP
III.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
BY REVENUES FROM
WHICH PAH} OR PAYABLE.
CLASSIFIED
CLASSIFIED
50,000
BY DEPARTMENTS,
TO
OFFICES,
IN
100,000
1907.
AND ACCOUNTS.
I.— General government.
Commercial.
Council and legislative
Chief executive
offices.
offices.
City
Aggregate.
Council, board of
aldermen,
General.
assess-
mental
ments.
receipts.
Salaries
and
Total.
wages.
Miscella-
neous.
540,307
971,975
1,004,933
1,162,192
1,041,563
1,645,527
805,539
878,089
495,349
776,594
$33,978
20,219
19,210
19,216
21,800
31,194
12,787
33,726
9,405
764,199
849,967
750,669
1,116,969
858,351
ber.
1,320
575
2,667
8,693
5,324
3,772
7,378
4,854
1,200
354
3,800
1,427
957
2,600
3,172
4,279
3,667
4,200
820
811
1,232
297
5,060
1,400
3,800
4,749
3,100
5,425
5,600
3,050
5,966
167
529
685
929
1,518
3,600
2,000
3,000
1,833
1,600
184
148
178
209
2,811
2,259
2,500
2,306
2,813
442
1,296
2,430
3,984
4,000
4,360
800
462
1,347
4,433
4,905
3,505
3,140
1,200
2,145
2,200
200
2,520
3,700
2,720
3,735
115
253
25
277
210
929
2,171
2,253
4,920
2,400
1,800
3,481
370
350
382
2,000
2,900
4,850
2,200
2,842
23
3,800
'i,"5i9
2,640
2,700
2,300
2,000
325
1,350
2,250
1,694
150
30O
7,304
27
1,620
2,909
4,080
4,700
237
1,556
109
6,800
100
4,200
3,960
4,800
99,527
60,600
54,341
82,095
81,238
75,037
47,317
41,884
57,398
47,581
24,490
13,283
12,457
24,697
33,657
600
4,075
2,850
5,833
6,079
140
821
157
760
4,308
59,191
11,145
34,494
31,565
71,143
48,541
51,858
64,393
54,649
28,966
36,929
38,548
15,841
19,575
14,929
25,845
7,513
39,640
9,548
4,446
43,564
63,789
27,062
28,197
37,308
53,255
20,817
24,150
6,256
10,534
6,245
4,047
35,791
16,825
108,545
4,318
34,566
62,262
57,439
50,835
24,545
41,629
41,172
41,613
10,021
16,595
15,877
Including payments
12
SO
36,793
14,193
14,852
12,362
18,958
766,445
511,629
528,642
785,547
90196—10
1,000
3,779
3,000
4,400
3,700
123,363
34,233
47,948
49,525
74,627
22,616
34,208
8,775
12,031
11,428
,
302
1,204
127
44
133
32
77
70
921
4,200
10,950
1,200
5,060
2,895
160,156
48,460
62,804
61,887
42,880
109,260
30,438
35,295
56,783
for charities
and
9,222
All
other.
2,408
1,742
279
550
65,496
143,468
39,213
47,326
68,211
and
45
2,400
5,208
1,285
315
51,969
13,445
36,039
12,313
16,442
Salaries
$673
692
172
199
200
2,250
6,960
25,860
54,174
27,772
21,611
All
other.
$5,507
6,500
3,416
4,200
3,440
7,003
27,186
27,924
15,041
39,239
31,984
82,487
87,923
61,907
119,326
and
fers.
24,981
55,301
59,999
46,316
80,087
3,898
127,420
88,315
86,999
12,294
Salaries
trans-
63
360
5,432
55,209
57,269
37,557
62,081
41,720
11,963
51,561
12,108
10,105
33,900
10,295
3,979
All
other.
150
370
3,304
67,595
83,527
53,184
70,385
53,219
685,017
966,412
440,692
489,220
565,203
16,496
and
12,386
26,258
15,627
8,304
11,499
19,675
18,116
14,626
15,162
38,354
46,587
36,568
503,348
681,852
541,708
384,346
All
other.
$1,038
$33,644
44,984
41,096
32,825
13,484
10,067
27,205
5,878
8,071
5,930
1,927
and
$6,853
4,300
4,265
5,258
3,000
$86,344
116,225
90,269
78,187
34,949
32,075
55,415
27,533
18,267
Service
$2,096
12,012
4,124
2,913
1,134
$119,988
161,209
131,575
111,194
48,433
42,577
82,620
33,411
54,658
42,498
4,412
583,924
637,005
537,177
407,703
num-
missions.
$4,711
10,500
900
1,700
650
$67,040
8,541
43,550
43,526
7,266
11,411
7,243
6,514
16,900
12,686
575,370
628,498
474,981
676,186
540,190
Executive
boards and com-
All other.
Salaries
819,098
959,308
645,577
893,400
961,024
City clerk.
etc.
office.
Depart-
Special
$1,441,874
1,201,099
1,417,075
1,261,753
711,390
Mayor's
$210
182
714
1,640
2,283
5,437
2,000
2,390
100
381
161
80
8,175
364
30
136
167
653
4,800
1,720
250
4,038
390
corrections to other civil divisions
347
180
and
3,644
4,473
6,175
3,488
4,995
411
376
76
60
61
62
63
64
$400
65
66
67
63
70
71
72
73
74
1,280
58
13,600
1,415
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
505
16,020
2,500
3,720
1,959
2,000
3,000
$161
84
3,'000
to private associations
55
56
57
58
59
128
825
162
131
80
51
52
S3
54
1,518
156
996
178
51
47
48
185
579
170
and individuals.
84
85
86
87
90
91
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
176
Table 6.—PAYMENTS
GROUP
IV.—CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
TO
30,000
list
of the cities arranged alphabetically
30,000
IN
1907.
BV DIVISION OF THE
CLASSIFIED
QOVEKNMENT OF THE
FOR GENERAL EXPENSES
[For a
CLASSIFIED
CTCY PAYINQ.
Payments
by states,
BY PAYEE.
to public.
Total
payments
Other
for general
and
special
service
expenses.
City cor-
School
divisions
of the
poration.
districts.
govern-
Classified
by
character.
Classified
by object.
prises,
and
accounts
Total.
(service
transfers).
For meeting
govern-
Payments
Salaries
mental
in eiror.i
and wages.
costs.
Saginaw, Mich
Lincoln, Nebr
Altoona, Pa
Spokane,
Wash
Pa
Lancaster,
Birmingham, Ala
Bayonne, N. J
South Bend, Ind
Hont
Butte,
Pawtuoket, R. I
McEeesport, Pa
Binghamton, N.
Johnstown, Pa
Y. .
Dubuque, Iowa
Sioux City, Iowa
Augusta,
Ga
Mobile, Ala
Topeka, Kans
Springfield, Ohio
Allentown, Pa
EastSt. Louis, HI....
Wheeling, W. Va.....
Montgomery, Ala
Passaic, N. J
Davenport, Iowa
AtlanticCity, N. J...
Little
Rock, Ark
Bay City, Mich
York, Pa....:
Maiden, Mass
Springfield, HI
Quincy, 111
Canton, Ohio
Superior, Wis
Chester, Pa
Chelsea, Mass
South Omaha, Nebr.
Newcastle, Pa
Salem, Mass
Newton, Mass
Haverhill, Mass
JaclcsonviUe, Fla
Joplin,
Mo
Wichita, Kans
Rookford,Ill
Tenn
Elmira.N.Y
Galveston, Tex
Knoxville,
New
Conn.
Chattanooga, Tenn.
Elalamazoo, Mich
Woonsooket, R. I
Fitchburg, Mass
Britain,
Racine, Wis
Auburn, N.
Macon, Ga.
.
.
Y
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Oshkosh, Wis
WestHoboken, N. J..
Sacramento, Cal
Pueblo, Colo
Everett, Mass
Taunton, Mass,
Newport, Ky
La Crosse, Wis
Fort Worth, Tex
P.
1510,829
187,913
196,759
531,441
184,076
579,300
533,218
392,293
604,143
610,818
579,300
533,218
238,321
459,701
610,818
409,478
442, 165
359,539
322,905
419,230
222,540
442, 165
191,603
206,248
169,277
325,204
275,845
362,642
444,920
325,204
275,845
170,630
293,432
150,515
490, 491
368,327
314,068
419, 785
537,286
306, 111
805,515
275,651
366,686
283, 162
805,515
165,539
366,686
243,802
564,941
564, 941
446,955
276,657
346,309
434,261
271,300
230, 464
495,568
302,880
275,830
512,361
841,720
495,568
140, 949
535,751
440, 454
202,902
303,097
329, 108
535,751
440,454
105,008
173,740
329, 108
282,233
374,029
404, 166
368,046
383, 686
282,233
374, 029
323,305
368, 046
383,686
336, 111
314, 968
419, 008
169,020
314, 958
419,008
296, 824
386,207
296,824
386,207
246, 477
Joliet,Ill
San Juan,
$510,829
394,497
388, 113
960,423
314,354
R
321,987
306, 174
284, 156
253, 046
530, 716
538,877
375,324
366, 152
235,827
314,068
419, 785
341,310
153,709
195,620
$206,584
191,354
428,982
130,278
153,972
144,442
145, 081
512, 361
477
916
571
156
3,078
55
479
578
160
386,341
386,977
290, 170
434. 448
398,850
593
26
96
285,098
279,586
272, 136
224,547
312,696
162,579
87,403
98,358
105,797
44
1,531
1,400
191,017
174,636
292,923
298,787
179,574
115,185
99,528
52, 134
146,133
110,234
369,574
265,325
120,917
66,031
104,372
166,745
157,099
359,539
322,905
418,392
39,360
181,841
122,848
150,689
122,698
$34,650
537,286
805,615
259,235
341, 498
283,162
563,794
805, 440
259,235
341,364
283,162
560,211
75
507,346
203,706
270,019
154, 756
365,056
298, 169
134
55,529
71, 479
128,406
198,738
16,416
25,188
416,062
276,557
346,255
434,261
271,300
416,062
341,067
191,375
259,605
74,995
85,182
86,650
126, 789
111, 132
30,893
189, 130
8,531
107,571
82,033
212,241
285,069
10,367
535, 054
372,874
202,902
302, 456
329, 108
282,233
374,029
377,359
367, 890
381, 486
317, 923
291, 079
419, 008
296,824
362, 780
238,
321,
302,
284,
977
449
174
156
263, 046
530,716
500,791
373,096
195,844
280,046
262,667
366, 152
195, 844
362, 947
195, 844
280,046
262,667
196, 187
195,187
1
838
253,040
380, 187
512,361
831,353
273,438
185,330
799
36
76
302,880
116,072
128,603
16,908
123, 681
203, 786
360
'3,'583'
276, 471
345,870
434,098
271,037
487, 037
167, 091
146,241
102,123
169,695
195,060
12, 192
275, 830
80,850
476
30,000
490,489
331,356
295,966
419, 749
537,210
161, 931
129,357
$1,554
27,702
490, 491
130,749
97, 894
109
$147,124
65,451
97,089
246,718
131,431
306,202
273,804
346,013
443,389
288,408
331,366
'ii6,"ii2
408,679
441,572
359,514
322,809
418,283
$57
73
82
212
306,202
274, 164
345,057
444,920
308, 168
419, 785
253, 046
257,278
353, 547
375,324
546,222
533,163
391,814
603,565
593, 750
167,936
116,657
249, 953
841,720
246,
206,
177,
284,
549,300
533,218
392,293
408, 679
442, 165
434, 261
148,602
1,068
$362,151
301,344
290, 759
713, 70S
182. 447
593,910
195,976
neous
objects.!
$509,218
366, 722
387,766
960,211
312,810
186, 938
184,380
132,500
Miscella-
(509,275
366,795
387,848
960,423
313,878
604, 143
192,012
151,488
139,293
to enteroffices,
ment of
the city.
Payments
301,669
275,825
512,356
831,307
534,831
367,873
201,711
300,235
329, 104
282. 193
373, 496
377,295
367,864
385
163
307, 472
160, 168
39
1,221
5
297,907
195,309
193,797
300, 120
546,284
6
46
223
5,001
1,191
2,221
4
40
533
64
26
329,701
259,896
158,860
208, 576
236,006
205,353
112, 978
44,042
176, 512
106, 721
230,363
143,676
107,859
163,096
129,806
269, 500
93, 880
93, 102
19,002
1,681
17,585
36,971
5,910
1,147
54
697
67,580
64i'
26,796
156
2,200
381, 405
81
204,794
251,680
317,271
652
239, 475
78,448
291, 073
418, 851
296. 194
6
186,243
104, 836
18,188
23,879
157
255, 567
33,427
630
392
203,786
226,785
163,441
93,038
125,996
977
356
728
102
446
54
158,466
226,945
226,916
179, 132
80,511
94,504
75,268
105,024
253,031
525,704
500,713
373,070
15
5,012
78
26
156,590
380,527
369,005
248, 723
362,388
238,
321,
301,
284,
7,500
538
4,000
96,466
150, 189
131,786
124,373
2,228
280,046
249,245
362,739
196,844
280,026
249,193
240,771
136,763
200,827
195,086
122,176
59,081
79,219
54,159
13,322
190,941
190,833
13,841
97,100
4,246
Subsequently corrected by refund receipts.
3,205
GENERAL TABLES.
177
AND SPECIAL SERVICE EXPENSES: 1907— Continued.
with the nuitfber assigned to each, see page 127.]
GROUP
HAVING A POPULATION OF
IV.— CITIES
BY REVENUES FROM
WHICH PAID OR PAYABLE.
ClASaiFIED
CLASSIFIED
Commercial.
),000
;
TO
50,000
IN
1907.
BY DEPARTMENTS, OFFICES, AND ACCOUNTS.
I.
— General government.
Council and legislative oHices.
Chief executive
City
Aggregate.
Council, board of
aldermen,
General.
assess-
mental
ments.
receipts.
Salaries
and
Miscella-
neous.
$486,354
383,554
381,039
923,272
311,758
$24,475
10,943
7,074
37,151
2,596
$47,837
37,083
475,398
523,980
389,510
578,315
595,644
153
1,400
103,902
9,238
2,783
6,670
16, 174
55,640
48,624
25,314
56,637
60,239
34,709
40,361
19,405
44,286
38, 703
20,831
8,263
6,909
12,352
21,506
1,500
3,790
99
983
624
3,374
3,740
2,324
8,477
7,082
6,500
18,195
8,283
2,373
6,770
30,583
42,310
21,295
24, 113
24,883
23,513
28,389
18,513
20,092
17,720
7,070
13,921
2,782
4,021
7,163
42,541
6,503
16,607
18,027
2,431
29,299
24,338
20,782
35,819
20,806
25,764
19,405
17,607
26,199
16,154
3,535
4,876
3,275
9,620
4,651
16, 435
384
5,609
21,491
5,803
36,766
36,081
29,439
44,700
39,904
33,248
30,889
24,484
16,656
26,102
25,145
5,192
4,523
28,026
14,802
8,103
9,321
163,430
12,742
3,318
4,096
35,241
66,013
25,606
49,478
19,843
30,563
45,349
20,106
29,205
13,067
22,298
19,664
4,967
18,658
6,786
8,266
6,821
2,869
3,702
3,279
3,873
42,322
15,236
26,991
36,767
26,962
31,890
13,062
21,274
30,826
18,721
10,432
2,174
5,717
5,942
8,241
27,921
1,910
8,957
190,728
91,814
34, 155
24,931
26,906
17,797
27,139
49,835
8,522
10,621
2,073
4,863
23,419
35,152
33,652
3,633
6,496
19,939
38,676
44,027
20,520
21,942
28,228
26,204
35,060
18,687
15, 786
12,472
8,967
1,933
5,516
6,121
14,725
3,636
48,701
20,248
30, 087
20,370
45,720
26,313
28,228
22,746
41,000
28, 588
27, 545
17,247
$19,258
9,331
490,772
406,802
199,269
296,413
309,169
9,827
5,676
12,980
267,508
369,195
356,394
1,198
342, 741
'5,'667
353,599
367,733
229,971
320,304
247,802
274,587
16, 967
16, 181
11,730
23, 107
10,865
57
432
18
633
1,615
702
99
641
108
326
1,243
96
25
1,676
1,062
19
166
43
996
980
20
4,302
3,673
299
3,961
1,546.
'i,"666'
1,000
3,600
180
360
1,060
250
1,481
2,675
2,400
2,286
$276
503
780
160
24
340
1,309
50
1,295
2,100
1,650
3,220
302
346
115
3,200
1,747
3,102
2,929
1,800
2,400
900
2,250
58
50
612
1,950
1,200
2,640
1,220
ber.
140
299
3,200
1,489
1,167
2,000
1,200
HI
1,000
1,800
1,085
2,4^2
1,200
4,780
368
660
1,200
1,507
500
1,000
2,000
300
300
3,600
1,500
2,535
1,000
1,075
223
2,250
2,321
2,400
1,938
54
529
93
374
166
2,133
63
2,490
3,000
2,000
2,392
1,423
6,765
36,474
21,557
6,109
14,123
15,869
8,616
30,371
23,718
28,099
39,013
21,224
20,293
21,398
31,234
8,791
3,425
6,701
7,779
356
1,025
37
30,092
2,215
2,946
19,206
34, 120
2,709
587
399
240 L
Including payments for charities and corrections to other
and
62
106
107
108
109
110
111
192
,125
112
113
114
115
116
119
120
121
127
132
133
134
135
136
306
160
137
138
139
140
141
41
328
142
143
204
148
144-
145
146
147
148
149
150
126
2,926
1,800
1,300
200
41
1,225
1,800
213
151
152
153
154
132
5,700
civil divisions
102
103
104
106
$6,797
2,517
2,188
4,800
700
14,181
20,290
69,282
62,343
30, 186
101
128
129
130
131
1,087
920
162
33
505
267
440
1,464
9,646
7,419
13,944
122
1,100
2,215
1,000
1,950
3,500
2,200
3,914
2,286
3,477
65
97
98
99
100
122
123
124
126
126
837
755
42
160
1,800
3,020
3,840
1,500
19,914
19,131
16,984
16, 113
500
129
100
3,566
1,476
3,720
1,500
1,500
136
2,374
56
251
92
93
94
95
96
117
118
8
21
1,101
278
20, 134
All
other.
6,200
2,660
1,000
2,031
1,000
3,331
3,185
1,200
2,759
4,236
213
1,800
2,414
3,643
3,048
31,667
and
1,000
3,843
5,126
9,427
3,464
15, 131
507
3,160
3,538
1,600
2,220
1,017
2,183
2,728
2,084
2,413
1,995
22, 197
5,158
2,283
2,000
3,233
1,500
404
316
185
75
310
'290
$275
77
3,250
2,673
600
813
2
1,657
962
632
1,822
2,631
8,548
7,649
8,834
7,066
10, 933
Salaries
All
other.
$1,000
1,720
1,800
3,612
3,000
172
1,001
43
2,938
2,400
250
1,118
18,263
17,392
19,261
and
wages.
2,000
2,100
1,700
1,283
2,100
1,263
1,500
1,225
2,415
1,800
1,623
765
1,162
240
211
6,525
2
2,250
1,430
2,620
1,619
730
2,600
23,757
24,257
26,411
19,577
2,970
154
2,128
1,100
1,275
16,506
1,683
68,372
3,044
192,217
960
3,826
360
2,626
2,500
4,818
984
2,832
6,000
600
9,505
17,492
3,567
12,412
10,298
26,811
26,390
28,096
45, 169
1,500
4,800
6,661
2,844
22,082
5,314
11,324
521,170'
336,060
193,629
276,075
243,324
37,426
19,870
32,002
73,363
$30
4,854
9,769
7,150
251,582
631,458
354,625
num-
fers.
106,751
23,293
33, 531
Salaries
All
other.
trans-
$2,400
3,687
1,334
4,270
1,100
9,278
15,021
281, 751
and
$301
1,095
458,369
285,949
266,873
315,958
736,926
308,414
299,777
392,072
Salaries
All
other.
470
7,858
500
'""250
440,134
273,698
342,607
421,651
267,427
and
$5,744
4,148
269,342
346,785
426,893
287,377
642,085
262,909
363,368
279,067
520,379
Service
$8,933
7,722
9,376
36,196
9,543
2^,282
Executive
boards and commissions.
$38,904
29,361
24, 156
70,555
13,750
2,381
474,056
362,818
292,577
413,982
500,146
etc.
office.
'All other.
Salaries
47,084
1,451
Mayor's
City clerk.
Depart-
Special
402,978
423,970
351,256
273,448
411,009
offices.
to private associations
12,392
6,010
864
and individuals.
$20
156
166
157
158
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
178
Table 5.— PAYMENTS
[For a
CLASSIFIED
BY DEPARTMENTS, OFFICES, AND ACCOUNTS
J.
Finance
City
list
offices
FOR GENERAL EXPENSES
of the cities arranged alphabetically
—Continued.
«
— General government— Continued.
and accounts.
num-
General law
ber.
Auditor or comptroller.
Salaries
and
Grand
AU
other.
1,173,786
337,075
152, S56
113,264
153,968
92,076
43,402
44,427
GEOUP
New York, N.Y..
111
FhUadelphia, Pa..
St. Louis,
Mo
Boston, Mass
Baltimore,
Md
Pittsburg, Pa
Cleveland, Ohio...
Buffalo,
San Francisco, Cal
N.Y
Detroit, Mich
Cincinnati, Ohio.
Milwaukee, Wis...
New
Orleans, La..
Washington, D. 0.
Newark, N.J
Minneapolis, Minn.
Jersey City[N. J
Louisville,
Ky
St. Paul,
. . .
.,
Ind
Minn
Providence, R. I
Rochester, N.
Y
Kansas City,
Mo
Toledo, Oliio
Denver, Colo
Columbus, Ohio
Los Angeles, Cal
Worcester, Mass
Seattle,
Wash
Memphis, Tenn
Omaha, Nebr
New Haven, Coim.
Scranton, Fa
Syracuse, N.
St. Joseph,
Y
Mo
Paterson, N. J
Portland, Greg
Atlanta, Oa
Richmond, Va
FaU
and
AU
other.
River, Mass
NashviUe, Tenn
Dayton, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.
944,441
320, 143
208,597
160,570
Assessment of
Collection of
revenues.
revenues.
Salaries
and
412, 141
I.— CITIES
307,114
151,365
229,699 1,175,206
58,029
203,824
47,924
190,392
19,942
131,880
1
1
HAVING A POPULATION OF
$62,989
22,608
8,056
8,675
1,907
$133,463
375,424
50, 150
16,541
47, 720
$6,029
21,321
3,699
552
9,786
$462,884
585,888
195,526
69,006
192,805
14,607
52,852
51,826
42,019
-19,600
517
13,444
11,916
878
11,984
88,053
22,769
45,398
18,432
928
2,987
9,750
6,369
2,837
32,117
167,705
18,872
34,820
104,706
1,402
10,891
2,787
6,110
9,278
6,135
5,559
630
1,027
43,206
38,300
33,963
33,970
71,343
4,074
1,647
4,599
576
6,272
34,732.
6,365
52,561
38,010
11,000
19,600
24,770
10, 179
23, 017
3,830
37,762
16,097
7,080
884
II.— CITIES
$41,490
14,308
9,500
8,490
10,363
$442
768
1,261
2,707
4,018
$11,786
12,045
5,276
5,000
10,851
8,670
7,769
15,852
25,505
9,200
601
360
3,114
2,486
1,920
13,378
19,754
19,294
21,995
26,640
14,364
13,570
5,246
7,363
1,828
8,188
643
14,201
29, 127
50,796
8,132
11,800
7,009
46,315
6,085
11,338
8,144
6,400
11,023
1,410
712
1,415
143
9,665
1,000
1,600
9,798
15,820
6,091
3,142
21,523
8,660
5,925
1,253
315
5,780
4,200
3,358
6,600
1,100
5,840
4,420
4,600
6,300
1,097
136
3,641
761
4,800
4,300
4,900
8,173
and
$16, 686
162,864
8,718
3,005
8,925
2,143
$441,317
70, 179
203,847
103, 142
133,362
457,610
89,143
51,240
36,605
300,000
ces
Salaries
and
wages.
19,187
20,568
6,243
1,107
1,779
18,871
22,100
499,156
45,363
7,436
1,103
Salaries
AU
1,217
13, 986
10,827
'29,'745'
650
26,076
8,726
and
other.
wages.
TO
300,000
1,287,308
336, 479
178,783
148,020
616, 094
Salaries
and
AU
other.
$2,662,312 $1,427,037
2, 163,
615
164,331
68,340
61,120
177, 134
129,092
92,471
1,136,145
123,873
98,790
68,229
1907.
$74,776
1,763
169,555
24,928
13,818
$498, 193
294, 692
160,831
27,988
45,475
$197,967
252, 289
38, 102
21,308
29,600
$642,846
556, 672
434,404
61,269
120,609
$436,803
76,193
244,538
12,569
97,883
36, 919
22,562
32,727
30, 674
27, 629
27,208
7,417
3,583
5,508
5,312
6,621
124,788
101,843
60,367
36, 678
82,313
83,580
35,997
21,646
24,314
51,363
22,267
35,725
16,280
31,760
13,307
9,226
17,133
14,435
2,099
5,494
17,626
32,346
7,752
30,981
12,026
601
51,424
1,693
16,826
204
640
3,893
1,997
5,936
5,010
100,000
AU
other.
$1,960,590 $899,885
398,336
33,106
36, 114
64,531
OR OVER IN
27, 871
26,905
Elections.
and accounts.
$42,087 $417, 069
287,642
18,000
14,256
74,496
1,600
8,547
8,877
63,157
HAVING A POPULATION OF
$88
AU
other.
offices.
Other finance o&-
$2,945,720 $356,594 |$1,701,302 $633,398 $553,068 $622,087
85,787 2,075,100
46,387
23,385
Salaries
All
other.
$589,038
115,250
69,625
60,486
40,371
GROUP
Indianapolis,
Salaries
$1,776,681 S333,S73 $1,633,751 $204,991
total
Group I
Group II
Group III
Group IV
Chicago,
Treasurer or
chamberlain.
by states,
IN
1907.
1,661
293
GENERAL TABLES.
AND SPECIAL SERVICE EXPENSES: 1907— Continued,
with the
nunber assigned
to each, see
page
127.]
CLASSIFIED
BY DEPARTMENTS,
OFFICES,
AND ACCOUNTS—Continued.
179
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
180
FOR GENERAL EXPENSES
Table 5.— PAYMENTS
[For a
GROUP
HAVING A POPULATION OF
III.—CITIES
CLASSIFIED
Finance
TO
100,000
list of
IN
the
arranged alphabetically by
offices
and accounts.
General law
ber.
Auditor or comptroller.
Salaries
and
Cambridge, Mass.,
Albany, N.Y....
Hartl'ord, Conn...
Lowell, Mass
Reading, Pa
Trenton, N.J
Bridgeport, Conn.
.
Wilmington, Del
Camden, N. J
Des Moines, Iowa
. .
Kansas City, Kans.
Lynn, Mass
New Bedford,
Mass
Springfield,
Troy, N.
Mass.
Y
AU
other.
Assessment of
Treasurer or
chamberlain.
Salaries
and
Salaries
All
{4,000
7,487
3,210
3,886
2,818
1300
2,008
498
1,170
276
$14,884
10,039
6,500
8,322
3,000
14, 107
4,200
4,537
2,156
5,300
3,700
184
2,199
32
136
5,300
800
2,138
3,700
2,600
628
70
274
264
333
2,211
4,028
2,074
7,900
2,587
1,239
688
120
1,490
1,706
9,879
12,690
6,480
6,950
3,033
996
2,663
Covington,
Ky.
420
609
147
562
3,200
3,295
2,700
2,499
6,460
2,500
2,000
740
2,720
1,200
1,000
2,760
5,350
6,795
2,400
1,460
1,203
29
3,711
3,486
"2i8
141
21
654
681
2,156
531
2,800
879
625
125
37
4,913
146
600
1,000
3,330
2,938
1,539
1,800
1,754
1,624
40O
600
2,120
Akron, Ohio
Holyoke, Mass..
Brockton, Mass.
1,271
6,681
2,408
295
8,366
913
2,65iD
7,800
3,400
2,100
1,200
1,077
3,620
3,133
Tex
710
5,511
3,994
560
1,140
6,637
2,700
122
Terre Haute, Ind...
Fort Wayne, Ind...
4,386
4,106
156
645
810
432
2,139
Dallas,
2,184
2,761
1,000
1,036
992
2,075
221
432
1,403
Youngstown, Ohio.
2,416
7,979
1,700
3,080
7,880
3,450
14,516
8,820
11,899
11,916
5,661
4,404
5,168
6,814
85
86
87
243
594
698
2,569
631
773
573
403
84
4,015
6,770
6,089
3,000
Harrisburg, Pa..
Charleston, S. C.
Portland, Me
13
681
431
175
1,231
50
277
Taeoma, Wash.
815
4,600
2,000
.4, 160
1,725
9,511
13,703
500
10,486
3,250
3,000
600
Houston, Tex
3,102
8,064
4,925
75
832
220
327
90
12,088
25
277
277
80
81
82
83
•276
1,847
296
2,437
904
364
3,060
6,922
2,896
2,400
3,266
79
2,980
4,600
5,850
4,167
4,063
825
6,298
1,600
331
1,917
Lake City, Utah
Pa
63
3,631
3,032
503
1,072
10
4,522
3,539
475
3,700
4,082
2,047
6,902
2,600
2,279
2,000
Wilkes-Barre,
Erie, Pa..
5,339
94
1,217
916
500
1,066
442
144
1,644
1,245
779
417
Salt
7,537
800
2,220
3,012
5,220
7,258
4,014
1,980
4,242
6,108
3,200
7,537
Waterbury, Conn
1,121
4,382
4,987
1,932
3,327
379
1,643
Peoria, 111
75
76
77
78
3,134
3,664
3,739
2,885
5,610
10,620
4,443
67
68
N.J
2,026
1,080
1,471
1,497
162
1,114
1,024
1,065
297
4,920
2,726
3,725
4,935
7,721
79
1,141
2,364
1,684
846
218
176
6,514
1,116
A
970
766
641
"'243'
3,635
1,230
1,631
All other.
3,286
3,619
1,600
2,229
8,000
1,000
9,871
5,485
1,508
350
1,160
5,323
1,200
and
wages.
2,978
3,190
200
377
750
615
35
1,597
138
712
2,343
246
Elizabeth,
831
4,433
Salaries
708
6,296
266
182
3,382
7.
$3,801
All
other.
2,902
1,800
3,884
4,800
8,845
2,218
3,100
8,401
1,796
4,900
6,938
6,560
3,875
2,417
1,667
4,104
.
1,104
1,668
and
$1,207
660
1,635
1,962
4,208
17,460
2,097
6
2,527
21
2,137
H
311
7,125
4,839
12,609
8,950
Elections.
$4,335
7,800
6,176
4,826
3,450
4,299
882
1,205
582
4,731
2,000
2,500
2,850
1,250
400
Ind
San Antonio, Tex.
$85
164
$1,993
2,048
10,301
Salaries
All
other.
6,062
9,769
3,817
6,141
Norfolk, Va....
Evansville,
and
wages.
26, 104
65
66
Manchester, N.
Schenectady, N. Y.
Salaries
420
1,422
5,126
1,194
359
70
71
72
73
74
620
578
73
$8,961
All
other.
1,197
1,996
2,182
6,030
5,676
8,293
8,102
3,799
Yonkere. N. Y.
Utica, N. Y....
13,743
7,544
3,574
10,842
$1,574
1,972
946
2,168
and
11,586
13,146
9,196
8,200
1,613
174
J.
$14,026
14,050
10,971
12,219
7,776
Salaries
offices.
and accounts.
3,023
2,226
652
6,966
6,550
1,500
700
676
6,176
Hoboken, N.
wages.
AU
Other.
Other finance offices
864
Oakland, Cal
Lawrence, Mass..
Somerville, Mass.
Savannah, Ga
Duluth, Minn
204
and
Collection of
revenues.
revenues.
Other.
states,
— General government— Continued.
num-
69
cities
1907.
BY DEPARTMENTS, OmCES, AND ACCOUNTS—Continued.
I.
City
50,000
'iso'
$10,955
12,140
5,656
8,699
6,490
1,760
$7,242
10,271
6,926
6,128
1,362
94
1,794
2,447
6,266
208
788
872
135
512
37
2,619
847
851
2,133
3,164
992
2,709
1,663
232
1,419
407
3,481
2,813
879
1,221
559
983
645
3,091
2,684
4,697
2,556
2,045
676
GENERAL TABLES.
AND SPECIAL SERVICE EXPENSES:
181
1907— Continued,
with the nupilier assigned to each, see page 127.]
GROUP
III.—CITIES
CLASSIFIED
HAVING A POPULATION OF
BY DEPARTMENTS,
OFFICES,
50,000'
TO
100,000
AND ACCOUNTS—Continued
IN
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
182
Table 6.---PAYMENTS
[For a
GROUP
IV.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
CLASSIFIED
BY DEPABTMENTS,
30,000
TO
50,000
of the cities arranged alpliabetioally
list
IN
FOR GENERAL EXPENSES
by states,
1907.
AND ACCOUNTS—Continued.
OFFICES,
I.— General government— Continued.
Finance
City
offices
and accounts.
num-
General law
ber.
Auditor or comptroller.
Salaries
and
Saginaw, Mioli..
Lincoln, Nebr...
$3,600
Fa
Spokane, Wash.
1,500
5,814
2,860
Altoona,
Lancaster, Fa. .
Birmingham, Ala.
Bayonne, N.J
South Bend, Ind.
1,844
2,700
3,200
.
100
Butte,
All
other.
6,694
1,493
2,400
3,599
1,000
6,772
6,689
Mont
101
Fawtuoket, E.I...
2,829
1,320
McKeesport, Fa
Binghamton, N. Y.
Johnstown, Pa
2,820
40
2,765
72
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
lis
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
668
1,750
1,878
1,800
Dubuque, Iowa
Sioux City, Iowa
Augusta, Ga
Mobile, Ala
Topeka, Kans
2,900
Springfield, Ohio..
2,520
1,164
Allentown, Pa
East
St. Louis,
2,807
Atlantic City, N. J.
111.
Quincy, HI
Canton, Ohio...
Superior, Wis.
Pa
Chester,
4,680
7,056
3,000
1,698
2,000
4,517
3,060
1,200
1,169
424
1,000
90
1,000
439
456
7
13
320
412
2,784
Chelsea, Mass
Newton, Mass
1,086
1,800
3,150
132
133
134
135
136
Haverhill, Mass..
Jacksonville, Fla.
1,076
4,858
'137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
ISO
South Omaha, Nebr
Newcastle, Fa
Salem, Mass
""284'
3,134
2,040
127
128
129
130
131
Joplin,
409
.
York, Fa
Maiden, Mass
Springfield,
1,324
127
300
500
Davenport, lowa..
Little Bock, Ark.
Bay City, Mich
162
2,000
225
III..
WheeUng, W. Va.
Montgomery, Ala.
Passaic, N.J.
Mo
Wichita, Kans
Eockford, 111
4,270
991
Enoxvllle,
2,220
163
1,250
New Britain, Conn.,
Chattanooga, Tenn..
1,600
692
2,400
Term
Elmira.N.Y
Galveston, Tex
Kalamazoo, Mich.
Woonsoeket, E. I.
Fitchbure, Mass
Eacine,
Wis
Auburn, N.
400
1,325
Y
1,500
:
WestHoboken.N.J.
152
153
154
Sacramento, Cal
PUeblo, Colo
156
IS6
157
158
Taunton, Mass
Newport, Ky
Everett,
Mass
1,692
199
200
105
166
133
79
26
332
2,400
177
1,250
700
1,992
172
21
200
1,620
1,833
1,200
3,238
74
79
43
333
2,400
3,897
3,750
1,238
100
4,886
"i,'294
609
1,800
4,590
1,000
4,050
4,259
1,000
1,860
6,421
4,700
2,600
201
1,300
1,600
264
237
1,334
2,000
2,200
4,120
2,500
2,130
16,007
1,322
2,663
144
1,346
250
600
5,755
•
4,495
3,204
1,678
4,378
1,253
Fort Worth, Tex..
San Juan, P. E.
4,245
1,401
4,056
1,130
25
6,051
5,100
1,705
1,823
and
wages.
$104
All
other.
$26
2,853
"4,'272
648
48
210
1,032
135
231
1,065
7,606
5,730
258
77
1,545
1,667
25
6,250
26
6,691
600
1,710
5,400
2,876
2,097
7,132
220
71
303
343
256
7,606
163
3,465
1,644
5,033
5,062
77
1,448
21
2,832
1,600
46
774
330
60
21,852
6,189
31
1,026
"'566
320
80
177
3,598
240
2,028
76
4,739
4,852
2,268
5,381
10,228
499
945
2
755
16
62
4
4,163
5,166
1,063
1,217
""is
249
1,300
1,125
2,857
2,663
172
360
432
167
382
1,218
186
1,863
1,286
70
2,640
2,000
1,200
2,940
2,400
2,000
1,950
2,700
3,000
1,400
1,935
1,190
1,217
2,664
2,749
226
3,188
976
343
176
2,130
1,628
631
4,790
1,648
182
596
1,884
2,998
2,299
55
410
161
264
617
181
918
270
375
792
366
525
440
1,200
3,350
2,000
2,214
3,600
190
1,537
326
1,023
981
110
70
796
1,000
1,919
1,050
1,237
1,600
1,855
3,431
609
4,487
277
20
166
1,824
117
2,098
1,300
1,042
2,757
484
260
390
2,043
5,437
696
22
86
3,499
360
3,909
604
2,480
554
297
1,932
2,249
1,720
2,112
2,700
2,000
2,000
915
224
297
188
533
873
230
1,084
1,980
3,709
1,085
717
1,036
25
1,833
1,500
1,000
1,200
1,500
299
420
368
104
191
1,286
193
1,075
327
3,764
1,087
307
1,222
1,712
1,116
509
420
404
666
544
653
1,364
1,369
477
2,181
6,760
368
1,399
6,043
676
1,760
4,500
1,200
645
337
1,635
60
6,607
2,424
755
961
1,825
124
2,000
2,460
724
1,200
828
2,172
2,535
256
584
230
114
2,831
4,878
166
1,439
618
23
1,142
2,841
193
127
2,904
1,660
1,700
611
138
5,909
837
2,571
2,730
64
20
3,901
3,168
2,948
3
783
$362
756
23
2,444
1,600
1,375
1,700
2,746
5,657
1,680
2,020
All other.
1,977
1,720
1,878
180
1,207
1,525
134
12
1,964
527
13
749
278
496
218
430
$811
1,591
3,562
2,000
1,500
6,120
3,460
1,285
448
375
682
and
$2,301
836
330
6,763
1,719
530
4,096
3,146
"'is'
3,887
2,120
2,600
172
4,729
300
1,016
Salaries
$2,637
3,440
1,980
7,092
900
271
687
2,933
417
5,480
4,789
AU
other.
3,600
1,700
2,480
2,600
1,600
35
2,151
6,863
2,457
and
1,475
1,200
201
6,280
Salaries
136
2,885
519
541
134
472
1,977
72
623
1,400
2,000
1,800
1,667
$40
$1,688
6,460
2,351
""68
Salaries
All
other.
7,353
2,100
1,609
238
1,400
176
824
410
and
wages.
Elections.
offices.
and accounts.
2,042
2,933
3,237
3,845
1,800
2,518
511
$276
126
Salaries
1,200
6,174
1,320
2,417
600
2,600
2,280
2,276
350
1,435
31
AU
other.
ces
129
399
2,727
331
27
118
200
273
1,921
La Crosse, Wis
36
328
3,202
1,300
4,346
1,600
1,460
$292
869
and
2,600
1,800
4,665
Macon, Ga
151
150
Salaries
All
other.
Other finance offi-
Collection of
revenues.
revenues.
3,200
1,250
200
2,000
Joliet,lll
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Oshkosh, Wis
and
$6,602
6,589
2,400
6,884
2,196
102
103
Salaries
$282
257
1S8
1,274
110
280
Assessment of
Treasurer or
chamberlain.
834
1,800
2,150
3,396
1,600
149
876
950
75
1,470
531
317
603
1,874
GENERAL TABLES.
AND SPECIAL SERVICE EXPENSES:
with the nuBiber assigned to each, see page
183
1907— Continued,
127.]
GROUP
IV.— CITIES
CLASSIFIED
HAVING A POPULATION OF
BY DEPARTMENTS,
OFFICES,
30,000
TO
60,000
AND ACCOUNTS—Continued.
IN
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
184
Table 6.—PAYMENTS
[For a
CLASSIFIED
BY DEPARTMENTS,
OFFICES,
list
FOR GENERAL EXPENSES
of the cities arranged alphabetically
by states,
AND ACCOUNTS—continued.
II.— Protection of life and property.
City
and armo-
Militia
Police department.
Aggregate.
num-
ries.
Fire department.
ber.
All other.
Total.
Grapd
GROUP
New York, N.Y..
Chicago, 111
Philadelphia, Pa.
St. Louis, Mo
Boston, Mass
Baltimore, Md
Pittsburg, Pa
Cleveland, Ohio...
Cal.
Detroit, Mich
Cincinnati, Ohio...
Milwaukee, Wis . .
New Orleans, La.
Washington, D. C.
Newark, N. J
Minneapolis, Minn...
Jersey CityLN. J
Ky
Indianapolis, Ind
St. Paul,
Minn
Providence, R. I
Rochester, N.
Y
Kansas
City,
Mo
Toledo, Ohio
Denver, Colo
Columbus, Ohio
Los Angeles, Cal
Worcester, Mass
Seattle,
Wash
Memphis, Tenn
Omaha, Nebr
New Haven, Conn.
Scranton, Pa
Syracuse, N.
St. Joseph,
Pensions
and
and
Miscella-
Service
neous.
transfers.
.
Y
Mo
Paterson, N. J
Portland, Oreg
Atlanta, Ga
Richmond, Va
Fall River, Mass
Nashville, Tenn
Dayton, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.
1653, 747
$364, 467
$324,639
$28,179,462
$1,728,804
6,121,127
3,845,199
2,510,555
350,698
6,678
4,436
2,666
283,267
13,220
16,060
12, 102
16,917,020
6,619,469
3,239,694
2,403,279
1,456,696
160,386
78, 466
33,267
$288,984
$136,664
6,066
34,511
1,973
19,491
$6,069,476
2,245,881
1,103,342
870,589
1,099,953
$724,031
148,846
86,430
36,306
109,059
643,164
707,780
678,480
691,062
737, 813
21,693
38,932
63,260
49, 109
610,444
491, 160
609,017
307,087
461,782
24,661
36,329
29,636
8,414
36,866
136,837
259,283
282,961
263,240
369,200
403,854
76,691
1,973
1,129,844
865,692
668,906
739,254
1,031,169
27,383
34,616
60,468
49,430
71,198
49,722
43, 136
38,721
89,402
71,268
226, 491
764
675, 105
217,487
197,096
10,643
27,022
39,962
10,436
1,800
82,639
60,439
39,661
33,878
26,376
44,861
1,563,449
1,375,106
1,206,815
869,203
1,904,377
1,336,194
1,167,618
999,076
639,090
1,676,874
$1,042,471
648,210
716,476
546,077
476,190
468,857
868,960
681,607
723,770
416, 419
411,414
706,993
664,448
631, 147
318,636
594,103
479,616
853, 412
410,225
481,777
443,997
407,035
746,699
358,980
420, 160
335,667
281,395
433,011
294,872
238,833
360,667
185, 163
403,966
149,462,
306,674'
204,286
393,291
436,323
386,012
285,304
149,871
299,923
362,601
339,367
247, 747
294,370
248,914
329,961
284,081
260,317
224,690
272,968
237,047
IN
14,397
1,740,916
1,761,294
1,305,606
1,382,604
1,992,330
$1,211,943
714,464
860,461
666,205
670,154
OR OVER
$762,621
446,919
219,269
98,362
217,432
2,000,485
2,044,246
1,668,746
1,817,396
2,398,157
II.—CITIES
300,000
510,532'
330, 106
216, 101
$1,510,230
300,102
175,646
230, 113
327,503
48
600,630
449,411
294,327
942,330
HAVING A POPULATION OP
$168,354
66,222
144,975
and
2,242,046
$11,956,494
4,812,294
3,197,833
1,701,742
1,638,669
741
2, 999,
Pensions
gratuities.
$3,297,783
344, 780
$13,031
228,047
and
2,627,649
168,370
66,851
15,789
HAVING A POPULATION OF
$4,487,438
1,342,261
840,651
352,067
812,248
Another,
$2,778,659
I.—CITIES
$20,373,109
7,646,266
4,805,186
2,701,010
and
$43,170,370
10,601,763
2,372,575
1,967,334
1,317,902
69,079
163,940
85,948
Salaries
Salaries
All other.
gratuities.
52,316,804
12, 171, 852
7,373,623
5,123,238
$24,873,678
9,116,664
5,645,737
3,053,115
3,826,386
GROUP
Louisville,
Salaries
and
$76,985,517 116,259,574
total
Group I
Group II
Group III
Group IV
BufEalo,N.Y
San Francisco,
Salaries
.
100,000
TO
300,000
IN
1907.
1,188
10,600
33,754
26,978
5,644
22,895
1907.
48,318
46, 126
GENERAL TABLES.
AND SPECIAL SERVICE EXPENSES:
-with the
nuinber assigned to each, see page
1907— Continued.
127.1
CLASSIFIED
BY DEPARTMENTS,
OFFICES,
AND ACCOUNTS— Continued
185
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
186
FOR GENERAL EXPENSES*
Table 5.— PAYMENTS
[For a
GROUP
III.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
CLASSIFIED
BY DEPARTMENTS,
50,000
TO
OFFICES,
100,000
list of
IN
the
cities
arranged alphabetically by
states,
1907.
AND ACCOUNTS— Continued.
II.— Protection ol life and property.
City
and armo-
Militia
Police department.
num-
ries.
Fire department.
ber.
All other.
Total.
Cambridge, Mass
Albany, N.Y....
Hartford, Conn...
LoweU, Mass
Beading, Pa
Trenton,
Y
100,616
95,768
85,192
122,050
81, 787
133,427
269,682
233,559
267,213
237,378
224,772
204, 938
228,314
170,087
29,533
44,910
28,509
38,899
67, 169
62,451
94,036
124,586
96,885
111,712
370,956
174,603
191,416
222,444
223,137
272,923
145,370
154,585
178,914
159,905
29,233
36,422
43,530
24,076
243,322
272,466
248,918
230,861
261, 767
214,440
225,914
177,887
146,986
134,241
28,882
46,336
71,031
50,545
120,263
.
172,074
110, 533
Y.
171, 701
151,127
128,524
117,333
118,398
125,248
40,399
43,177
18,656
39,745
25,879
137,602
151,564
108, 771
130,438
143,401
109,099
126,915
83,821
110,426
119,118
28,503
23,113
24,950
189,028
78, 941
196,096
223,381
132,392
50,350
132,727
165,661
20,227
28,591
63,256
57,720
172,592
l65, 164
168, 123
113,250
143,838
147,542
113,549
93, 802
28,754
17,622
54,574
19,448
147, 806
176,670
137,826
93,972
110,536
137,473
114,095
89,498
37,270
32,773
23,311
4,474
Conn
.
Mass.
Mass
Savannah, Ga
Duluth, Miim
Va
Hobol£en, N. J.
111
Yonkers. N. Y.
Utica, N. Y....
H
Manchester, N.
Schenectady, N.
Evansville, Ind
135,989
San Antonio, Tex.
158, 141
Elizabeth,
N.J
Waterbury, Conn
Salt Lake City, Utah.
Wilkes-Barre,
Erie,
Pa
Pa
Houston, Tex
Tacoma, Wash.
Harrisburg, Pa.
Charleston, S. C.
Portland, Me
Youngstown, Ohio.
Dallas,
Tex
Terre Haute, Ind
Fort Wayne, Ind.
. .
Akron, Ohio
Holyoke, Mass.
Brockton, Mass.
Covington,
Ky..
$153, 754
38,306
52,830
75,619
41,473
63,115
Oakland, Cal
Lawrence, Mass.
Peoria,
gratuities.
187,317
196,299
91,632
219,528
191,826
Somerville, Mass.
Norfolk,
transfers.
wages.
226,623
249, 129
167,251
261,001
254,941
Kansas City, Kans.
Lynn, Mass
Troy, N.
neous.
and
$44,413
70, 786
57,101
43,178
46,405
Wilmington, Del
Springfield,
Service
Pensions
and
$266,852
287, 704
266,937
273,110
68,372
Camden, N.J
Des Moines, Iowa.
New Bedford,
Miscella-
Salaries
$311,462
398, 490
340,537
316,880
114, 777
N.J
•Bridgeport,
and
.
$197
235
135,021
137,656
63,444
149,
16,499
592
$5,510
4,799
3,668
487
$7,038
16,249
9,114
7,993
1,304
2,268
13,520
7,009
9,347
9,290
3,436
2,061
11,111
39, 156
78,242
79,967
96,813
60,595
2,084
2,207
1,280
33,330
7,263
129,913
135,080
98,744
77,976
48, 167
49,328
60,915
56, 717
420
9,901
50
1,379
52,704
80,033
1,636
20,012
24,253
36,409
113
6,424
420
52,080
66,696
51,607
48,111
59,997
58,246
44,967
86,428
79,321
All other,
$1,478
$905
""246
12, 152
361
6,562
8,358
8,070
630
200
18,648
4,188
4,193
14,591
5,525
1,240
576
400
3,500
459
200
67
270
3,640
43, 696
690
381
and
gratuities.
$97,617
129,369
123,038
125,483
1,600
$3,627
8,342
4,16S
81,683
97,651
1,200
94,525
105,015
3,226
50,092
92,187
75,638
123,684
62,675
101,674
63,428
58,236
77,817
91,096
2,000
220
76,786
87,894
67,677
64,960
83,564
7,552
11,942
2,020
7,982
1,700
60,175
60,024
58,916
56,555
44,750
5,227
10,065
53,905
2,766
2,206
3,180
30,694
58,073
56,388
5,649
1,654
7,352
6,351
70, 660
1,882
5,932
4,770
380
5,146
3,187
"'748'
3,840
3,481
1,440
6,558
2,570
1,985
101
55, 199
999
2,674
8,827
1,408
3,090
1,046
2,317
3,868
8,230
Pensions
and
wages.
6,174
9,769
5,834
19,024
11,607
253
1,040
71,651
62,301
53,242
38,720
56,859
54,745
52, 122
and
5,499
155, 024
21,142
Salaries
Salaries
All other.
10
126
66
867
3,174
2,301
1,380
42,791
76,546
1,837
200
600
66,447
80,138
55,573
62,738
2,447
65,560
76,580
3,064
55,897'
36,526
2,268
1,312
GENERAL TABLES.
187
AND SPECIAL SERVICE EXPENSES: 1907—Continued,
with the num'ber assigned to each, see page 127.]
GROUP
III.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
50,000
TO
100,000
IN
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
188
Table 6.— PAYMENTS
[ For a
GROUP IV.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF
CLASSIFIED
BY DEPARTMENTS,
30,000 to 50,000
OFFICES,
list
IN
FOR GENERAL EXPENSES
of the cities arranged alphabetically
by states.
1907.
AND ACCOUNTS—Continued.
n.— Protection of Ufe and property.
City
and armo-
Militia
Police department.
.\ggregate.
num-
ries.
Fire department.
ber.
All other.
Salaries
Total.
92
Saginaw, Mich
Lincoln,
Altoona,
S94, 105
Nebr
Pa
Wash
Lancaster, Pa
97
Birmingham, Ala
Bayonne, N.J
South Bend, Ind
Mont
100
101
Butte,
102
103
104
105
106
McKeesport, Pa
Binghamton, N. Y.
Johnstown, Pa
107
108
109
110
Pawtuoket, E.I
.
Dubuque, Iowa
Sioux City, Iowa
Augusta,
Ga
,.
Mobile, Ala
178,205
104,219
90,519
160,438
102,375
38,644
20,360
13, 462
47,014
23,123
71,977
63,348
36,564
88,408
63,666
99, 776
85,267
68,221
80,431
65,631
67,397
14,509
16,205
16,407
12,837
10,423
49,626
36,629
33,998
30,346
33, 386
56, 118
111,909
88,606
64, 137
77,252
39,907
19,399
22,963
8,718
18,621
15,211
55,778
50,604
24,277
33,857
20,620
121,486
106,291
96,622
61, 187
107,922
91,574
89,224
81,224
29,092
70,035
29,912
17,067
16,311
32,095
37,887
87
223,773
67,504
63,626
25,198
92,317
33,385
9,573
14,411
22,394
22,008
313
73,591
80,867
111,336
63,287
106,683
52,308
71, 117
70,579
25,884
15,273
21,283
9,760
40,757
27,403
84,954
32,657
39,352
90,068
135,366
27,806
14,461
28, 472
20, 081
20, 120
21,223
16,835
83,426
96,838
78,468
77,820
131,308
111,559
72,865
95, 773
East St. Louis, ni
Wheeling, W. Va.
Montgomery, Ala
Passaic, N. J
Davenport, Iowa
117
118
119
120
121
AtlantlcCity, N. J...
257, 158
Little Bock, Ark
Bay City, Mich
York, Pa
Maiden, Mass
77,077
78,350
47,692
114,564
122
123
Springfleld,
121, 966
124
125
126
Canton, Ohio
127
128
129
130
131
Chelsea, Mass
Newton, Mass
107,570
60,463
53, Sl3
118, 540
155, 962
132
133
134
135
136
Haverhill, Mass
Jacksonville, Fla
106, 948
165, 896
137
138
139
140
141
Knoxville,
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
Superior, Wis
Chester, Pa
South Omaha, Nebr.
Newcastle, Pa
Salem, Mass
traEnsfers.
216,849
124,579
103,981
207,452
139,599
112
113
114
115
116
111
neous.
19, 731
Wichita, Kans
46, 479
68, 427
Kockford,Ill
73, 057
86,668
114,367
30, 644
43, 979
67, 845
91,070
95, 957
103,764
74, 469
141,705
66,213
60, 800
92, 979
56, 115
109, 341
24,867
67,761
86,092
80,984
60,999
93,045
48, 496
56, 165
65, 663
9,234
11,442
16,321
24,754
16,880
126,548
79,534
66,839
55,921
103,250
62,676
60,406
112,063
136, 462
61,883
45, 657
14, 749
86, 109
103,450
52,738
25,944
87,212
43,237
65,886
101, 426
70,734
85,560
16,767
4,246
8,918
15, 866
3,433
1,546
1,815
J'oplin,
Mo
Elmira,N.
Tenn
Y
Galveston, Tex
New Britain Conn
Chattanooga, Tenn.
.
,
.
.
Kalamazoo, Mich
Woonsocket, R.I
Fitohburg, Mass
Bacine, Wis
Auburn,
N.Y
Macon, Ga
JoIiet,Ill
Oklahoma City,
Oshkosh, Wis
Okla.
151
West Hoboken, N.
152
153
154
Sacramento, Cal
Pueblo, Colo
155
156
157
158
Taunton, Mass
Newport, Ky
Everett, Mass
La Crosse, Wis
Fort Worth, Tex
SanJuan.P.
R
J..
36,245
66,765
49, 432
37,789
38, 991
66, 968
S14, 101
55,688
42,063
42,267
26,247
31,516
2,885
140
20,306
38,758
28, 709
23,006
42,183
$2,191
2,787
1,958
1,366
90
319
502
40, 437
33, 874
16,
445
132
48,517
28, 406
37, 693
28,612
19, 419
37, 612
72
23
1,000
1,431
1,921
1,940
94,929
37,047
47, 729
64,678
43,415
49,966
32, 418
38,860
41,010
18,589
686
3,538
2,306
4,960
1,655
3,246
37, 757
5,887
2,273
1,698
517
3,348
1,711
4,032
2,736
1,643
6,068
2,112
1,480
1,233
IS
789
3,459
1,343
34,519
46,893
2,595
34,919
100
$360
126,687
28,746
33, 192
830
36, 107
2,159
1,097
333
440
57, 130
29,373
37, 744
40,888
300
462
891
300
6,093
642
76
132
472
13,088
17, 145
27,775
43, 960
100
592
""757'
475
30,
"i,'i25'
42,120
447
426
25, 100
35,734
393
45,
11,
31,079
30, 930
50, 307
2,'
935'
3,086
26, 675
52, 707
10
173
26,238
22,791
30,884
21, 168
35,023
4,118
4,315
1,865
29,839
21,824
14,749
$430
39,725
89, 146
16,646
4,322
9,207
3,432
3,038
1,469
1,519
1,816
4,072
1,023
1,409
31,049
465
15,077
29, 484
49, 123
23,298
16,858
7,407
18,132
$625
34, 195
1,107
1,051
1,281
2,606
3,050
1,726
2,747
4,884
2li 888
and
35,002
30,413
46,433
34,599
31,251
2,743
9,084
2,894
2,734
2,912
348
Pensions
4,943
2,737
2,412
1,911
3,247
35,997
65,701
18, 364
18,684
21,809
33,
400
and
$36,154
4,169
4,236
3,012
7,955
8,375
2,338
2,016
814
2,647
3,885
41,751
27,090
53,843
11,
Salaries
All other,
$4,253
2,880
2,769
11, 498
1,253
48,391
17,093
21,034
44, 134
72, 978
32, 759
29, 570
22
and
gratuities.
2,892
1,008
2,771
1,841
2,004
10,786
18, 198
32, 364
18, 486
Salaries
All other.
47,131
22,936
30,001
28,891
24,737
35, 157
9,013
and
89, 445
24, 448
16,212
15, 567
Pensions
gratuities.
77, 159
166,999
46,743
HI
Quiney.IU
Service
S41,614
18,868
33,522
64, 129
27,897
Topeka, Kans
Springfield, Ohio
Allentown, Pa
. .
179,578
63,063
and
Miscella-
$14,527
11,566
17,367
37,296
10,716
64,629
94,526
194,294
56,459
Spokane,
Salaries
and
wages.
1,140
61,261
27,958
22,471
22,752
5,220
60,210
49,793
600
844
2,005
22, 132
30,323
•10, 119
36,649
44,657
1,299
533
GENERAL TABLES.
189
AND SPECIAL SERVICE EXPENSES: 1907—Continued,
with the nuirfber assigned to each, see page
127.]
GROUP
IV.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
TO
50,000
IN
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
190
FOR GENERAL EXPENSES
Table 6.—PAYMENTS
[For a
CLASSIFIED
BY DEPARTMENTS,
OFFICES,
list of
the
cities
arranged alphabetically by
states.
AND ACCOUNTS—Continued.
—Continued.
III.— Health conservation and sanitation
Sanitation.
Health conservation.
City
Sewers and sewage disposal.
numand
Quarantine
ber.
Health department.
contagious
dis-
Street cleaning.
Morgues.
General
ease hospitals.
General expenses.
supervision.!
Salaries
Grand total
Groupl
Group II
Group III
Group IV
N. Y.
All
other.
Jl, 055, 473
S994, 492
$838, 067
$27, 790
$24,545
2,701,819
573,006
407,817
248,398
732,137
783,029
106,791
67,004
37,668
515, 635
169, 667
27, 790
24,294
131, 181
122, 426
69,
729
I.—CITIES
91,727
61,038
wages.
"251'
HAVING A POPULATION OF
$1,352,429
198,228
211, 407
95,362
135, 050
$339, 131
63,386
42,302
29,286
39,015
$428,002
180,512
48,603
8,270
26,614
Baltimore, Md
Pittsburg, Pa
Cleveland, Ohio. .
Buffalo,
San Francisco, Cal
63,021
107,599
106,651
41,332
132,654
21,582
22, 699
21, 960
3,026
107,544
16,615
18,679
83
6,013
7,630
Detroit, Mich
Cincinnati, Ohio...
26,522
49,805
36,380
94,326
51,053
6,465
6,694
4,037
14,904
10,206
4,913
2,018
7,852
8,951
19,274
Milwaukee, Wis . .
New Orleans, La.
Washington, D. C.
and
$3, 931, 040
other.
Chicago, 111
Fhilaaelphia, Fa..
St. Louis, Mo
Boston, Mass
N.Y
Salarle.s
All other.
GROUP
New York,
All
and
and wages.
Salaries
All
Salaries
other.
and wages.
All other.
and wages.
All other.
$242, 450
$68, 497
$3,705,925
$1,788,247 $12,350,572
$4,456,453
127,748
77, 146
23,299
14,257
41,526
17,817
7,178
1,976
2,558,886
527,528
357, 450
8,642,435
1,886,613
1,112,012
710,662
3,795,442
308,107
243,886
109,018
and
300,000
OB OVER IN
262, 061
1907.
Salaries
1,149,549
246,358
243,035
149,305
GENERAL TABLES.
191
AND SPECIAL SERVICE EXPENSES: 1907—Continued,
with the number assigned to each, see page 127.]
CLASSIFIED
BY DEFABTMENTS,
OrFICES,
AND ACCOUNTS— Continued.
III.— Health conservation and sanitationContinued.
IV.— Highways.
Sanitation— Continued.
General street
expenses.
General
Aggregate.
supervision.'
Street pavements.
ber.
Miscellaneous.
Refuse disposal.
All other.
Salaries
and wages.
Salaries
$4,149,803 $3,284,015
2,497,847
728,804
640,624
282,628
and
All other.
2,006,081
608,711
394,859
275,364
I
All
other.
Total.
:
$93, 828
transfers.
$14, 188, 432
$29,013,644
$1,656,388
$992,008
$129, 405
7,00S
3,005
8,744
28,181,616
7,418,996
5,288,325
3,969,527
8,770,711
2,400,947
1,682,215
1,334,559
18,684,657
4,608,022
3,620,007
2,301,068
826,348
410,027
86, 103
333,910
572,752
182, 792
130,619
105,845
84,082
17,281
19,767
8,275
$26,331
$133,438
106,551
240, 168
7,577
12,899
1,071
1,848
1,942
6,126
206,448
21,591
204,800
277,669
79,749
218,229
5,594
3,657
3,739
878
4,707
93,800
4,788
70,914
1,947
HAVING A POPULATION OF
$3,630,630
830, 909
621,952
1,161,344
826, 114
637, 110
768, 759
,
9,913
I.^CITIES
$11,904,857
2,418,723
2,611,191
1,729,082
2, 111, 590
378,569
802,678
678,811
462, 377
1,068,459
GROUP
$7,778
39,021
neous.
$39, 443
640,852
1,105,225
$8,234,784
1, 117, 104
2,474,083
1,088,230
999,311
236,260
343,612
437,627
156,193
255,211
385,126
622,669
363,604
480,604
513,648
566
195,163
24,983
313
137, 108
176,671
206,509
84,961
289,904
II.—CITIES
628,107
452,031
309,571
778,655
470,710
7,064
20,271
67,845
300,000
$2, 173
27,955
2,031
13,060
11,200
14,996
4,164
3,211
5,230
915
942
11,625
12,569
HAVING A POPULATION OP
and
100,000
and
All other.
$6,126,048 $3,163,097
3,620,272
1,019,111
732, 551
754,114
1,674,302
611,344
410,864
466,587
$2,606,103 $3,312,962
1,796,697
400,094
264,850
144,462
2,301,422
610, 760
328,332
172, 438
$100,628
489,724
368,906
$331,673
366,045
195,651
139,092
1907.
$2,640,622
129,761
6,946
29, 187
16,945
$931,366
66,622
208,363
3,031
8,676
48,178
145,671
143,779
29,364
177,784
33,138
27,951
16,702
19,997
103,086
127,567
138,519
102,567
71,869
211,089
43,267
31,136.
186,i595
15,421
119,625
21,677
47,454
101,381
63,317
31,742
148,510
116,911
395
25,839
18,290
67,210
41,676
100,020
53,340
137,841
4,948
84,211
356, 176
300,000
IN
9,767
24,432
12, 498
18,540
TO
Ail other.
wages.
OR OVER IN
$206,426
102,661
68,014
49,221
54, 130
Salaries
Salaries
other.
$44,868,464
145,021
652,263
255,097
140,873
10,764
Service
216,876
7,380
7,632
953
60,658
19,287
86,580
17, 465
17,660
166,282
AH
and
Miscella-
$232,841
417, 155
47,984
and wages.
$188,102
GROUP
9 $28, 108
1,081,641
Salaries
Salaries
1907.
City
num-
16,060
140,859
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
192
Table 5.—PAYMENTS
[For a
GROUP
III.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
CLASSIFIED
III.
BY DEPABTMENTS,
TO
50,000
of the cities arranged alphabetically
IN
by
states,
1907.
AND ACCOUNTS— continued.
OFFICES,
—Health conservation and sanitation—Continued.
Sanitation.
Health conservation.
City
Sewers and sewage disposal.
numQuarantine
ber.
Health department.
and
contagious disease hospitals.
Morgues.
Street cleaning.
General
supervision.'
Salaries
and wages.
All other.
and
Cambridge, Mass.
Albany, N.Y....
Hartford, Conn.
Lowell, Mass
Reading, Pa
$15,392
11,041
10,113
13,336
2,472
S5,204
2,136
6,747
2,120
2,294
15,456
600
Trenton, N.J
Bridgeport, Conn.
Wilmington, Del.
Camden, N. J
Des Moines, Iowa.
8,112
2,262
7,878
9,000
6,341
1,605
1,830
1,531
1,117
1,160
600
6,878
11,311
9,760
7,558
11,123
.
Kansas City, Kans.
Lynn, Mass
New Bedford, Mass.
Spring&eld, Mass
Troy, N.
Y
Oakland, Cal
Lawrence, Mass.
Somerville, Mass
Savannah, Ga. .
Duluth, Mirm. .
Va.
Hoboken, N.
Norfolk,
Peoria,
. .
J.
111
Yonkers. N. Y.
Utica,N. Y....
Manchester, N. H.
Schenectady, N. Y.
Evansville, Ind
San Antonio, Tex.
Elizabeth, N. J
Waterbury, Conn
Salt Lake City, Utah.
Wilkes-Barre,
Erie,
Pa
Pa
Houston, Tex
Tacoma, Wash..
Harrisburg, Pa.
Charleston, S.C.
Portland, Me
Youngstown, Ohio.
Dallas,
87
list
100,000
FOR GENERAL EXPENSES'
Tex
Terre Haute, Ind.
Fort Wayne, Ind.
.
.
Akron, Ohio
Holyoke, Mass.
Brockton, Mass.
Covington, Ky..
1
1,301
Salaries
All
other.
and
All
other.
Salaries
and
wages.
$16,592
338
$2, 399
2,605
2,000
747
1,439
4,867
1,200
General expenses.
All
Salaries
other.
and wages.
All other.
and wages.
All other.
$10,814
4,000
12,442
11,869
21,739
$26,223
622
5,416
1,066
51,474
$35,397
39,080
35,182
16,564
8,360
$1,588
15,340
3,611
5,890
5,512
2,923
1,897
14,793
742
2,881
1,962
1,432
2,267
23,522
43,947
12,848
25,500
17,379
8,072
2,137
9,606
6,132
4,165
3,119
5,082
2,259
2,279
$79
1,750
267
720
600
90
70
4,181
4,264
1,615
2,489
5,624
4,206
923
3,772
762
3,117
6,523
471
6,407
753
70,279
5,933
6,841
13,425
8,396
16,628
4,194
4,784
1,520
958
5,267
2,256
3,536
960
6,105
919
2,446
6,059
790
5,285
13,313
5,754
8,152
12,015
6,788
3,248
1,765
3,635
2,458
3,014
3,276
2,125
1,870
2,750
1,016
2,633
2,909
786
3,849
8,381
4,197
16,770
7,090
3,116
3,455
621
1,737
4,274
2,015
690
3,500
1,346
500
2,740
4,220
11,069
2,770
7,251
7,802
1,613
1,791
1,604
1,622
3,274
140
140
527
287
748
402
71
13,628
9,465
4,342
2,000
9,866
6,711
769
3,574
1,832
2,629
720
400
60
897
1,151
340
589
1,155
15,922
4,150
6,557
2,549
10,751
13,080
1,246
9,553
7,984
860
4,730
3,360
947
199
402
139
2,668
474
450
12,077
42
1,244
4,977
2,665
1,919
2,945
2,800
4,792
3,950
1,660
500
2,818
4,866
78
30O
180
287
360
340
844
685
6,330
4,848
10,984
6,645
For some
cities,
176
1,192
2,313
764
1,704
1,375
$251
1,200
900
863
1,356
345
29
1,872
2,088
1,221
1,640
Salaries
10,646
1,029
11,956
1,698
5,950
14, 539
14, 154
9,628
3,497
5,502
1,078
12,260
21,437
18,135
39,712
77,479
15,867
8,809
13,172
9,024
7,662
4,063
2,290
14,884
4,097
37
88,621
10,000
17,715
23,627
9,184
13, 622
24,443
6,171
7,369
2,660
6,722
14,884
2,160
1,012
1,276
1,332
46, 157
18, 627
25,738
40,990
1,423
12,338
2,783
50
4,245
59, 535
6,661
3,847
3,194
5,490
47,527
3,391
3,506
1,743
1,304
635
5,906
2,251
470
1,989
10,190
2,248
9,782
6,376
3,013
10,016
2,766
314
3,297
17,973
48,398
5,500
9,600
15,548
2,004
700
177
1,538
31, 012
5,506
35,000
15,616
22, 978
3,146
5,467
1,798
93
1,245
734
15,361
21,746
19,284
13,934
2,713
598
999
1,264
637
788
6,669
358
5,628
9,484
6,942
8,000
19,866
expenses of supervision of sewers are included under "general supervision" of highways.
19, 115
6,157
187
9
2,467
GENERAL TABLES.
193
AND SPECIAL SERVICE EXPENSES: 1907—Continued,
with the
number
assigned to each, see page 127.]
GROUP
III.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
50,000
TO
100,000
IN
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
194
Table 6.—PAYMENTS
GROUP
IV.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
TO
[For a
list of
50,000
IN
the
1907.
FOR GENERAL EXPENSES
cities
arranged alphabetically, by
states,
GENERAL TABLES.
195
AND SPECIAL SERVICE EXPENSES: 1907—Continued,
with the
number assigned
to each, see page 127.]
GROUP
IV.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
TO
50,000
IN
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
196
Table S.— PAYMENTS
[For a
CLASSIFIED
BT DEPARTMENTS,
IV.
City
Street curbing.
num-
Sidewalks.
OFFICES,
list of
FOR GENERAL EXPENSES
the cities arranged alphabetically
by states.
AND ACCOUNTS —Continued.
—Highways—Continued.
Bridges other than
toll.
Snow and ice removal.
Street sprinkling.
Street lighting.
ber.
Salaries
Salaries
and
All other.
Grand
Group I .
Group II
Group III.
Group IV..
total.
All other.
and
All other.
and
Salaries
All other.
$390,259
$322, 524
$1,696,142
$1, 130, 626
$748,369
$2,439,654
$884,967
$1,031,085
140, 917
117,114
89,709
70,247
45,454
1,303,105
178,994
148,017
66,026
795, 123
470,845
103,889
121,316
62,319
2,407,506
23,449
5,801
2,798
228,599
6,600
10,669
1,177
424
2,444
3,811
3,136
365,321
298,202
267,277
120,285
80,925
104, 148
64,269
I.—CITIES
and
All other.
wages.
$9,815
GROUP
1
and
$18,446
.
.
All other.
Salaries
Salaries
Salaries
and
wages.
wages.
135,617
128, 149
71,637
HAVING A POPULATION OF
300,000
OR OVER IN
366, 171
159, 181
131,016
1907.
$574,606 $18,926,241
616,677
44,448
6,052
7,429
11,502,277
3,313,022
2,371,503
1,738,439
GENERAL TABLES.
AND SPECIAL SERVICE EXPENSES:
with the ntmher assigned to each, see page
1907— Continued,
127.]
CLASSIFIED
BY DEPARTMENTS,
OFFICES,
AND ACCOUNTS— continued.
197
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
198
Table 5.— PAYMENTS
[For a
GROUP
III.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
50,000
TO
100,000
list of
IN
tbe
1907.
FOR GENERAL EXPENSES
cities
arranged alpliabeticall^
by states,
'
GENERAL TABLES.
199
AND SPECIAL SERVICE EXPENSES: 1906—Continued.
with the bumtier assigned to each, see page 127.]
GEOUP m.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF
OLASSiriED
BY DEPARTMENTS,
OFFICES,
50,000
TO
100,000
AND ACCOUNTS— continued.
IN
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
200
Table 5.—PAYMENTS
GROUP
IV.—CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
TO
[For a
list
50,000
IN
FOR GENERAL EXPENSES
of the cities arranged alphabetically
1907.
by states,
GENERAL TABLES.
AND SPECIAL SERVICE EXPENSES:
witb the
number assigned
to each, see
page
201
1907— Continued.
127.]
GROUP
IV.-CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
TO
50,000
IN
1907.
202
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
Table 5.— PAYMENTS
[For a
list
FOR GENERAL EXPENSES
of the cities arranged alphabetically
by states,
GENERAL TABLES.
203
AND SPECIAL SERVICE EXPENSES: 1907—Continued.
with the number assigned to each, see page 127.]
,.
CLASSIFIED
BY DEPARTMENTS, OFFICES, AND ACCOUNTS— continued.
:
:
—
:
:
_.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
204
Table 5.—PAYMENTS
GROUP
III.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
50,000
TO
FOR GENERAL EXPENSES
[For a
list
of the cities arranged alphabetically
100,000
IN
1907.
by states,
GENERAL TABLES.
205
AND SPECIAL SERVICE EXPENSES: 1906—Continued.
witli the number assigned to each, see
page
127.]
GROUP
III.— CITIES
CLASSIFIED
HAVING A POPULATION OF
BY DEPAKTMENTS,
OFFICES,
60,000
TO
100,000
AND ACCOUNTS—continued.
IN
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
206
Table 6.— PAYMENTS
[For a
GROUP
IV.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
TO
50,000
list of
IN
the
1907.
FOR GENERAL EXPENSES
cities
arranged alphabetically by states,
GENERAL TABLES.
207
AND SPECIAL SERVICE EXPENSES: 1906— Continued,
with the
nmaber assigned
to each, see
page
127.]
GROUP
IV.—CITIES
CLASSIFIED
HAVING A POPULATION OF
BY DEPARTMENTS,
OFFICES,
30,000
TO
50,000
AND ACCOUNTS—Continued.
IN
1907.
208
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
Table 5.— PAYMENTS
[For a
list of
FOR GENERAL EXPENSES
the cities arranged alphabetically
by states,
GENERAL TABLES.
AND SPECIAL SERVICE EXPENSES:
with the
number assigned to each,
see page 127.]
1907— Continued,
209
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
210
Table 5.— PAYMENTS
[For a
GROUP
III.—CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
CLASSIFIED
BY DEPARTMENTS,
50,000
OFFICES,
TO
100,000
list of
IN
FOR GENERAL EXPENSES
the cities arranged alphabetically
by states,
1907.
AND ACCOUNTS— Continued.
VI.— Education— Continued.
Schools.'
City
Of city.
number.
General suirervision.
Elementary day
schools.
High and
collegiate
day
Night schools.
schools.
Pensions
and
gratui
Salaries
and
wages.
Cambridge, Mass
Albany.N.Y
Hartford, Conn
Lowell, Mass
Reading,
Pa
Trenton, N.J
Bridgeport, Conn
. .
Wilmington, Del
Camden, N. J
Des Moines, Iowa.
.
Kansas City, Kans.
Lynn, Mass
New
Bedford, Mass.
Springfield,
Mass
Troy,N.Y
Oakland, Cal
Lawrence, Mass
Somerville, Mass
Savarmah, Ga
Duluth, Minn
NorfoUi:,
Peoria,
111
Yonkers. N.
J
Y
Utioa.N.Y
H.
N.Y..
Manchester, N.
Soheneotadjr,
.
E vansville, Ind
San Antonio, Tex.
.
Elizabeth, N. J
Waterbury, Conn .
Salt Lake City .Utah
.
Wilkes-Barre, jPa....
Erie,
Pa
Houston, Tex
Taooma, Wash
Harrisburg, Pa
Charleston, S. C
Portland, Me
Youngstown, Ohio.
Dallas,
Tex
Terre Haute, Ind
Fort Wayne, Ind
Akron, Ohio
Holyoke, Mass
Brockton, Mass
Covington, Ky
Salaries
and wages.
Salaries
and wages.
Salaries
and wages.
AU
All Other.
Other.
other.
114,483
6,700
7,684
8,445
9,940
SI, 818
11,284
9,062
7,238
10,311
10,840
526
172
1,623
6,912
3,473
11,083
10,446
9,293
6,586
9,078
4,603
2,675
4,576
4,513
1,191
10,794
7,080
5,856
3,831
1,045
407
(=5
Va
Hoboken, N.
AU
ties.
.Of
Of
Of
Of
Of
Of
teachers.
Others.
teachers.
others.
teachers.
others.
$1,500
15
1,790
785
4,491
3,150
.1,617
m
1,727
199,423
274,084
216,011
152,871
S34,041
18,002
26,199
53,483
21,968
t66,415
56,283
101,893
55,779
33,273
$87,873
46,694
$11,229
2,300
6,767
3,931
$21,966
15,528
20,869
9,236
7,914
$9,072
8,893
14, 175
18,146
4,000
3,182
600
164,664
161,029
137,220
235,089
248,494
13,477
14,257
10,632
28,101
27,916
66,886
50,839
34,342
66,445
65,410
32, 175
29,882
28, 617
22,072
66,360
1,935
2,181
2,200
4,570
6,185
10,055
7,874
7,420
9,169
14,792
4,103
1,392
604
372
125,431
166,419
167,912
233,001
155,398
11,839
21,625
19,398
37,108
17,534
22,049
38,631
54,664
64,872
35,089
38,973
46,620
33,474
77,383
36,216
3,123
3,.598
3,110
1,698
3,512
8,401
18,708
11,572
21,923
7,312
4,090
342
623
9,930
2,939
345,661
150,906
195,626
24,605
26,107
19,996
56,494
41,602
40,446
72,931
26,606
64,511
4,746
2,652
4,150
7,310
3,542
18,053
332
433
168,062
26,286
50,746
28, 195
3,453
w
14,544
8,326
10,794
7,471
86,278
211,000
171,969
208,199
154,093
11,208
17,317
15,026
17,436
12,931
19,809
51,502
33,234
69,177
35,014
11,275
23,706
22,906
36,931
26, 6S1
960
1,733
1,614
2,520
2,289
4,784
5,201
9,279
6,002
375
4,582
471
6,741
3,489
60
620
150
87,829
130,520
133,596
122,379
104,019
6,716
7,286
14,494
12,975
10,155
25,320
37,399
17,796
16,838
32,395
16,000
24,030
36,008
21,596
19,792
1,463
1,680
2,760
1,769
960
5,371
6,656
2,603
1,567
3,060
1,580
4,290
163,061
279,665
112,832
110,606
116,626
19,067
36,727
14,806
13,305
8,865
45,632
72, 730
34,680
22,373
16,973
21,550
47,014
22,150
27,071
31,545
2,173
9,679
1,200
2,104
1,800
6,384
11,148
3,850
6,819
3,300
4,330
180
641
1,300
2,097
990
205
160
"82
189,819
110,786
47,174
127,352
17, .367
14,356
1,250
19,816
30,281
38,303
8,536
46,025
54,044
42,300
8.920
33; 120
3.979
3,874
300
2,640
16,059
7,403
14,618
10,398
55,874
25,615
45,003
25,284
22,510
26,037
26,533
26,829
1,500
1,861
1,922
2,878
3,624
7,563
4,242
6,096
14,054
12,512
14,681
5,395
30,179
39,311
31,240
12,973
27,788
28,513
36,840
11.400
1,960
4,465
5,904
800
5,610
11,156
9,631
1,662
W
3,814
8,490
6,834
11,920
12,361
2,983
2,033
8,788
2,815
2, 614
4,498
5,194
5,724
6,508
6,400
264
951
1,315
466
350
3,500
19,767
7,978
10,462
5,220
1,707
3,626
1,000
2,572
1,813
14,674
6,210
2,500
4,954
3,417
3,463
180
375
7,056
4,737
7,740
6,562
1,719
1,032
1,437
242
124,120
146,229
136,428
96,972
10,691
12,436
4,933
6,320
151
2,270
774
3.029
120,738
113,723
133,339
86,249
100
650
1,503
>
61, 791
40,191
29,400
Total payments for expenses of schools given in Table 34, page 353.
4,6.11
$436
$598
6,530
3,180
575
70
806
694
isii'
110
767
91
87
460
18
1,965
840
485
596
211
153
8,456
16, 757
1,707
4,275
1,420
172
701
5,397
3,740
200
198
1,168
33
362
322
GENERAL TABLES.
211
AND SPECIAL SERVICE EXPENSES: 1907—Continued,
with the
number assigned
to each, see page 127.]
GROUP
III.—CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
50,000
TO
100,000
IN
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
212
FOR GENERAL EXPENSES
Table 5.— PAYMENTS
[For a
GROUP
IV.—CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
CLASSIFIED
BY DEPARTMENTS,
VI.
30,000
OFFICES,
TO
50,000
list
IN
of the cities arranged alphabetically
by states,
1907.
AND ACCOUNTS —Continued.
—Education—Continued.
Schools.'
City
Of city.
number.
General supervision.
Elementary day
schools.
High and
collegiate
day
Night schools.
schools.
Pensions
and
Salaries
and
wages.
Saginaw, Mich..
Lincoln, Nebr.
Altoona, Pa
Wash
Spokane,
Lancaster, Fa.,.
Birmingham, Ala.
Bayonnej N. J
South Bend, Ind..
Mont
100
101
Butte,
102
103
McKeesport, Pa
Binghamton, N. Y.
Johnstown, Pa
104
105
Pawtuoket, B. I..
Dubuque, Iowa
106
Sioux City, Iowa. .
107
108
109
110
111
Augusta, Ga
112
113
East St. Louis, 111..
Wheeling, W. Va.
114
115
116
Montgomery, Ala.
117
118
119
120
121
AtlanticCity, N. J.
Little Bock, Ark..
122
123
124
125
126
Fassaic,N. J
Davenport, Iowa. .
Bay City, Mich
York, Pa
Maiden, Mass
Quincy, 111
Canton, Ohio..
Superior, Wis
Chester, Pa
.
134
Joplln,
135
Wichita, Kans...
Bockford, 111
Mass
and wages.
Of
Of
Of
Of
Of
teachers.
others.
teachers.
others.
teachers.
others.
$14,797
13,587
13,343
23,899
9,776
$34,601
25,271
23,207
64,996
18,750
$41,170
39,116
23,267
69,905
16,200
$4,030
2,728
5,664
4,180
1,824
$9,593
6,967
10,640
14,681
9,668
5,320
4,876
4,760
6,019
4,995
902
2,233
970
755
1,179
71,588
164,127
90,640
82,533
113,539
6,403
11,457
12,611
8,164
16,518
18,719
34,627
20,856
18,778
43,022
24,740
16,039
17,662
18,825
15,500
2,564
1,264
1,867
1,135
1,363
5,906
4,161
3,692
3,275
4,440
12,580
5,022
3,590
4,500
8,014
110
861
1,079
94,153
93,740
91,369
65,691
112,972
12,500
8,873
11,576
9,445
13,182
39,318
18,329
26,408
15,067
42,009
17,691
19,374
20,355
16,039
20,244
2,160
1,188
1,430
1,130
2,340
4,602
2,584
7,754
1,051
3,9l9
4,495
8,078
5,630
174
1,619
2,115
114,099
86,241
74,087
14,048
14,321
9,119
18,043
17,839
23,039
5,560
5,515
- 2,412
6,350
5,998
1,352
1,734
469
460
109,147
87,015
42,391
109,658
113,744
19,164
5,915
1,609
9,237
9,268
6,450
5,513
5,600
2,960
4,620
100
758
707
64,865
79,561
74,069
115,083
349
$291
734
443
65
1,339
AU
other.
Of
$106,737
107,736
108,049
249,393
62,253
W
h
32,058
11,850
250
$240
$380
30
323
1,157
1,950
1,573
250
5,760
"528
(«)
(>)
19,650
14,350
2,743
1,600
660
6,302
2,140
3,646
23,320
16,304
7,403
42,009
36,312
19,421
10,517
9,875
18,202
24,512
1,466
480
720
720
6,142
2,336
1,873
2,274
2,891
9,582
5,054
10,115
10,176
10,410
45,267
15,197
23,407
27,935
37,799
15,650
13,209
27,675
14,373
34,315
2,000
1,405
1,710
1,648
2j977
2,100
1,413
2,495
6,098
7,058
"4,'385
90,280
66,088
82,566
102,490
67,121
8,700
7,863
11,201
16,088
10,193
10,895
26,824
18,321
26,410
22,703
26,733
16,175
19,756
22,060
11,398
1,730
1,697
1,440
2,660
1,500
3,567
2,704
6,199
2,610
1,181
27,216
20,
760
75
559
166
6,162
360
631
213
830
5,725
6,616
2,442
1,929
2,504
1,020
1,671
2,450
267
18,531
20, 962
46,894
730
14,985
16,569
23,406
49,889
150
5,425
7,360
10,250
11,697
9,761
8,323
13,000
2,930
387
198
2,500
101,534
76,639
76,098
79,056
143,881
6,276
2,560
3,908
3,112
12,382
2,490
1,827
361
120
790
Haverhill, Mass..
Jacksonville, Fla.
4,052
2,901
103,233
11,
576
33, 665
22,
839
874
4,668
2,630
Mo
4,770
5,350
357
746
2,310
3,031
4,698
344
3,000
3,889
4,471
4,271
3,700
453
692
368
1,318
1,353
5,300
4,362
4,437
3,495
4,436
1,541
680
79, 192'
62, 194
844
962
672
66,229
82,538
66, 176
South Omaha, Nebr.
Newcastle, Pa
Salem, Mass
<.')
KnoxvUle, Teun
Ehuira, N. Y
Galveston, .Tex
Britain, Conn..
Chattanooga, Tenn..
New
Elalamazoo, Mich.
Woonsocket, R. I.
Fitohburg, Meiss.
Bacine, Wis
Auburn, N.
.
Y
Macon, Ga
JoUet, ni
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Oshkosh, Wis
3,300
3,050
151
152
153
154
West Hoboken, N.
3,800
5,480
8,392
4,160
156
157
158
Salaries
All other.
$1,078
1,187
1,882
2,210
147
148
149
150
165
and wages.
$9,390
8,291
3,777
9,719
5,801
7,611
3,430
10,927
5,400
3,995
Springfield, 111.
132
133
142
143
144
145
146
other.
m
Newton, Mass
141
Salaries
All other.
(")
Topeka, Kans
Springfleld, Ohio.
Allentown, Pa
Chelsea,
137
138
139
140
and wages.
ties.
Mobile, Ala
127
128
129
130
131
136
Salaries
gratui-
AU
Sacramento, Cal
Pueblo, Colo
Everett, Mass
Taunton, Mass
Newport, Ky
La
Crosse,
Wis
Fort Worth, Tex..
San Juan, P.
R
J.
4,360
2,652
3,650
970
n
67,088
W9,020
73,324
74,363
7,497
11,083
911
70,880
46,
285
51,433
66,773
50,628
6,364
17, 715
6,004
24,393
4,660
6,917
21,100
12,209
16,308
7,670
5,494
8,048
8,259
8,862
19, 443
17,933
20,658
13, 480
16,262
28, 614
67, 791
119, 124
913
363
102,335
101, 961
76,527
42,968
62,660
24,396
1,466
1,140
23,446
23, 980
14,864
5,924
13,436
13,351
11, 970
31,768
15,325
28, 984
29, 494
18,218
5,280
7,903
1,396
22,955
10,438
12,535
1,402
984
26, 180
16,
16, 701
650
9,051
22,954
16,604
17,934
21, Oil
4,
•
W 934
2,100
10,
4,097
6,395
3,461
7,114
3,384
764
473
m 710
20, 112
21, 703
10,619
7,941
7,595
400
9,209
653
16,947
13,
57,816
74,609
64,429
978
231
28, 491
W3,104
746
615
2,043
450
341
2,170
2,590
3,906
1,109
2,500
654
1,320
1,313
834
10,648
2,396
3,151
1,804
4,167
n
25
'i89
600
2,010
1,801
1,420
139
100
263
442
607
1,718
70
724
375
127
471
(«)
900
1,625
3,142
1,194
404
6,685
22,852
25,883
18,326
550
1,219
1,474
1,994
2,687
3,450
1,675
6,379
13,036
10,200
15, 077
6,099
1,304
840
3,049
752
3,676
1,000
9,166
935
Total payments tor expenses of schools given in Table 34, page 363.
420
2,809
421
"83i
4,673
'i,"952'
2,634
*
GENERAL TABLES.
213
AND SPECIAL SERVICE EXPENSES: 1907—Continued,
with the
number
assigned to each, see page 127.]
GROUP
IV.—CITIES
CLASSIFIED
HAVING A POPULATION OF
BY DEPARTMENTS,
OFFICES,
30,000
TO
50,000
AND ACCOUNTS—continued.
IN
1907.
214
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
Table 5.—PAYMENTS
[For a
list of
the
FOR GENERAL EXPENSES
cities
arranged alphabetically by
states,
GENERAL TABLES.
AND SPECIAL SERVICE EXPENSES: 1907—Continued,
with the
number assigned to each,
see
page
127.)
215
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
216
Table 6.—PAYMENTS
[For a
GROUP
III.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
50,000
TO
100,000
FOR GENERAL EXPENSES'
list
of the cities arranged alphabetically
IN
1907.
by states,
GENERAL TABLES.
217
AND SPECIAL SERVICE EXPENSES: 1907—Continued.
with the
number assigned
to each, see
page
127.]
GROUP
III.-CITIES
CLASSIFIED
HAVING A POPULATION OF
BY DEPARTMENTS,
50,000
TO
100,000
IN 1907.
218
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
Table 5.—PAYMENTS
GROUP IV.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
TO
[For a
list
50,000
IN
FOR GENERAL EXPENSES*
of the cities arranged alpliabetioaily
1907.
by states,
GENERAL TABLES.
AND SPECIAL SERVICE EXPENSES:
with the Bumber assigned to each,
219
1907— Continued,
see page 127.]
GROUP
IV.—CITIES
CLASSIFIED
HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
TO
50,000
BY DEPAKTMENTS, OmCES, AND ACCOUNTS—Continued.
IN
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
220
Table 6.— PAYMENTS
[Cities
FOR EXPENSES OF MUNICIPAL SERVICE ENTERPRISES:
having no municipal service enterprises are omitted from
this table.
For a list of
page 127.]
cities
arranged alphabetically by states, with the
1907.
number
assigned to each, see
PAYMENTS TO ENTEBPEBES, OmCEa,
PAYMENTS TO PUBLIC.
AND
ACCOITNTS.
Total pay-
ments
City
num-
CITY,
AND KIND OF
tor
expenses of
municipal
ENTEEPPI.SE.
ber.
service
enterprises.
Classified
by
object.
For meeting
governmental costs.
Service
Salaries
and
Miscellane-
Allowances
.
transfers.
for depreciation.!
Interest
on cost
of plants
ous objects.
Grand
total.
12,113,623
Group I.
Group II.
Group IV.
1,663,480
237,506
212,637
.
GROUP
I.— CITIES
$2,051,727,
tl, 109, 318
$942,409
$34,715
$15,990
917,042
99,831
92,445
711,610
•121,906
108,893
32,679
1,140
763
11,007
4,230
1,628,652
221,737
201,338
HAVING A POPULATION OF
300,000
AND OVEE
IN
1907.
New York,
N. Y.:
High pressure water system
Chicago,
.
$2,026
$2,026
$2,026
633, 777
456,256
609,290
448,079
334,757
295,805
$274,533
152,274
til.:
Electric light systems
Waterworks shops
St. Louis,
Mo.:
$24,487
8,177
.
Industrial school bakery
Boston, Mass.:
Printing department
Pittsburg, Pa.:
Electric light systems
Asphalt iBpair plant
New Orleans, La.:
Asphalt plant
Electric light systems.
29,503
2,735
26,768
198,602
126,095
72,507
127,050
105,029
127,050
102,880
51,351
47,588
75,699
,55,292
56,685
64,537
111,222
GROUP
Denver, Colo.:
City shop
Columbus, Ohio:
29,518
198,602
II.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
100,000
$15,456
$15,456
62,226
62, 181
Omaha, Nebr.:
Asphalt repair plant .
36,975
36,975
St. Joseph, Mo.:
Electric light systems.
25,018
25,018
Nashville, Tenn.:
Electric light systems.
58,428
51,333
39,403
30,774
Grand Rapids, Mich.:
Electric light systems.
TO
300,000
$9,928
IN
1907.
$1,396
$753
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
222
Table 7.— PAYMENTS
FOR EXPENSES OF INVESTED FUNDS'
[For a
PAYMENTS FOB EXPENSES OF
list
of the cities arranged alphabetically
PAYMENTS FOR EXPENSES OP PUBUC SERVICE ENTERPRISES.
INVESTED FUNDS.
Classified
Payments
Total pay-
ments
for
expenses of
sala-
ries
and
invested
funds.
For
all
other
total
objects.
to depart-
ments,
offices,
public service
Classified
enterprises
$873,832
$179,336
801,309
49,997
12,800
9,726
128,427
38,250
6,583
6,076
GROUP
1
Payments
expenses of
by character.
:
Classified
by object.
en-
terprises,
funds, and
accounts
For meeting
governmental costs.
Grand
to public.
payments for
Total.
Group I
Group II
Group III
Group IV
by payee.
Total
For
by states;
Payments
Salaries
and
(service
Miscella-
neous objects.
in error.i
$694, 496
$27,933,978
$27,757,097
$27,743,651
$13, 646
$16,343,591
$12,413,506
$176,881
672, 882
16,987,928
4,496,168
3, 715, 733
2,734,149
16,866,471
4,466,887
3,707,236
2,726,504
16,853,072
4,460,796
3,704,287
2,726,397
3,399
6,092
2,948
1,107
9,889,965
2,394,689
1,831,420
1,227,517
6,966,506
2,072,198
1,875,815
1,498,987
131,457
29,281
8,498
7,646
<
ni,747
I.—CITIES
6,217
<3,660
HAVING A POPULATION OP
300,000
OH OVER IN
1907.
GENERAL TABLES.
AND OF PUBLIC SERVICE ENTERPRISES:
with the number assigned to each, see page
1907.
127.]
PAYMENTS FOB EXPENSES OF PUBLIC SERVICE ENTERPEISES—Continued
223
224
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
Table 7.— PAYMENTS
FOR EXPENSES OP INVESTED FUNDS*
[For a
GROUP ni.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF
50,000
TO
100,000
list of the cities
IN
1907.
arranged alphabetically
by states,
?^
GENERAL TABLES.
225
AND OF PUBLIC SERVICE ENTERPRISES: 1907—Continued.
with the nuniber assigned to each, see page 127.]
GROUP
III.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
60,000
TO
100,000
PAYMENTS FOR EXPENSES OF PUBUC SERVICE ENTERPRISES—Continued
IN
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
226
Table 7
GROUP
IV.— CITIES
PAYMENTS FOR EXPENSES OF INVESTED FUNDS
HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
TO
[For a
list of
50,000
IN
the cities arranged alphabetically
1907.
by states,
GENERAL TABLES.
227
AND OP PUBLIC SERVICE ENTERPRISES: 1907— Continued,
witfi
the
number
assigned to each, see page 127.]
GROUP
IV.—CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
TO
50,000
PAYMENTS roR EXPENSES OF PUBUC SERVICE ENTERPRISES—Continued.
IN
1907.'
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
228
Table 8.—STATISTICS
[For a
list of
OP INTEREST
the cities arranged alphabetically
by states
PAYMENTS FOR INTEKEST.l
Gross payments.
City
num-
Classified
ber.
by
division of the government
of the city paying.
Classified
Payments
by
payee.
to public.
Payments to
funds and
Total.
City
School,
Other divisions of the
corporation.
districts.
government
of the city.
divisions of
For meeting Accrued interest and
governmental
payments
costs.
Total.
in error.'
Grand
total
Group I
Group II
Group III
Group IV
GROUP
New York, N.Y..
167,251,516
tl, 721, 183
48,776,167
46,165,290
414,823
544,337
389,958
372,065
10,'474,998
9, 878,
6,885,989
S, 119, 563
6, 465,
I.— CITIES
Boston, Mass
Md
Pittsburg, Pa
Clevelaad, Ohio...
N.Y
Buffalo,
San Francisco, Cal,
Detroit, Mich
Cincinnati, Ohio...
Milwaukee, Wis . .
New Orleans, La.
Washington, D. C.
601
594
4,742,031
770, 721
5,225,487
$27,470,526
1,678,384
2,365,420
770,721
5,225,487
1,720,976
1,641,275
1,358,353
818, 198
143,325
1,720,976
1,090,726
1, 172, 150
785,896
143,325
452,064
1,855,535
390,978
847,142
441, 761
378,128
1,704,572
370,077
847,142
441,761
I
$1,038,551
431, 613
900,290
407, 295
169,219
$1,038,551
431, 613
900, 290
407, 295
113, 392
Toledo, Ohio
452,961
655,231
446,408
352, 788
386,246
452,961
655,231
446,408
240,839
364, 814
Denver, Colo
Columbus, Ohio
Los Angeles, Cal
Worcester, Mass
239,014
507,573
298,560
341,093
203,021
466, 774
268,400
341,093
542,593
Louisville,
Ky
Indianapolis, Ind
Minn
Providence, R.I
St. Paul,
Rochester, N.
Kansas City,
Seattle,
Y
Mo
Wash
652, 169
Memphis, Tenn
Omaha, Nebr
New Haven, Conn..
Scranton, Pa
Syracuse, N.
St. Joseph,
Y
Mo
130, 197
369, 357
Richmond, Va
Fall River, Mass
Nashville, Tenn
..
253, 781
251, 427
189, 855
Grand Rapids, Mich.
97,944
Dayton, Ohio
1
300,263
132,070
125,350
333, 747
82,393
224,436
389,743
Paterson, N. J
Portland, Oreg
Atlanta, Ga
2
325, 424
'.
$60,061,702
$404,840
$10, 790, 175
39,842,933
9,332,145
6,475,026
4,816,438
39,687,866
9, 210, 367
6,398,380
4,765,099
155,077
121, 778
76,646
51,339
8,933,234
1,142,853
410, 963
303, 125
$21,510,308
3,244,516
1,974,323
761, 562
4,059,445
$21,510,308
3,177,956
1,953,899
761,027
4,059,445
$66,560
20,424
535
$5,960,217
28,756
392,232
9,159
1,166,042
1,216,564
1,296,072
1,293,560
749,489
143,325
1,216,564
1,282,644
1,288,159
745, 120
143,325
13,428
5,401
4,369
OR OVER IN
185,216
117,340
365, 333
47,467
103, 496
68,863
32,302
73,936
1907.
360,296
1,579,388
389, 618
823, 556
440,911
335
17,944
12,060
14,031
91,768
276,147
1,360
23,586
850
$776, 633
369, 371
$772,984
359,687
754, 848
407, 295
754, 721
393, 906
$3,649
9,684
127
13, 389
$261,918
62,242
145,442
$45,827
157,899
157,899
430, 195
486, 643
438, 816
2,138
111,949
21,432
432,333
486,643
439,233
332, 429
318, 507
20,628
168,588
7,175
20,359
67,739
100,000
26,073
40,799
30,160
TO
$9,920
109, 576
326,424
264,064
131, 429
72,431
333,747
36,199
641
52,919
43,214
39, 179
224, 436
341, 865
130, 197
5,748
42,140
300,000
IN
219, 770
379, 135
289, 818
321, 724
317, 479
282,060
131,060
112,232
332,301
280,918
131,050
110,352
325,998
82,235
223,369
387, 863
82,235
222,915
384, 668
130, 197
130, 197
309, 666
241, 516
240,214
247,343
172,999
91,033
on city securities sold.
' Accrued interest received on loans issued to the public by the various divisions
by refund receipts. The payments in error are given separately on page 48.
175, 115
94,297
Exclusive of interest classified as outlays, i^iich is included in Table 9.
Interest payments for meeting governmental costs are the total interest payments to the public,
of the
less
government
325,342
1,320
417
7,087
318, 507
234,955
379, 135
298, 660
217,540
651,917
251,242
23,835
1, 561,
1907.
369,357
253,781
251,427
166,020
97,944
504, 412
345,203
64,793
68,709
359,961
444
377, 568
809, 525
440,911
20,901
GROUP n.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF
Newark, N.J
Minneapolis, Minn..
Jersey City, N. J
$60,466,542
$1,530,088
1,135
I
transfers).*
054
52,060
30,437
5,467
300,000
$64,800
city (interest
12,284,018
2, 196,
HAVING A POPULATION OF
$27,470,525
3,273,272
2,366,565
Chicago, HI
Philadelphia, Pa.
St. Louis, Mo
Baltimore',
$71,256,717
the govern-
ment of the
214,943
620,934
15,186
8,742
2,597
4,069
128,438
123,553
252
1,880
6,303
3,700
18,213
1,020
13, 118
1,446
454
3,185
158
1,067
1,890
1,302
3,899
2,116
3,264
12,265
186
14,740
3,647
4,245
1,132
the amounts previously received from the public as accrued interest
of the city, together
with payments in error subseauently
j corrected
•±
GENERAL TABLES.
ON DEBT:
with the
1907.
number assigned
to each, see page 127.]
PAYMENTS FOB INTEREST 1—continued.
229
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
230
Table 8.—STATISTICS
[For a
GEOUP ni.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF
TO
50,000
list of ttie cities
100,000
IN
OF INTEREST*
arranged alphabetically by
states,
1907.
PAYMENTS rOE INTEEEST.'
Gross payments.
City
num-
Classified
ber.
by
division of the government
of the city paying.
Classified
Payments
Total.
by payee.
to public.
Payments to
funds and
Other diviCity
corporation.
School
sions of the
districts.
government
divisions of
of the city.
For meeting Accrued interest and
governmental
Total.
costs.''
the government of the
city (interest
transfers).*
Cambridge, Mass
Albany,N.Y
Hartford, Conn
Lowell, Mass
Beading, Pa
Trenton,
N.J
Conn
Bridgeport,
Wilmington, Del
Camden,N.T
Des Moines, Iowa.
.
Kansas City, Kans.
Lynn, Mass.:
New
..
.
Bedford, Mass..
Mass
Springfield,
Troy,N.Y
Oakland, Cal
Lawrence, Mass
Mass
Somerville,
Savarmah, Ga
Dulutb, Minn
Norfolk,
Va
Hoboken, N.
Peoria,
111
Yonkers,N.
J
Y
Utioa,N.Y
Manchester, N. H.
Schenectady, N.
Y
.
.
Evansville, Ind
.
Waterbury, Conn.
Salt
Lake
.
Utah
Pa
City,
Wilkes-Barre,
Erie,
.
. .
Pa
Houston, Tex
Taooma, Wash
Harrisburg, Pa
Charleston, S. C
Portland, Me
.
.
Youngstown, Ohio.
Dallas,
Tex
Terre Haute, Ind
Fort Wayne, Ind
Covington,
Ky
?.
GROUP
137,536
220,050
235,955
108,644
161,791
21,997
169,633
2,065
101,307
105,500
184,391
156,142
306,661
64,032
105,600
184,391
156, 142
266,777
46,240
319,238
81,766
62,300
204,975
74, 196
319,238
81,766
45, 118
204,976
74, 196
77,447
118,822
134,656
115,437
77,447
118,822
96,220
134,666
116,437
73,855
203,661
40,520
39,451
245,634
73,866
171,036
30,060
32,673
245,634
286,302
91, 713
155,393
163,463
248,326
69,061
165,393
141,967
71,630
116,766
36,012
64,118
116,766
14,666
24,932
59,044
124,734
138,692
87,846
49,383
124,734
138,692
87,846
IV.—CITIES
216,060
43,964
97
98
99
100
101
Birmingham, Ala..
Bayonne, N. J
South Bend, Ind..
166,241
112,214
49,279
49,276
231,768
156,241
112,214
39,297
41,837
231,758
102
103
104
105
106
McKeesport, Pa
Binghamton, N. Y.
Johnstown, Pa
61,884
26,550
24,272
66,083
76,635
38,315
26,660
15, 322
60,703
61,918
1
2
Pawtucket, R. I_.
Dubuque, Iowa
Sioux City, Iowa.
.
158,
$66,371
16,923
27,034
49,884
7,850
32,625
10,460
6,778
,
37,920
22,662
21,496
159,633
187,087
224,157
96,429
160,382
111
225,809
99,083
161,617
1,662
2,654
1,235
32,862
10, 146
9,461
2,239
101,307
100,468
184,391
165, 142
303,628
93,480
100,218
180,441
155, 142
300,649
2,979
283,444
79,686
60,339
193,969
74, 196
283,444
78,968
60,241
191, 368
71, 156
718
98
2,591
3,040
61,602
109,892
96,469
134,600
108,812
61,602
109,442
96,469
125,236
67,907
203,661
40,048
22,641
246,634
64,619
203,661
39,406
22,641
246,634
276,317
79,309
136,795
152,086
275,317
75,653
136,795
136,471
64,538
112,212
36,810
9,661
52,520
116,684
124,114
87,846
52,194
116,511
123,523
87,842
TO
60,000
IN
$88,538
$8, 598
9,982
7,439
166,241
99, 465
49,279
49, 276
178,703
96,960
49,246
49,276
178,703
59,614
26,650
19,145
66,083
76, 636
69,614
26,474
18,696
66,083
76,635
of the
less
108
5,032
36,794
2,080
1,961
11,016
450
15,845
8,930
9,264
109
2,640
56
6,625
3,288
5,948
""642'
3,656
'i5,'6i5'
306
472
16,810
10,985
12,404
18,598
11,377
6,992
4,564
789
326
1,073
591
6,524
8,160
14,678
4
$88,476
56,175
76,882
216,283
42,419
66,391
76,215
215,283
42,419
8,950
6,380
14,717
19,
16,912
1907.
20,990
48,990
12,400
23,569
7,827
250
3,950
108, 703
23, 181
Exclusive of interest classified as outlays, which is included in Table 9.
Interest payments for meeting governmental costs are the total Interest payments to the public,
on city securities sold.
Acoraed interest received on loans Issued to the public by the various divisions
by refund receipts. The payments in error are given separately on page 48.
150,863
53,330
8,625
11,080
30,000
$18,304
26,466
22,388
2,356
8,148
34,978
62,652
64,233
112,212
22,392
35,810
Interest
8
66
840
128, 030
187, 198
$1,035
$622
206
3,401
1,422
3,852
2,080
1,106
63,974
131,882
152,943
54,436
HAVING A POPULATION OF
$91,217
50,004
59, 046
167,070
31,664
80,fi35
Mont
170,391
159,533
220,050
235,955
108,544
163,856
$91,217
68,602
Butte,
173, 792
208,770
83,082
131,882
168,866
27,402
Saginaw, Mich..
Lincoln, Nebr...
Altoona, Pa
Spokane, Wash
lancaster. Pa..
92
93
94
96
96
258,666
191,742
106,827
208,770
83,082
131, 882
168,855
54,436
23, 181
Akron, Ohio
Holyoke, Mass
Brockton, Mass
$459, 764
158, 155
$478,590
184,827
214,682
194,097
96,892
99, 109
San Antonio, Tex
Elizabeth, N. J
sn
258,665
191,742
107,667
$460,286
$478,590
184,827
281,053
194,097
•113,815
$63
216
333
$2,679
2,211
4,420
777
1,545
3,605
33
12,769
156,241
53,065
2,270
76
450
5,127
the amounts previously
as accrued
r
*j received from the public
government of the
city,
:> together
•=
with payments
in error subseauentl
v
r j
h
j corrected
,
GENERAL TABLES.
231
ON DEBT: 1907—Continued.
with the
numker assigned
to each, see page 127.]
GROUP
PAYMENTS FOE
III.—CITIES
HAVING
A.
POPULATION OF
60,000
TO
100,000
IN
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
232
Table 8.—STATISTICS
[For a
^
GROUP
IV.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
TO
50,000
list of
OF INTEREST
the cities arranged alphabetically
by states,
IN 1907— Continued.
PAYMENTS FOR INTEREST.'
Gross payments.
City
num-
Classified
ber.
division of the government
of the city paying.
by
Classified
Payments
Total.
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
Ga
Augusta,
City
School
sions of the
corporation.
districts.
government
173,926
178,293
111,849
63,113
42,790
$73,925
178,293
Montgomery, Ala
Passaic, N. J
86,954
23,566
86,107
32,703
65,350
23,666
85,107
Davenport, Iowa
27, 197
13,197
161,482
17,411
69, 564
44,725
128,791
161,482
10,536
69, 564
30,349
58,188
44,051
84,316
33,011
36,558
51, 604
36, 672
69,937
33,011
26,246
143,920
59,609
23, 435
42,570
316, 189
143,920
66,977
15,790
42,670
315,189
82,975
88,808
12,490
64,478
30, 461
82,976
88,808
4,929
53,479
30,451
79,464
43,908
163,011
85, 416
67,806
43,908
163,011
85,416
67,806
39,815
139,763
81,733
27,266
24,765
31,385
139,763
81,733
27,266
24,755
21,634
60,739
48,486
19, 178
44,153
22,163
Mobile, Aia
Tojjeica,
Kans
Ohio
Springfield,
Allentown, Pa
East St. Louis, 111....
Wheeling, W.Va
Atlantic City, N.J...
Little Rock, Ark
Bay City, Mich
York, Pa
Maiden, Mass
Springfield,
111
Quincy, 111
Canton, Ohio
Superior, Wis
Chester, Pa
127
128
129
130
131
Chelsea, Mass
132
133
Haverhill, Mass
Jacksonville; Fla
134
135
136
Jophn,
137
Knoxville,
Elmira, N.
Galveston,
138
139
140
141
South Omaha, Nebr.
Newcastle, Pa
Salem, Mass
Newton, Mass
Mo
Wichita, Kans
Rockford, 111
Tenn
Y
Tex
New Britain, Conn
. .
Chattanooga, Tenn.
.
Kalamazoo, Mich
Woonsocket, R. I
Fitchburg, Mass
142
143
144
145
146
Auburn, N.
14!
Macon, Ga
148
149
160
JoUet,
151
152
153
154
WestHoboken, N.
155
166
157
158
Racine,
Wis
Y
111
Oklahoma City, Okla
Oshkosh, Wis
22, 163
Payments to
funds and
84, 531
49,208
25,288
divisions of
Total.
For meeting
governmental
Accrued
in-
the government of the
and
payments
city (interest
in error.'
transfers).*
terest
$73,926
178,293
111,849
61,699
41,248
$73,926
176,353
111,221
50,403
41,248
$1,940
628
1,196
85,954
23,566
5,107
32,625
27,197
23,566
81,712
31,718
27,197
3,395
807
178
137,418
17,411
69,564
42,166
123,607
125,611
17,411
68,504
42,074
120,539
11,807
24,064
1,060
92
3,068
2,559
5,184
58,188
44,051
81,330
33,011
33,539
58,188
44,051
79,865
33,011
33,539
1,465
110, 501
110,160
58,389
22,855
40,097
248,961
351
1,220
580
648
914
1,825
65,314
1,042
7,960
30, 451
73,973
88,808
11,634
64,148
30,367
79,464
43,316
155,451
85, 416
67,806
79,464
42,689
151,477
86,416
67,806
35,698
127,496
68,191
27,256
24,306
124,671
67,993
25,756
24,305
2,456
16,586
38,250
21,634
60,739
18,843
38,250
21,634
56,618
18,843
31,165
16,945
31,166
15,878
16,974
181, 168
181, 168
$27,318
3,905
17,602
20,604
32, 703
14,000
6,875
"14,376'
128, 791
1,117
7,379
14,379
$5,467
10,312
2,632
7,645
69,609
23, 436
40,746
249,876
7,661
10,999
79,464
8,430
75,015
88,808
12, 490
64,478
$lj514
1,542
2,986
"3,019
33,419
330
84
627
3,974
2,826
198
1,600
592
7,660
4,117
12,267
13,642
10,236
4,121
Sacramento, Cal
Pueblo, Colo
16, 945
181, 168
Everett, Mass
107,823
31, 166
16,946
164,194
107,823
97,583
97,355
10,240
Taunton, Mass
Newport, Ky
93,327
49,639
36,789
96,669
93,327
49,639
36, 789
95,569
89,340
49,639
34,382
95,669
89,081
49,639
34,019
95,569
3,987
36,372
36,372
36,372
La
Wis
Fort Worth, Tex
Crosse,
San Juan, P.
R
J.
to public.
Other diviof the city.
107
108
109
110
111
by payee.
31,165
1 Exclusive of interest classified as outlays, which is included in Table 9.
' Interest payments for meeting governmental costs are the total interest
nterest on city securities sold.
payments
to the public, less the
amounts previously received from the public
2,407
as accrued
GENERAL TABLES.
ON DEBT:
-with the
233
1907—Continued.
number assigned
to each, see
page
GROUP
127.]
IV.— CITIES
PATUEHTS FOR INTEREST '—continued.
HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
TO
50,000
IN 1907— Continued.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
234
Table 9
[For a
CLASSIFIED BY DIVISION OF THE
GOVEKNMENT OF THE CITY PAYING.
CLASSIFIED
list
—PAYMENTS*
of the cities arranged alphabetically
by states
BY BECEIPTS FBOM WHICH PAID OE PAYABLE.
From special assessments.*
City
Total
nuitt'
payments
ber.
for outlays.
Other
City
School
corporation.
districts.
divisions
From other
of the
For health
conservation
government
of the city.
Total.
For
highways.
and
sanitation.
Grand
total
Group I:
Group II
Group.ni
Group IV
$244,117,298
$225,650,362
$9,746,172
$8,720,764
158,148,678
44,864,097
24,570,354
16,534,169
145,513,896
42,340,412
22,526,648
15,269,406
4,326,524
2,601,093
1,684,640
1,233,915
8,308,258
22, 592
359,066
30,848
GROUP
,
I.— CITIES
other
purposes.
"$69,732,312
$8,212,389
$49,997,520
$1,522,403
26,618,698
2 21,160,517
2 6,498,889
2 5,554,208
2,250,340
3,666,443
1,400,609
894,997
24,028,996
239,363
1,071,568
187,329
24,143
2
HAVING A POPULATION OF
300,000
OR OVER IN
16>®2>506
4,910,951
4,^5,068
1907.
1
Newark,N. J
Minneapolis, Miirn
Jersey City, N. J . .
Louisville,
Ky
Indianapolis, Ind.
Paul, Minn...
Providence, E.I.
Rochester, N. Y..
St.
Kansas City, Mo.
Toledo, Ohio
Denver, Colo
Coliunbus, Ohio.,
Los Angeles, Cal.
Worcester, Mass.".
Seattle,
Wash
Memphis, Tenn
Omaha, Nebr.:
New Haven, Coim.
Scran ton. Pa
Syracuse, N.
Y
Joseph, Mo..
Paterson, N. J..
Portland, Oreg.
Atlanta, Ga
St.
Richmond, Va.
Fall River, Mass
Nashville, Tenn
Dayton, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.
GROUP n.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF
100,000
$2,320,510
2,012,172
1,257,089
1,656,363
1,742,568
$2,320,510
2,012,172
1,267,089
1,655,363
1,494,167
$248,401
$822,467
1,351,806
245,627
330,883
1,189,602
1,378,009
847,709
1,960,197
2,840,198
1,067,739
1,378,009
847,709
1,960,197
2,607,465
942, 955
332,733
124,784
1,168,720
1,429,782
615,964
1,941,438
1,760,076
5,248,839
629, 403
8,437,412
1,834,909
1,617,456
4,984,527
629, 403
8,042,692
106,529
142,620
264,312
1,068,211
586,209
2,199,692
394,820
6,336,336
7i3,784
688,083
698,890
573, 674
495,465
713,784
639,228
598, 890
365,272
495, 465
606,532
169,715
1,774,454
728,841
728, 184
341, 797
169,716
1,427,223
728,841
728, 184
317,844
559,008
926,772
884, 129
317,844
559,008
896,509
884, 129
TO
588,784
300,000
IN
1907.
$226, 112
263,981
86,787
26,482
176,966
48,856
408,750
141,266
218, 402
231, 918
288, 411
264,735
248, 687
67,008
324)639
$22,592
869, 419
96,803
«
30,263
376, 180
444,409
$578,338
180,280
376, 483
167, 469
1,001,124
1,183,759
344,906
127
4,275
653, 980
507,669
1,842,867
14, 958
6,659,571
74, 650
18, 162
36, 631
$596,365
609, 487
168,840
304,401
1,012,637
32,021
18, 162
241,748
271,069
439, 681
77,540
356,726
21, 673
394,608
98,306
52,721
130,370
67,218
310, 444
88, 535
101,548
221,193
32,212
11,819
197,361
44,660
216, 476
68,355
32,521
307,825
411,888
56, 189
672, 068
52, 163
sources.
For all
382,157
2
$184, 384, 986
2
131,629,980
223,703,580
18,071,465
2 10,979,961
2
GENERAL TABLES.
POR OUTLAYS:
Trith the
1907.
i
numtier assigned to each, see page
'
127.]
CLASSIFIED
Payments
Classified
235
BY
DEPABTOFFICES,
ACMENTS,
COUNTS, AND ENTEBFBISES.
CLASSIFIED
BY PAYEE,
GroTips of departments,
fices, and accounts:
to public.
by character.
Classified
by object.
Total.
$243, 531, 839
in
erroE^ubse-
num-
enterprises,
ber.
funds, and
accounts
for outlays
offset by
For meeting quently cor- receipts from
governmental rected by
sales of real
refund
property and
receipts.
from insur-
$241,701,788
167, 766, 748
$19,247,037
$29,514,844
$585, 469
$177, 326, 424
97, 313, 738
105, 345, 159
28,594,820
17,074,746
12, 117, 963
17,872,361
6, 293, 666
3,099,578
2,249,250
381, 930
6,059,087
726
1,094,992
12,426,762
3,747,079
2,026,909
1,047,287
I.—CITIES
315
1,016
"4,882,487
6,246,820
4,664,027
2,924,192
2,482,626
4,846,097
6, 118, 495
4,646,880
2,893,666
2,480,626
6,838
22
15,346
3,268,165
4,026,319
2,287,272
4, 166, 934
3,943,917
3,257,176
4,011,324
2,284,793
4, 164, 797
3,943,811
979
30,562
127,303
1,801
30,626
2,000
'""29'
1,191
GROUP
2, 359,
HAVING A POPULATION OF
$21,516,859
2,007,081
964,231
350,641
1,076,947
1,830,436
327,820
294, 693
404,969
494,014
140, 174
142, 998, 699
13,462,609
10, 109, 867
4, 366, 908
2, 766, 263
300,000
$5,812,134
2, 188, 412
376,202
71, 746
1,130,466
OR OVER
1,
496, 461
246,626
416, 860
228, 144
214, 961
434,420
836, 767
220, 738
308, 146
1,687,486
2,629,379
1,486,979
3,795,226
490,003
243,881
66,543
50,968
477, 172
940,493
789, 265
437,086
234,096
3,466,745
363,804
297,664
86,654
II.—CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
100,000
TO
300,000
37,153,085
20, 439, 147
677
14,389,033
$8,243
143,435
$46, 800, 669
20, 579
19, 197
3,659,269
3, 754, 474
4,028,652
1, 964, 306
2,482,626
24,
IN
502
695
584
072
168, 301
412, 754
14,996
2,450
946
169,466
$5, 145,
2, 472,
580,
342,
836
5,237,064
3,117,707
2,070,341
1,466,506
2, 142,
General
government.
neous.
$166,101,266
764
15,000
20,613
317,811
359,008
926,772
884,129
wages.
30, 164, 887
1612, 416
606,532
169,715
1,774,464
728,841
728,184
Total.
Miscella-
$39,668,692
$8,641
713,784
687,960
598,890
573,674
495,466
(service
transfers).
and
859,454
161, 660
610,838
161, 775
174,852,137
20,120,697
12,030,120
6,104,962
6, 118, 339
1,938,838
1,760,076
6,102,456
622,737
8,429,034
Salaries
$1,693,717
$76,473,194
20,120,697
12,030,874
5,120,267
6,139,967
1,377,701
842,950
1,960,145
2,840,198
1,067,697
tJontracts.
33,384
93,187
5,294
4,469
GROUP
$2,320,510
2,012,160
1,257,089
1,655,363
1,742,568
Land.
$136, 334
.
44,694,641
24,560,958
16,509,492
City
Payments to
Payments
Payments
of-
272
642,140
321, 563
406, 586
4, 734,
1907.
150,000
37,
IN
$5,104,660
816
1907.
14,499,702
6,837,496
4, 148, 199
4, 330, 964
2,692,320
2, 673, 672
2,079,177
1, 941, 118
3,562,636
$928,382
2,482,986
66,487
11,666
68, 143
226, 827
148, 152
4,140
36,952
11,346
3,012
6,000
224,627
627,664
7
8
9
10
11
1213
14
15
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
236
Table 9.— PAYMENTS
[For a
GEOUP
III.-CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
CLASSIFIED BY DIVISION OF THE
GOVERNMENT OF THE CITY PAYING.
50,000
TO
CLASSIFIED
of the cities arranged alphabetically
IN
by states,
1907.
BY KECEIPTS FROM WHICH PAID OE PAYABLE.
From
City
list
100,000
FOR
special assessments.'
Total
num-
payments
ber.
for outlays.
Other
City,
corporation.
School
districts.
divisions
of the
From
government
of the city.
Total.
For health
conservation
and
For
highways.
sanitation.
Cambridge, Mass
Albany, N.Y
Hartford, Conn
Lowell, Mass
Reading,
Pa
Trenton, N.J
Bridgeport, Conn
Wilmington, Del
Camden, N.J
Des Moines, Iowa
Kansas City, Xans.
Lynn, Mass
New Bedford,
Mass.
Mass
Springfleld,
Troy,
.
N.Y
Oakland, Cal
Lawrence, Mass
Mass
Somerville,
Savannah, Ga
Duluth, Minn
Norfolk,
Va
Hoboken, N. J
Peoria,
111
Yonkers,N.Y
Utioa.N.Y
H
Manchester, N.
Schenectady, N. Y.
E vansville,
.
Ind
San Antonio, Tex
Elizabeth, N. J
Waterbury, Conn
Salt
Lake
City, UtaJi.
Wilkes-Barre, Pa....
Erie,
Pa
Houston, Tex
Tacoma, Wash
Harrisburg, Pa
Charleston, S. C
Portland, Me
Youngstown, Ohio. .
Dallas,
Tex
Terre Haute, Ind
Fort Wayne, Ind
Akron, Ohio
Holy oke. Mass
Brockton, Mass
Covington,
Ky
$559,071
579,160
792,771
148, 159
605,550
»559,071
579, 160
752,833
148, 159
591, 735
269,081
552,392
385,077
640, 472
591, 735
269,081
552,392
385,077
620,556
394,738
346,737
1,607,074
582,970
316,459
167,409
346,737
1,607,074
582, 970
316,694
2,694,902
235,051
191,081
2,256,243
236,051
191,081
$25,477
227,700
70,324
22,496
316,488
$2,791
20,852
66,357
15, 120
316, 488
$22,686
206,848
3,967
114,695
53,292
88,468
93,140
33,576
88,468
21,555
19,716
19,916
286,571
61,964
224,607
227,329
125,936
6,891
119,046
865
101,607
4,997
3,741
96,610
438,650
748,681
12,126
118,709
3,744
629,972
8,382
$39,938
8,684
m
h3,741
For
all
other
sources.
other
purposes.
$533,694
351,450
722,447
125,663
189,062
7,376
477,040
215,789
463,924
2385,077
353,901
268,802
2346,737
21,607,074
579,229
214,852
180, 173
180, 173
m16,644
707,650
617,878
283,011
31,286
251, 726
1,946,221
222,926
! 191,081
164,629
424,539
411,702
195,239
277,203
681,851
411,702
105,239
166,661
681,851
436,628
19,919
51,282
225,692
248,707
638
71,887
25,213
19,919
50,644
153,805
223, 494
411,702
175,320
225,921
456, 159
187,921
96,675
110,083
2,390
145,842
17,870
2,390
40,892
166,817
904,116
173,588
188,823
324, 816
84,919
$35,623
15,644
166,817
904, 115
156,791
188,823
324,816
450,415
1,194,982
156,700
173,475
323,668
1,090,277
127,953
154,223
323,668
104, 705
27, 747
2,096,265
604,449
109,664
603,826
1,907,873
546,870
109,564
201,357
167,418
57,579
658,024
531,340
366,141
277,566
606,635
531,340
185,739
221,568
51,389
283,783
275,924
275,403
248,854
190,422
276,924
276,403
248,854
450, 415
I
Including outlays
19,252
20,974
166,817
807,440
63,506
186,433
178,974
96,675
92,213
104,950
45,183
353,618
49,844
61,282
16,661
39,400
34,622
28,622
314,218
49,844
26,630
1,461,662
316,816
75,618
68,776
1,198,805
248,041
406,232
841,364
105,866
112,223
323,668
$187,329
634,613
287,633
109,564
497,460
6,366
5,397
84,141
4,836
723
11,539
293,281
18,273
118,231
116,617
280,602
508,231
180,402
56,008
377,422
23,109
118,954
128,156
93,361
69,000
4,000
65,000
20,081
70,589
13,188
18,636
6,893
51,953
214,783
2275,924
255,322
178,266
met by
issuing special assessment bonds.
247, 187
149,410
GENERAL TABLES.
23T
OUTLAYS: 1907—Continued.
with the
numbgr assigned
to each, see page
—
.]
GROUP
III.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
60,000
TO
100,000
IN
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
238
Table
[For a
GROUP
IV.—CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
CLASSIFIED
30,000
BY DIVISION OP THE
GOVERNMENT OV THE
TO
50,000
CLASSIFIED
CITY PAYING.
9.—PAYMENTS PO^
of the cities arranged alphabetically
list
IN
by
states,
1907.
BY RECEIPTS FROM WHICH PAID OR PAYABLE.
From special assessments.'
City
Total
nuin-
payments
ber.
for outlays.
Other
City
School
corporation.
districts.
divisions
of the
From other
government
of the city.
Total.
For health
conservation
For
and
highways.
For
sanitation.
Saginaw, Mich
Lincoln, Nebr
Altoona, Pa
Spokane, Wash
Lancaster, Fa
97
98
99
444,295
1,075,049
108, 308
$474,682
202,360
411,288
862,320
108,308
421,282
146,884
266,732
203, 607
216, 329
421,282
146,884
260, 167
173,499
216,329
326, 725
224,706
168, 312
149, 791
159,490
260,217
224,706
90,684
122, 926
112,545
136,480
170,502
168, 355
165, 303
288,018
136,480
170, 602
134,256
165,303
239, 980
306,658
53,618
243,236
191,924
428,410
287,292
52,168
243,236
191,924
412,800
294,695
159, 629
90,750
313,327
566,659
203,760
169,629
53,024
313,327
265,356
48,857
193,303
131,049
13,817
202,746
48,857
164,072
131,049
13,817
99,100
116,092
235,906
154,518
349,366
99,100
93,992
195,891
154,518
349,366
Wichita, Kans
Rockford, 111
106,882
548,017
187,097
336,800
249,982
106,882
548,017
129,616
318,038
249,982
Term
Elmira,N.Y
Galveston, Tex
175,671
73,678
948, 470
416,218
207,844
175,671
73,678
948,470
415,218
207,844
325,811
69,370
114,952
191,070
178,628
298,742
69,370
114,962
191,070
178,628
Birmingham, Ala
Bayorme, N. J
South Bend, Ind
Mont
100
Butte,
101
Pawtucket, R. I
102
MoEeesport, Pa
Binghamton, N. Y. .
Johnstown, Pa
103
104
105
106
S474, 582
242, 957
Dubuque, Iowa
Sioux City, Iowa
Ga
107
Augusta,
108
109
110
111
Mobile, Ala
112
113
114
East St. Louis, in...
Wheeling, W.Va....
Montgomery, Ala
115
116
Davenport, Iowa
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
Topeka, Kans
Springfield, Ohio
Allentown, Pa
Passaic,
N.J.
AtlanticCity, N. J...
Little Rock, Ark
Bay City, Mich
York, Pa
Maiden, Mass
Springfield,
ni
Quinoy, lU
Canton, Ohio
Superior, Wis
Chester, Pa
127
128
Chelsea, Mass
129
Newcastle, Pa
Salem, Mass
130
131
132
133
South Omaha, Nebr.
Newton, Mass
Haverhill, Mass
Jacksonville, Fla
Mo
134
135
136
Joplin,
137
138
139
140
141
Knoxville,
142
143
144
145
146
New Britain, Conn.
.
Chattanooga, Tenn.
.
Kalamazoo, Mich
Woonsocket, R.I
Fitohburg, Mass
Racine, Wis
Auburn, N.
Y
140,697
33,007
212, 729
$66,092
24,843
10, 366
119,449
$286, 579
372,677
60,909
183,072
124, 734
12,301
26,573
7,212
44,271
14,131
5,884
346,004
53,697
138,801
110,603
6,417
48,705
85,976
83,660
78,873
204,028
92,391
36,898
18,897
13,919
73,494
22,979
88,011
29,867
6,961
378
81,060
29,489
234,334
187,808
168,312
61,780
129,623
18,046
169,602
78,025
72,160
2,873
15,172
169,602
70,157
49,462
66,508
.
77,628
26,865
46,946
34,099
'48,' 038'
19,366
1,450
610
90,936
2,138
22,698
62,218
135,900
340, 992
$6,761
6,730
"29,'23i'
22,100
40,015
116, 564
16,294
14,280
144,821
34,356
292,153
6,833
81,675
62,662
29, 101
6,833
63,407
33,461
559,826
213,020
97,067
90,750
>313,327
119,324
21,986
107,732
103,904
5,952
7,203
20,016
796
113,372
14,782
87,716
101,818
146,032
26,872
85,571
27,146
=13,817
3,681
38,372
124,093
3,094
2,013
5,026
19,382
3,094
1,668
33,346
104,711
18,268
190,094
53,618
98,415
141,274
121,977
1,290
95,519
77,720
111,813
161,424
> 349, 366
n06,882
(=)
65,063
111,610
175,728
43,616
57,481
18,762
65,063
81,224
88,663
36,887
30,386
87,075
7,729
31,612
482,964
76,487
161,072
206,366
176,671
42,066
948,470
390,761
207,844
31,612
I
27,069
118,435
1,000
90,330
93,143
288,018
144,821
50,660
306,433
m
$30,848
$121,911
165,896
291,278
614,608
108,308
116, 564
'37,' 726'
31,762
sources.
other
purposes.
$362,671
87,061
153,017
4£0,441
16,566
30, 108
15,
all
'
'3,' 922'
'24,"457'|
20,536
141,354
11,938
12,766
43,684
60,258
17,301
10,224
11,205
8,421
23,748
124,053
1,714
1,661
33,163
36,610
59, 472
541,606
30,911
14,689
63,434
36, 421
478,171
30,911
82,342
44,793
6,989
17,927
2,451
37,549
121,732
174,650
14,840
3,165
386,788
82,825
53,906
21,106
67,081
7,811
2112,601
18,733
90,134
193,407
I
'
I
2,000
184,457
57,432
102,186
147,486
118,370
I
147
148
149
Macon, Ga
Joliet, 111
150
Oklalioma City, Okla
Oshkosh, Wis
161
West Hoboken, N.J.
152
153
154
Sacramento, Cal
Pueblo, Colo
Everett, Mass
155
166
167
Taunton, Mass
Newport, Ky
158
Fort Worth, Tex....
La Crosse, Wis
San Juan, P.
R
^,228
150,907
854,948
123,131
4,228
96,437
845,648
123,131
85,507
514,509
71,197
86,507
399,677
244,685
71,197
112,601
39,839
167,215
201,218
112,601
39,839
157,216
201,218
127,160
127,160
276, 402
'Including outlays met by issuing special assessment bonds.
"As the classification by "receipts from which paid or payable'
«
64, 470
9,300
114,832
30,717
i
128,721
192, 677
17,291
m21,106
67,081
7,811
'8,'362'
= 4,228
91,436
313,343
92,220
127,160
was not reported,
all
payments
for outlays are
included in the co
imn "from
other sources.'
GENERAL TABLES.
239
OUTLAYS: 1907—Continued.
with the number assigned to each, see page 127.]
GROUP
IV.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
CLASSIFIED
Payments
Classified
by character.
Payments
Payments in
Total.
For meeting
gov^mnental
costs.
error subsequently cor-
rected
by
lor outlays
offset by
receipts from
sales of real
refund
property and
receipts.
from insur-
t474,582
242,967
444,295
1,075,049
108,308
$473,327
242,957
442,788
1,071,416
107,536
421,282
146,884
266,732
203,607
216,301
420,476
146,884
266,357
200,357
205,776
326,725
224,706
168,312
149,791
169,490
326,725
224,706
168,312
149,791
169,490
133,868
170,602
168,365
165,303
288,018
133,168
156,031
168,355
165,303
288,018
700
14,471
306,668
53,618
242,996
191,924
428,410
305,298
53,618
242,802
191,924
426,590
1,360
566,659
294,695
159,629
90,750
313,262
S66, 659
282, 960
265, 366
48,867
193,303
131,049
13,817
265,356
48,837
193.278
127,911
13,817
98,984
116,092
236,906
154,518
347,190
235,866
146,068
347, 190
t823
772
245
820
78,795
175,671
73,678
948,470
416,028
204,744
161,671
73,678
935,470
415,028
204,744
325,811
69,370
114,962
191,070
178,628
319,517
65,970
114,723
190,969
170,128
25
3,138
142
40
631
229
101
2 5,263
160,905
123,131
85,507
499,452
275,402
71, 197
112,590
39,839
157,215
193,342
112,590
39,264
167,215
191,017
127,160
124,768
1,000
20
853, 728
85,607
608,452
276,402
71,197
130
3,260
10,526
36
116,-092
97,312
547,778
187,097
335,225
249,251
1,507
2,810
11,736
3,805
165,773
90,718
313,217
106,186
548,017
187,097
336,300
4,228
160,907
854,948
123,131
$1,255
23
20,047
BY
to public.
PAYEP:.
30,000
TO
60,000
IN
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES,
240
PAYMENTS FOR
Table 9
[For a
CLASSIFIED BY DEPARTMENTS, OPPICES, ACCOUNTS,
Groups
of departments, offices,
list of
the cities arranged alphabetically by states^
AND ENTEEPRISES— Continued.
and accounts— Continued.
City
num-
Protection of life and property.
ber.
Health conservation and
Highways.
sanitation.
Charities
and cor-
Paving.
Grand
total
Group I
Group II
Group III
Group IV
New York, N.Y.
Chicago, 111
Philadelphia, Pa.
St. Louis, Mo
Boston, Mass
Baltimore, Md
Pittsburg, Pa
Cleveland, Ohio
Buflalo, N.
San Francisco, Cal
Y
Detroit, Mich
Cincinnati, Ohio...
Milwaukee, Wis
New
Police de-
Fire de-
partment.
partment.
St. Paul,
Minn...
Providence, R. 1.
Rochester, N. Y..
Kansas
City,
Mo.
Toledo, Ohio
Denver, Colo
Columbus, Ohio..
Los Angeles, Cal
Wash
$25,459,828
$2,533,686
$30,769,002
$3,755,744
$3,719,910
1,127,918
238,681
86, 676
154,385
13,796,252
5,901,508
3,562,814
2,199,254
2,0
303,090
121,029
89,298
12,388,734
8,829,965
4,821,336
4,728,967
1,889,761
1,109,685
535,726
220,582
1,010,877
1,511,540
545,793
651,700
29,233,453
8,767,402
4,530,185
2,302,966
4,482,865
596,113
30,154
71,833
GROUP
I.— CITIES
OR OVER
IN
$731,621
114,223
62,933
123,207
$805,933
273,318
161,917
71,678
26,397
$352,361
10,316
50,885
19,420
$19,881,606
665,256
2,857,626
103,122
1,017,760
$3,250,605
12,866
6,185
36,573
195,148
23,005
3,675
19,551
22,490
21,617
202,893
19,887
89,050
22,201
186,940
7,868
29,829
110,270
31,183
479,888
336,517
627,560
810,628
112,316
100,386
124,612
154,287
1,759
164,566
116,335
7,774
130,640
14,901
129, 196
208,033
376,897
676,832
11,320
1,068,196
13,902
199,938
50,886
11,769
159,603
52,008
104,916
$181,891
61,722
18,038
18,930
64,468
$17,661
61,671
143,009
12,751
48,860
2,081
37,754
147,003
33,047
167,620
157,187
110, 116
304,349
42,795
6,432
36,785
6,815
290,168
19,588
464,118
655,885
7,564
975,862
102,164
4,564,760
5,609
53,733
92,286
67,589
137,799
89,896
22,547
17,624
11,225
$60,553
12,934
1,570
4,438
825
4,789
914
29,145
7,825
5,714
Memphis, Term
Omaha, Nebr
New Haven, Conn
7,736
Scranton, Pa
Syracuse, N.
1,000
St. Joseph,
Y
Mo.
Paterson, N. J..
Portland, Oreg.
Atlanta, Ga
Bichmond, Va.
HAVING A POPULATION OF
90,618
76,698
58,164
41,217
78,269
II.-CITIES
$94,325
28,269
33,781
33, 188
4,318
16,947
69,816
66,832
106,725
71,780
49,698
42,819
48,381
6,533
98,751
12,732
32, 107
9,058
9,968
$831,149
49,563
44,714
1,422
12,986
4,393
125,199
20,^35
271
38,086
540
"i7,'335
$7,109
2,634
67
2,971
17,706
1,566
1,975
27,091
18,118
$2,684,869
2,882,356
1,092,076
668,231
1,240,709
$822,200
126,607
392,330
113,646
1,320,848
397,588
754,514
115,377
352,595
7,549
4,715
81,516
323,671
361,488
218,521
660,740
732,669
4,987
124, 766
$3,254,362
506,772
1,438,238
736,052
21,987
11,719
101,350
4,000
328,738
3,912
642,576
612, 156
487,073
127,307
298,329
676,839
41,616
22,078
7,044
$20,926
32,634
91, 136
176,965
8,925
TO
300,000
$664,649
287, 666
158,840
122,666
908,116
239,321
101,349
179,929
262,068
276,734
3,300
1,010
28
3,525
339,231
61,405
879,677
696,975
198,766
424,521
357,796
903,555
111,584
440,936
58,547
1,433
14,565
24,519
36,463
36,366
507,669
725,761
52,519
885,318
66,384
149,956
91,888
146,741
76,278
11,430
83,041
264,765
64,861
39,677
246,117
$131,717
179,509
16,006
228,212
278,505
10,307
297,918
100,000
IN
1907.
$66,596
130,707
79,650
293, 104
19,040
93,660
90,596
19,648
80,407
63,009
$110,284
70,363
^,315
18,827
1,500
16,008
12,960
11,999
6,063
"26,439
95,762
150,628
$6,180,965
1907.
531,793
1,597,261
1,288,663
178,376
789,777
$266,014
308,710
266,971
82,069
11,819
209,946
108,910
159,691
11,518
75, 130
10,531
16,566
1,850
Na^
300,000
HAVING A POPULATION OF
481
Fall River, Mass
viUe, Tenn
Dayton, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich
$44,833,9
$1,607,660
Worcester, Mass..
Seattle,
Replaced.
All other.
2,205,180
967,431
656,554
480,674
Jersey City, N. J...
Ky
Original.
Sidewalks.
$4,299,839
GROUP
Louisville,
rections.
All other.
1,183,957
172,889
114,361
54,781
Orleans, La.
Indianapolis, Ind.
Sewers.
11,525,988
Washington, D. C.
Newark, N. J
MirmeEtpolis, Minn.
All other.
14,923
173,407
43,004
631,832
38,829
189,654
13,470
21,592
65,668
216,241
348,724
11,984
689
19,035
14,344
3,078
44,828
12,186
143,304
119, 150
44,620
60,186
283,852
112,990
122,839
10,699
16,165
7,881
15,980
10,306
24,360
540
GENERAL TABLES.
OUTLAYS: 1907— Continued.
with ttie
number assigned
to each, see page 127.]
CLASSIFIED
BY DEPARTMENTS,
OFFICES, ACCOUNTS,
AND ENTERPRISES— Continued
241
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
242
I
[Jor a
GBOUP
III.—CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
50,000
TO
list of
100,000
Table 9.— PAYMENTS
FOR
by
states,
the cities arranged alphabetically
IN
1907.
GENERAL TABLES.
243
OUTLAYS: 1907—Continued.
with the
number assigned
to each, see
page
127.1
GEOUP
III.— CITIES
CLASSIFIED
HAVING A POPULATION OF
BY DEPARTMENTS,
OFFICES, ACCOUNTS,
50,000
TO
100,000
IN
1907.
AND ENTEKPEISES— Continued.
1
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
244
Table 9.— PAYMENTS
[For a
GEOUP
IV.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
TO
50,000
list of
IN
the
1907.
cities
arranged alphabetically by
FOR
states,
GENERAL TABLES.
245
OUTLAYS: 1907—Continued.
•with
the
number assigned
to each, see page 127.]
GEOUP
IV.- CITIES
CLASSIFIED
HAVING A POPULATION OF
BY DEPARTMENTS,
OFFICES, ACCOUNTS,
30,000
TO
50,000
IN
1907.
AND ENTEBPBISES—Continued.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
246
Table 10.— PAYMENTS
[For a
list of
AND RECEIPTS ON ACCOUNT OF DEBT:
the cities arranged alphabetically
by
states,
1907.
'
with the number assigned to each, see page
127.]
EXCESS OF RECEIPTS OVER PAYMENTS.
PAYMENTS.
City
number.
To public.
Total.
To invested
luuds 2
(investment
Total.
From in.
funds s
From public. vested
(investment
total
Baltimore, Md
Pittsburg, Pa
Cleveland, Ohio
Buffalo, N.Y
San Francisco, Cal
Detroit,
{38,925,659
$430,155,954
$374,725,796
$55,430,158
$137,396,847
$120,892,348
$16,504,499
185,679,339
30,647,063
22,357,240
15,149,806
30,668,782
5,328,699
1,819,704
1,108,474
319,657,305
53,688,660
32,811,961
23,998,028
277,235,927
44,823,059
30,393,386
22,273,424
42,421,378
8,865,601
2,418,575
1,724,604
103,309,184
17,712,898
8,636,017
7,739,748
91,556,588
14,175,996
8,036,146
7,123,618
11,752,598
3,536,902
598,871
616,130
$74,520,135
9,287,518
4,661,355
<
2, 513,086
2,966,994
$67,837,158
9,399,472
4,820,055
<2,570,036
1,302,344
$6,682,977
< 111,964
•158,700
56,950
1,664,650
$31,769,195
8,700
366
1,648,103
1,450,064
2,053,818
1,088,562
975,403
1,348,725
1,356,627
1,088,562
672,700
101,339
397,191
3,660,210
3,563,891
2,061.792
3,490,546
1,057,274
2,377,862
2,512,491
1,758,527
2,168,243
1,057,274
1,182,348
1,051,400
303,265
1,322,303
3,559,844
1,915,788
611,728
1,436,728
< 31,288
2,377,496
1,537,088
409,802
811,616
< 31, 288
1,182,348
378,700
201,926
625,112
349,191
1,069,794
1,476,179
1,129,267
589,143
30,750
364,995
1,476,179
1,121,527
589,143
318,441
704,799
1,076,702
4,342,967
2,727,087
2,987,589
372,697
2,911,833
2,702,888
2,964,127
372,697
782,772
1,431,134
24,199
23,462
727,511
3,273,173
1,250,908
1,858,322
< 216, 446
263,180
2,546,838
1,226,709
1,842,600
< 216, 446
464,331
726,335
24,199
is; 722
»
La
J
Ky
Indianapolis, Ind..
Paul Minn
Providence, R. I....
Rochester, N.
Y
Mo
Kansas City,
Toledo, Ohio
Denver, Colo
Columbus, Ohio
Los Angeles, Cal
Worcester, Mass
Seattle,
Wash
Tenn
Omaha, Nebr
Meiiipliis,
New Haven, Conn..
Scranton, Pa
Syracuse, N.
St. Joseph,
1907.
$202,476,602
33,49^,998
9,184,646
2,129,859
10,826,950
Minneapolis, Minn..
Jersey City^N. J
St.
OK OVER IN
$234,245,797
33,506,698
9,184,646
2,222,609
15,256,800
GROUP
Louisville,
300,000
$25,086,218
120,664
168,700
35,800
2,765,200
Washington, D. C
Newark, N.
HAVING A POPULATION OF
$134,639,444
24,098,526
4,364,591
4,699,895
9,524,606
Mich
Orleans,
I.— CITIES
$159,726,662
24,219,180
4,523,291
4,735,695
12,289,806
Cincinnati, Ohio
Milwaukee, Wis
New
transfers).
9253,833,448
GROUP
Pa
(investment
216,348,121
35,975,762
24,176,944
16,258,280
Group II
Group III
Group IV
NewYork, N. Y
vested funds*
1292,759,107
Groupl
Chicago, 111
Philadelphia,
St. Louis, Mo
Boston, Mass
From public'
transfers).
transters).
Grand
From InTotal.
Y
Mo
Paterson, N. J
Portland, Oreg
Atlanta, Qa
.
II.—CITIES
$6,333,550
446,061
2,327,212
3,701,978
210,511
$4,412,800
446,061
1,670,045
3,701,978
210,511
$1,920,750
1,980,375
946,272
3,765,225
606,674
493,780
1,850,750
647,976
3,765,226
594,674
261,901
129,625
955,721
1,384,653
768,204
1,320,528
2,322,298
929,121
528,453
768,204
795,528
2,286,960
26,600
866,200
496,494
731,246
307,960
269,879
1,935,181
348,494
547,553
307,960
243,879
1,904,481
148,000
183,693
177,834
2,028,159
758,709
98,291
177,634
1,908,159
768,709
98,291
143,072
200
120,000
Richmond, Va
195, 97»-
Fall River, Mass
Nashville, Tenn
718,721
203,200
340,803
160,271
Dayton, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich
HAVING A POPULATION OF
712,721
203,200
288,203
144,520
657,167
12,000
231,879
525,000
35,338
26,000
30,700
52,900
6,000
52,600
15,751
100,000
TO
92,750
4,429,850
300,000
IN
1907.
$7,144,263
1,575,889
3,425,799
4,459,289
68,101
$5,094,163
1,395,889
2,309,300
4,425,289
68,101
$2,050,100
180,000
1,116,499
34,000
$810,713
1,129,828
1,098,587
757,311
< 142, 410
$681,363
949,828
639,255
723,311
•142,410
$129,350
180,000
2,386,990
1,575,968
4,781,114
674,919
790,512
2,251,690
824,662
4,531,114
674,919
436,244
136,300
751,296
250,000
406,615
629,686
1,015,889
68,245
296,732
400,940
176,686
765,889
80,245
174,343
5,675
453,000
250,000
•12,000
122,389
1,694,113
2,671,523
1,536,894
1,234,045
8,130,699
1,630,223
295,423
1,536,894
1,006,933
7,936,680
738,392
1,286,870
778,690
•86,483
5,808,401
701,102
•233,030
778,690
211,405
5,649,720
37,290
1,519,900
552,056
1,094,637
566,743
517,374
2,298,851
662,056
1,094,637
514,743
517,374
2,266,351
203,562
547,084
206,783
273,495
361,870
•148,000
•183,693
42,000
•26,000
'32,'566
55,562
363,391
248,783
247,495
363,670
21,662
2,031,918
996,901
166,508
872,013
21,662
2,006,918
933,661
40,608
284,953
25,000
63,240
126,000
587,060
•166,172
3,759
238,192
68,217
676,041
•155,972
98,759
174,952
•67,783
141,881
•200
•95,000
63,240
126,000
534,160
802,242
289,361
786,727
461,659
822,354
289,361
726,272
334,685
173,521
86,161
445,924
301,288
109,633
86,161
438,069
190,165
63,888
354,268
63,890
1,376,100
227,112
194,019
42,000
60,455'
126,874
•297,888
158,681
1,800
7,855
111,123
The term "debt," as here used, includes all bonds; temporary and other loans, including overdrafts by the treasurer; all warrants outstanding at the close of the
and all judgments rendered E^amst the government of the city and not paid during the year.
Sinking, Investment, and public trust funds.
« Constitutes receipts on account of debt for meeting governmental costs, except where qualified by footnote (4), in which case the item represents payments on account
>
year;
*
of debt for meeting governmental costs.
• Excess of payments over receipts.
GENERAL
Table
TABLES'.
247
lO.-PAYMBNTS AND RECEIPTS ON ACCOUNT OF DEBT:
[For a
list
of the cities arranged alphabetically
GEO0P
III.-CITIES
by
states,
'
1907-Contintted.
with the number assigned to each, see page
HAVING A POPULATION OF
50,000
TO
100,000
IN
127.]
1907.
EXCESS OP BECEIPTS OVER PAYMENTS.
City
number.
To
Total.
public.
To invested
funds '
(Investment
From inTotal.
From public.
transfers).
Cambridge, Mass
Albany, N.Y
1762,276
391,691
199, 146
1,592,764
365. 123
$170, 000
$1, 108, 145
$983, 145
66, 632
234, 776
434, 605
2,500
1,200
1,665,500
417,000
234,776
434, 605
1,660,500
377,000
5,000
40,000
Trenton, N.J
Bridgeport, Conn
710, 789
Wilmington, Del
Camden, N.J
Des Moines, Iowa
644,920
41,847
520,539
22,079
256,151
604,420
41,847
190,250
20,000
256, 151
1,060,888
157,583
521,433
1,381,841
135,761
738,519
133,583
516,433
1,316,841
322,369
24,000
5,000
65,000
723,769
1,330,169
1,819,157
615,932
1,062,717
723,769
1,057,205
1,802,357
577,232
985,905
830,876
1,401,120
2,844,285
921,684
1,149,013
890,081
2,497,285
844,684
1,005,361
184, 615
717,591
1,071,476
79,011
350,640
184,615
710,591
1,071,476
79,011
290,973
1,079,793
853,369
1,103,000
36,694
375,700
1,079,793
851,369
1,103,000
36,694
329,700
65,933
226,343
294,459
1,043,905
771,667
61,933
217,843
289,709
999,505
771,567
4,000
8,500
4,750
44,400
369,832
365,569
166,995
1,571,039
705,178
277,128
365,569
166, 995
1,571,039
705, 178
432,905
392,905
343. 124
41,665
88,995
223,786
40,000
5,000
869, 724
141,235
544,105
62,160
17,526
335,959
931,884
141,235
544,105
393,123
299,123
94,000
15,000
260,301
15,019
287,711
34, 123
295,001
309,716
119,647
287,711
33,123
27,867
309,716
515,480
318,661
1,623,000
1,398,750
Youngstown, Ohio.
Tex
Heading, Pa
42,079
Kansas City, Kans.
Lyim, Mass
New Bedford,
Springfield,
Mass..
Mass
Troy,N.Y
Oakland, Cal
Lawrence, Mass
Mass
Somerville,
Savannah, Ga
Duluth, Minn
Norfolk,
Va
Hoboken, N.J
Peoria,
111
Yonkers.N.Y
Utica, N.
Y
Manchester, N. H. .
Schenectady, N. Y.
348, 124
Evansvllle, Ind
San Antonio, Tex.
Elizabeth,
41,565
88,995
241,312
.
N.J
Waterbury Conn
Salt Lake City, Utah
134, 647
,
Wilkes-Barre, Pa....
Erie,
Pa
Houston, Tex
Tacoma,
Wash
Harrisburg, Pa
Charleston, S. C
Portland, Me
Dallas,
Terre Haute, Ind
Fort Wayne, Ind
'
Ky
The term "debt,"
'
of
7,000
59, 667
217,980
111,504
260,282
135, 761
830, 876
107, 107
107, 107
167, 124
511,039
347,000
77,000
143,652
<
202, 176
170, 734
274,906
31,442
25,000
556,245
504,395
276,974
35,882
487,762
408,145
276, 074
20,882
68,483
96, 250
65,911
249,906
51,175
42,111
231,944
801,511
762, 119
112, 810
175,046
742,911
735, 119
112,810
241,728
776,500
856,000
100,429
743,000
790,000
114, 187
141,299
33,500
66,000
all
114, 187
946
760
670
110
151,811
<
1,131,374
550,963
1,623,387
1, 720, 147
58,600
27,000
139,226
127, 464
527, 134
< 66, 389
96,
683,
99,
455,
125,654
197,470
70,599
< 260, 682
< 39, 145
615,894
243,302
387
331,497
11,000
'i6,'i66'
•354,069
229,489
225,799
< 30, 029
15,000
bonds; temporary and other loans, including overdrafts by the treasurer;
of the city and not paid during the year.
<
all
9,784
25, Oil
93,881
1,377
$45, 000
66, 632
<
<
2,500
38,800
132, 119
4,000
5,000
24,500
93,914
<
238,075
330,200
38,300
66,840
694,928
267,452
19,456
895, 178
140,778
31,524
42, 317
38, 727
<
5,000
<
92,704
1,131,374
561,963
1,623,387
1,730,247
'13,667
215, 195
147, 726
122, 714
<
88,704
<8,500
< 4,
750
400
571,534
<
44,
56, 946
526, 600
<
40,
<
99,670
455, 110
75,337
125,635
197,470
71,599
16,452
< 39, 145
000
57,160
76,474
19
1,000
267, 134
<
<
709,723
<
342, 102
<
93,829
98, 800
387
344,397
317,028
158,239
37,041
71,250
225, 799
« 21, 229
<8,800
<
74,617
89
54,881
1,377
*
84,401
25, 100
39,000
warrants outstanding at the close of the
govermnent
Smkmg, investment, and public trust funds.
' Constitutes reeeipts on account of debt for meeting governmental costs, except where qualifled
debt for meeting governmental costs.
• Excess of payments Over receipts.
by
footnote(4) in which case the item represents
,
'^
(Investment
712, 421
895,178
135,778
31,524
< 42, 317
25,060
46,000
93,829
109,800
56, 898
70,951
1,025,128
305, 752
86,296
2,000
421,651
208,861
1,623,000
1,375,750
In-
vested funds
$220,869
156, 915
235, 459
67, 736
11, 877
350,099
115,504
265,282
736,921
93,914
104,722
44,319
270,571
23,800
public'
1
235,459
70,236
50, 677
335,959
485, 181
23,000
$175, 869
223, 547
<
1,000
267,134
as here used, includes
year; all judgments rendered against the
272,964
16,800
38, 700
76, 812
From
transfers).
$125,000
245,282
485,181
104, 722
44,319
270,671
51, 175
Akron, Ohio
Holyoke, Mass
Brockton, Mass
Covington,
-
40,500
Total.
transfers).
$932,276
458,323
199,146
1,595,264
366,323
Hartford, Conn
Lowell, Mass
From
vested funds 2
(investment
payments on account
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
248
Table 10.—PAYMENTS
[For a
list of
AND KECEIPTS ON ACCOUNT OF DEBT:'
the cities arranged alphabetically
GROUP
IV.~CITIES
by states, witb the number
HAVING A POPULATION OF
1907— Continued.
assigned to each, see page 127.]
30,000
TO
50,000
IN
1907.
EXCESS OF KECEIPTS OVEK PAYMENTS.
PAYMENTS.
City
To
number.
Total.
To public.
Invested
funds ^
(investment
Total.
From Infunds 2
From public. vested
(investment
289,947
610,817
Mont
219,863
327, 037
289,947
533,817
109, 183
219,863
327,037
16,495
106,662
20, 602
163,273
64,682
15,495
106,562
19,502
153,273
64,582
91,357
160,647
157,338
127,683
97,510
91, 367
150,547
157,338
123,235
92, 610
149,732
77,403
608,410
89,803
123,696
149,732
77,403
608,410
89, 803
123,696
285,069
91,972
212,823
30,938
429,756
285,069
91,972
212,823
30,938
407,556
420,810
221,905
189,692
33,453
310, 600
420,810
221,905
182,627
33, 453
219,900
679, 961
683,967
16, 537
160,311
95, 994
405, 400
493, 871
1,500
340,500
518,060
610, 060
8,000
63, 321
71, 104
486,886
63, 321
71, 104
Spokane, Wash..
Lancaster, Pa....
99
100
101
Butte,
Pawtucket, K.
I.
109, 183
.
102
103
104
106
106
McKeesport, Pa
Binghamton, N. Y.
Johnstown, Pal
107
108
109
110
111
Augusta,
112
113
114
115
116
East St. Louis, 111.
Wheeling, W. Va..
Dubuque, Iowa
Sioux City, Iowa.
.
Ga
Mobile, Ala
Topeka, Kans
Springfield, Ohio.
Allentown, Pa
Montgomery, Ala..
Passaic, N. J
Davenport, Iowa.
Atlantic City, N. J.
117
118
119
120
Little Rock, Ark.
City, Mich
.
Bay
York, Pa
Maiden, Mass
121
122
123
124
125
126
Springfield,
127
128
129
130
131
Chelsea,
132
133
134
135
136
Haverhill, Mass.
Jacksonville, Fla.
137
138
139
140
141
Knoxville,
Elmira, N.
Galveston,
111.
Quiucy, 111
Canton, Ohio...
Superior, Wis..
Chester, Pa
Mass
South Omaha, Nebr.
Newciastle,
Salem,
Pa
M^
Newton, Mass
Joplin,
Mo
Wichita, Kans
Rocktord, 111
Tenn
16,537
150,311
406, 900
834, 371
134, 288
108, 166
300, 646
Y
Tex
New Britain,
142
143
144
145
146
Kalamazoo, Mich..
Woonsocket, R. I...
Fitchburg, Mass
196, 427
196, 427
2,002,000
639,848
53,513
78, 312
1,966,000
147
148
149
150
Macon, Ga.-.
Joliet, lU
115,992
258,832
76, 582
132, 164
102, 992
151
152
153
West Hoboken, N.
154
155
156
157
158
Wis
Auburn, N.
Oklahoma
Y
City, Okla.
Oshkosh, Wis
1,000
4,448
5,000
426,309
844,817
114,370
361,437
366,267
108,748
217,482
66,280
159,278
3,376
108, 748
217,482
56,280
169,278
3,376
87,472
22,500
130,931
274, 541
164,220
87,472
22,600
130,931
234,297
164,220
216,260
48,033
736,887
216,260
48,033
736,887
224, 099
76,209
224, 099
76,209
7,065
90,700
9,000
127,000
$240, 921
136,362
264,000
6,187
141,684
169,918
136,362
311,000
5,187
141,584
39,230
111,920
36,778
6,005
< 61,206
93,263
111,920
36,778
6,005
4 61,206
30,000
*3,885
<
128,047
26,407
146,858
66, 710
4
856,253
183,369
67, 125
669,685
36,187
139,929
36, 187
162, 129
388,430
132,931
286,250
770
274, 600
388,430
*
32, 380
4
132, 931
4
271,528
770
274,600
14,722
•188,974
.96,558
32,683
36, 100
4
817,735
214,240
171,797
408, 707
1,041,758
635, 865
181, 870
592,200
93, 859
172, 753
311, 378
613, 484
660,200
93, 859
172,763
311, 378
613, 484
140, 760
77, 782
864, 368
140,760
67, 782
743, 368
349,229
1,024,151
137, 774
197, 703
140
859
432
274
598
6,472
4 30,384
563, 712
291,233
10,000
121,000
32,380
88,974
88,901
32,683
64,600
51, 898
207, 387
74,
93,
109,
240,
127,
4
6,472
31,384
569, 712
145, 612
34, 012
72,000
88,400
109,518
50,246
2,730
173, 624
74,518
32, 316
2,730
163, 624
10,792
257,353
440,875
106,870
10,792
257,353
440,875
106,870
105,200
4 1, 479
364,293
4 25,294
492,200
41,479
364, 293
4 25,294
139,278
330,957
22,931
42,541
617, 350
636, 417
19,067
46,212
22,931
288,416
19,067
14,212
35,910
433,688
43,199
11,002
28,219
< 33, 688
18,199
11,002
462
62,462
613
-
13,000
258,832
76,582
132, 164
116, 347
206, 163
161,000
403,375
Taunton, Mass. .
Newport, Ky
La Crosse, Wis.
Fort Worth, Tex.
349,800
113, 688
32,890
230,517
313,000
113,688
32,890
230,517
36,800
385,710
80,000
76,089
241, 619
341,219
80,000
51,089
241,519
7,429
7,429
69,891
10,000
4
288, 416
183,000
44,491
26,000
~
62,
90,700
85,876
24,000
2,039,618
601,694
56,243
241,936
78, 312
7,657
4
93,869
924,770,
-63,
60
'"4'22,'266
50, 140
111, 500
37,000
70, 470
119,008
109, 432
240, 274
127, 598
230, 439
569, 378
6,000
6,000
4 1,600
117,000
341,939
2, 111, 518
690,094
56,243
251,936
99, 381
35, 796
4
15,486
3,307
«0, 387
291,233
924,770
349,229
1,024,161
'1,000
197, 703
21,486
1,807
6,000
'457,' 566'
130,688
128,047
26,407
111,062
71,710
737,245
183,369
264,868
214,240
165,797
408,707
684, 258
447,000
4
66,528
4 29,370
128,477
134,296
4 47,487
4
1,663
43,885
4
66,628
< 29, 370
128,477
134,296
4 47, 487
4
$34,671
12,996
211,700
475,531
60,463
264, 918
Everett, Mass
San Juan, P. E.
5,000
$276,692
12,996
211,700
477, 194
60, 463
275, 331
477, 691
139,278
330,957
636, 417
220, 376
.
$42,131
vested funds"
(Investment
transfers).
1,022,314
116,347
42,641
617,350
357, 163
J.,
Sacramento, Cal
Pueblo, Colo
public.
322
275,331
477,741
67, 125
1, 141,
134,288
99,166
173, 646
67, 996
67,996
99,381
Racine,
77,000
485,886
Conn.
Chattanooga, Tenn.
426,309
874,817
114,370
361, 437
496,955
3,337
113,319
256, 700
1,204,077
Birmingham, Ala..
Bayonne, N. J
South Bend, Ind.
Pa
85, 463-
$469, 024
1185,972
100,323
45,000
723,546
35,000
Altoona,
$426,893
113,319
266,700
1, 199, 077
85,463
17,460
$193,432
100,323
45,000
726,883
35,000
From
transfers).
transfers).
Saginaw, Mich...
Lincoln, Nebr...
From InTotal.
1,000
46,000
111,500
36,000
17,930
10,000
413,000
32,000
26,000
The term "debt," as here used, includes all bonds; temporary and other loans, including overdrafts by the treasurer; all warrants outstanding at the close of the
and all judgments rendered against the government of the city and not paid during the year.
.
Sinking, investment, and public trust funds.
' Constitutes receipts on aceountofdebt for meeting governmental costs, except where qualified by footnote (4), in which case the item represents payments on account
1
year;
2
of debt for meeting governmental costs.
4 Excess of payments over receipts.
250
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
Table 11
[For a list of the
cities
—RECEIPTS FROM
arranged alphabetically by
states,
GENERAL TABLES.
GENERAL REVENUES:
with the
numb^ assigned
1907.
to each, see
page
127.]
CLAsaiPiED
BY SOURCE—Continued.
251
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
252
Table 11.— RECEIPTS FROif
[For a
GROUP
in.— CITIES
CLASSIFIED
HAVING A POPULATION OF
BY DIVISION OP THE
THE
CITY
OF
GOVERNMENT
RECEIVING.
CLASSIFIED
50,000
TO
list of tlie cities
100,000
BY
IN
arranged alphabetically
liy states,
1907.
CLASSIFIED BV SOURCES.
CHARACTER.
Taxes.
Total
City
receipts
num-
from
ber.
general
Other
City
corporation.
School
districts.
.
General property.
divisions
For meet-
of the
govern-
ing gov-
Receipts
Special
ernmental
in error.i
property
ment
of
costs.
and
Total.
the city.
Penalties
Original
levies.
PoU.
business.
and
collectors' fees.
Cambridge, Mass.
Albany, N.Y
Hartford, Conn...
Lowell, Mass
Reading, Pa
Trenton, N. J
Bridgeport, Coim..
Wilmington, Del
.
Camden, N. J
Des Moines, Iowa.
Kansas City, Kans..
Lynn, Mass
New
Bedford, Mass.
Springfield, Mass.
.
Troy.N.Y
60
61
62
63
64
Oakland, Cal.
Lawrence, ]
Somerville, Mass..
Savannah, Ga
Duluth, Minn
65
66
67
68
69
Norfolk,
70
71
72
Va
2,064,171
928,980
1,000,718
788,087
1,068,331
1,567,592
928,980
1,000,718
493,797
55,842
358,014
841,514
849,779
357,450
382,309
1,012,507
1,176,617
696,341
782,367
1,126,496
686, 135
402,367
683,790
1,125,699
741,937
1,057,087
665,687
564,515
471,629
1,057,087
362,536
341,722
270,408
853,492
782,303
713,621
485,588
462,197
782,303
713,621
485,588
391,295
73
74
San Antonio, Tex
Elizabeth, N. J
75
76
77
Wateibury, Conn....
78
Erie,
79
Houston, Tex
80
81
82
83
Taooma, Wash..
Harrisbnrg, Pa.
84
8S
Youngstown, Ohio.
Salt
Lake
City,
Wilkes-Barre,
Utah
Pa
Pa
Charleston, S. C.
Portland, Me
Dallas,
Tex
Terre Haute, Ind.
Fort Wayne, Ind.
.
.
Akron, Ohio
Holyoke, Mass..
Brockton, Mass.
Covington,
Ky.
1 Subsec[uently corrected
reported
footnotes.
m
775, 112
$2,782
788,JB87
841,514
1,488,464
607,368
607,023
1,012,507
H
by refund payments. In
1,308,042
777,261
989,189
592,276
799,426
1,308,042
720,697
876,559
591,189
794,507
1,111,421
810,213
879,700
1,186,412
1,253,712
2,443
606
19
10,143
3,691
761,949
539,113
712,247
1,065,031
1,113,819
642,238
502,586
704,969
1,019,755
1,051,474
736,865
771,030
732,321
996,208
699,687
4,082
595
142
665,388
626,712
645,226
854,887
487,111
2,065,750
922,522
1,000,068
774,772
1,067,311
283,975
736,855
775,112
452,826
996,350
700,156
Y
8,421
6,458
650
13,316
1,020
481
156
396,227
1,232,000
1,486,203
1,436,435
1,134,147
732,916
996,350
700,156
N.
603,202
997,606
977,661
1,092,668
995,369
679,721
1,231,844
1,486,203
1,434,264
1,185,053
680,202
1,232,000
1,486,203
1,436,435
1,189,989
736,855
Utioa,
2,171
4,936
609,132
1,117,759
1,117,504
1,308,761
1,035,895
532,362
E vansville, Ind
Yonkers, N. Y.
11,718
8,179
6,400
1,248
4,586
4,614
861,217
1,280,104
761,544
778,831
773,811
Manchester, N.
Schenectady, N. Y....
J.
111
497,186
1,030,518
699,312
489,940
1,125,647
866,603
1,280,033
760,745
778,685
1,306,163
861,217
1,280,104
761,544
778,831
1,306,173
1,113,864
810,819
525,112
1,196,556
1,257,403
Peoria,
536,750
1,063,136
706,646
501,633
1,130,233
376
203
1,366,-138
"285,016
$277,015
1,113,864
810,819
879,719
1,196,555
1,257,403
Hoboken, N.
$6,296
1,124
7,024
$5,908
4,577
11,905,910
1,359,108
1,745,292
1,516,743
613,962
710,317
748,488
$1,687,740
1,103,138
1,463,111
1,236,191
713,870
$1,889,753
1,160,163
1,768,242
$1,900,002
1,354,531
2,022,307
1,516,367
898,776
$1,905,910
1,359,108
2,022,307
1,516,743
898,978
"272,'82i
81,786
638,685
249,918
224,714
478,882
293,974
98,677
303,151
222,793
addition, this
column includes
71
799
146
20
841,493
1,487,113
602,432
607,023
1,011,852
21
1,351
4,936
655
700,411
1,030,917
498,041
494,672
878,276
1,173,504
696,237
775,032
1,126,470
3,113
104
7,336
26
856,603
612,190
564,432
1,067,705
741,937
1,055,127
665,007
564,516
853,492
782,082
713,621
483,772
service transfers
1,960
573, 196
925,334-
680
399,661
449,032
221
708,'274
739,196
696,518
370,873
made by
3,270
377
5,387
1,087
$162,917
57,025
297,732
94,573
1,882
$39,096
9,846
19,060
933
4,062
18,000
5,379
40,000
17,000
39,000
35,659
71,895
20,895
35,348
4,919
7,706
2,519
40,897
2,098
603,215
610,597
539,826
843,815
444,946
3,291
2,554
137,836
13,561
3,539
8,219
21,946
683, 193
1,020,423
473,231
490,928
872,189
3,566
7,221
786
2,043
3,174
1,701
855,603
596,284
539,413
984,772
739,196
619,897
615,907
370,873
6,383
6,930
76,883
122,466
177,103
34,771
110,182
33,227
7,278
4,379
60,247
673,196
921,001
396,818
434,724
1,103
35,250
25,712
781
21,046
5,400
7,533
12,000
6,431
10,494
20,850
6,087
4,000
412
1,837
24,607
58,479
10,069
24,' 454
4,333
2,843
14,308
72,919
51,902
16,458
27,686
certain cities in connection with specified revenues, and
GENERAL TABLES.
GENERAL REVENUES:
with the
253
1907— Continued.
number assigned to each, see page
127.]
GROUP
III.-CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
CLASSIFIED
50,000
TO
100,000
Subventions, grants, and
Subventions
grants
Fines and
Total.
Other
licenses.
business
and taxes.
licenses.
Dog
General
licenses.
licenses.
$44
113,700
137,640
$2,710
4,262
2,721
4,298
2,841
Permits.
S646
$4,152
4,483
$24
3,443
$4,573
2,801
13,220
6,105
1,250
$8,160
49,772
163,392
6,810
64,156
$5,439
42,450
47,624
3,980
64, 156
4,118
3,771
2,155
6,962
1,419
5,875
18,782
9,077
4,137
28,661
187,620
48,852
39,692
^ 134,546
37,797
182,723
46,852
35,476
133,043
37,797
1,162
6,209
9,937
2,824
5,676
221
19,833
4,823
282,848
7,131
40,150
19,833
3,359
4,361
4,688
33,397
50,168
5,660
4,863
18,206
25,098
434,492
3,834
5,208
1,352
45,670
430, 164
3,025
1,723
3,145
5,411
4,481
1,724
6,339
3,251
3,231
34, 162
133,465
13,037
31,927
33,261
28,634
133,365
10,368
30,066
30,714
1,422
1,294
349
4,506
2,397
4,858
12,459
8,707
8,916
1,593
3,621
25,096
85,970
95,864
122,825
3,621
20,368
84,660
67,790
122,302
57
116
1,027
564
127,738
95,101
45,028
98,981
83,027
114,867
113,723
3,508
93,596
79,465
92,240
108,703
40,341
4,787
2,452
2,692
1,357
271,454
142,235
1,468
176,253
198,237
165,040
140,661
26
52,426
183,000
81,942
996
961
121,354
8,707
313,282
136,517
148,096
96,346
107,092
114,131
127,860
134,934
86,848
106,972
193,974
4,396
8,268
3,264
1,120
2,152
2,638
1,726
823
62,988
93,013
36,683
88,627
55,921
100,091
76,118
23,936
82,678
2,379
6,236
11,602
4,696
2,344
2,565
3,224
2,825
3,545
1,208
87,098
230,674
68,518
66,873
49,527
159,700
56,800
56,400
39,090
2,382
59,097
5,824
6,949
7,913
2,841
3,132
669
1,652
545
1,395
8,600
5,225
1,872
1,979
14,802
21,422
4,121
2,623
14,481
39,203
205,451
36,688
42,855
70,223
39,174
205,451
36,688
42,856
70,123
1,633
916
18,511
10,583
38,428
45
169,640
43,218
82,956
57,622
169,640
40,766
60,459
46,430
2,944
4,412
273
8,917
11,112
3,079
2,794
25,831
81,896
186,782
72,306
186,228
71,304
94
1,900
5,566
7,690
2,075
39,532
4,588
6,250
77,716
34,245
2,200
4,552
77,716
,110,845
'
1,870
3,643
60O
19,438
20
7,647
16,825
497
118,935
12,600
10,845
14,749
96,488
1,224
1,450
2,086
63
133,993
38,745
76,165
40,383
129,058
33,093
68,409
27,200
1,671
3,978
2,984
11,435
158
1,674
360
1,475
72,864
63,876
3,163
34,924
71,524
61,861
1,211
2,014
2,842
9,198
'
17
599
510
132,863
30,350
96,551
1,224
21,130
1,061
418
63
'i36
'4,"657
23
711
'2,'ii9
162
129
321
3,919
I
Exclusive of receipts from permits issued
by public service
numMiscella-
ber.
neous
Total.
4,472
4,487
3,075
2,474
2,337
from private
individuals.
Gifts
general
revenues.
8,682
2,376
900
3,815
11,092
130,972
149,334
6,130
138,515
109,482
City
and
other
civil divisions.
For
137,911
69,106
133,828
78,800
from
gifts.
forfeits.
education.
S3, 424
146,372
77,4S3
138,690
85,084
1907.
BY SOURCE— Continued.
Licenses and permits.
Liquor
IN
enterprises,
1,680
4,110
For
other
purposes.
$2,013
For
For
expenses.
outlays.
$708
7,322
113,448
1,830
45
46
47
48
49
$1,500
60
2,000
1,464
1,098
2,013
1,830
1,098
61
717
1,503
3,500
27,389
430
6,753
260,000
52
53
54
$500
2,664
324
55
56
57
68
59
60
61
62
63
64
1,352
45,570
2,922
65
66
67
100
2,669
1,861
2,547
4,728
902
28,074
623
29
100
182
20,987
1,673
2,371
1,510
81,v068
828
5,000
825
1,548
which are reported
75
76
77
78
79
81
82
83
250
25,581
70
71
72
73
74
S4
85
564
1,002
87
287
1,663
150
90
91
in Table 17.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
254
\
Table 11.— RECEIPTS FROM^
GROUP
IV.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
TO
[For a
list
60,000
IN
of the cities arranged alpliabetically
1907.
by states,
GENERAL TABLES,
255
GENERAL REVENUES: 1907—Continued.
with the
number assigned
to each, see page 127.]
.
GROUP
IV.—CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
CLASSIFIED
30,000
TO
IN
60,000
1907.
BY SOURCE—Continued.
Subventions, grants, and
Licenses and permits.
gifts.
City
Subventions
grants
Fines and
Total.
Liquor
Other
licenses,
business
and
taxes.
licenses.
from
civil divisions.
Dog
General
licenses.
licenses.
Permits.'
150,557
55,404
48,818
173,003
40,307
146,604
49,603
26,267
149,820
30,218
12,783
4,760
20,743
15,744
3,489
SI, 035
320,336
57,444
24,399
97,435
45,667
113,100
50,660
19,900
51,256
37,996
202,317
1,376
2,242
41,616
4,283
458
930
2,473
2,298
48,806
37,654
68,410
37,257
59,129
29,066
33,597
34,800
34,631
64,053
18,957
2,296
24,384
1,957
4,704
693
1,662
1,538
669
297
66,988
169,804
16,423
27,769
42,491
10,300
36,536
64, 141
1,547
837
3,556
865
1,221
153,799
69,031
135,400
66,270
78,323
124, 715
'52,651
203,212
96,063
44,826
28,498
110,463
74,204
77,668
93,634
27,836
4,038
86,972
21,603
1,021
1,641
49,793
116,382
44,680
11,383
59,648
68,005
43,884
30,983
27,860
67,066
18,176
30,746
2,262
84,098
16,369
94,382
97,710
30,276
32,694
51, 171
97,758
95,312
961
42,963
26,376
45,149
40,408
112, 150
68,618
41,780
14,000
103,024
70,364
74,528
86,130
18,258
1,412
1,661
2,779
1,666
1,627
6,781
2,166
764
7,433
4,292
96
17
47,587
52,660
26,012
56,218
6,719
40,618
18,250
23,589
33,396
14,404
26, 847
19
70,190
13,757
2,144
12,661
685
1,426
1,952
63,202
17,258
6,657
3,430
59,231
2,063
10,398
877
33,670
2,133
2,263
2,013
11,488
46,600
93,242
8,000
27,710
47,882
2,793
16,269
3,752
60,075
65,610
84,935
275
28,750
8,093
617
41,514
11,795
32,200
30,587
20,755
22,690
a
90196—10
>
4,855
1,900
1,223
61,092
•97,622
66,501
69,846
10,262
7,463
2,048
6,633
670
20,218
32, 178
31,791
24,628
29,253
11,701
14,586
6,911
13,843
9,439
4,607
2,991
1,604
120
14,821
23,976
29,434
20,782
29,434
3,292
8,382
21,017
4,194
13,233
6,642
24,316
19,970
81,094
15,679
6,642
22,816
16, 794
80,999
15, 679
14,268
1,736
18
3,164
3,714
34,528
1,627
1,585
2,273
140,096
32,552
31,517
3,402
140,096
20,468
156,196
31,517
2,571
108
540
"36
'i;934
4,980
4,405
1,061
11,564
1,137
7,428
10,034
21,211
21,335
26,739
7,234
7,914
21,205
21,190
26,739
3,493
2,334
5,074
4,435
2,584
822
43,525
21,504
9,853
4,777
12,883
21,504
1,984
3,819
4,446
18,218
10,260
7,657
4,864
3,668
2,843
19,722
10,225
24,842
19,652
10,225
6,113
15,071
951
3,988
8,743
14,468
68,534
24,246
130,965
22,252
73,682
68,209
21,610
36,380
19,885
64,200
2,191
164
1,989
2,461
3,546
84,862
9,956
11,076
27,202
19,036
84,862
9,866
2,120
23,041
17,785
7,135
9,371
22,258
4,885
9,371
22,258
2,250
454
2,168
610
6,624
20,895
403
44,566
104,995
46,498
3,818
44,203
104,995
46,498
2,366
363
2,027
2,073
448
3,166
15,496
2,689
25,534
23,623
1,482
2,289
25,534
22,623
1,460
1,935
6,177
205
4,325
4,488
2,257
1,886
.601
200
473
140
679
3,754
2,815
330
1,272
10
378
1,478
3,489
15
's.eis
253
1,077
797
240
198
254
530
283
1,166
1,027
2,335
2,055
990
1,868
$66,412
4,955
61,092
97,522
75,320
59,896
11,802
136
217
2,201
651
845
$2,000
1,504
49,905
3,587
1,744
26,377
4,150
$3,693
1,674
2,484
1,798
746
1,694
316
1,071
1,668
$7,989
6,106
outlays.
$149,167
15,325
32,710
171, 170
31,222
1,114
1,345
656
1,132
1,240
606
406
220
2,420
1,469
145
'"970
$2, 687
26,272
29,253
11,701
14,586
157,9%
111
1,390
323
95
344
821
2,008
1,866
191
123
1,556
1,460
6,678
627
804
17,
92
93
94
95
96
97
100
101
102
103
104
106
106
387
1,604
120
174
12, 971
1,676
217
107
108
109
110
111
3,194
1,500
3,176
95
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
12,084
i,800
121
194
830
1,240
822
5,462
5,250
126
2,619
833
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
825
133
134
135
136
70
18,662
67
94,635
"9,066
325
2,635
60
2,367
482
1,281
7,675
137
138
139
140
141
100
4,161
'i,'26i
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
164
1,463
400
which are reported in Table
Exclusive of receipts from permits issued by pubUc service enterprises,
17
$19
8,819
60
1,550
16,953
823
6,879
852
1,137
1,021
.
1,258
8,153
10,589
6,334
ber.
neous
For
For
$215,568
27,890
32, 710
177,248
33, 122
6,600
27,662
15,673
96, 972
1,576
83,100
7,200
3,746
For
other
purposes.
4,729
6,362
51,951
257
t235
1,136
1,808
6
119,204
8,912
933
10,398
75,120
33,226
1,230
10,588
635
Miscella-
Total.
For
36,950
58,464
73,902
num-
Gifts from private
individuals.
forfeits.
education.
24,962
29,600
and
other
1,000
22
17.
165
156
157
168
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
256
Table 12.— RECEIPTS
[For a
list of
FROM COMMERCIAL REVENUES:
the cities arranged alphatiBtioally
by
states,
CLASSIFIED
Total
City
from
commercial
ber.
with the number assigned to each, see page
and
funds,
accounts.
prises,
Municipal
Special
services.
For meeting
governmental
costs.
Grand
Group I
Group II
Group III
Group IV
$159, 205, 710
total
95,564,410
34,063,727
16,852,434
12,735,139
,
GROUP
NewYork, N.Y..
Chicago, 111
Philadelphia, Pa.
St. Louis, Mo
Boston, Mass
$143, 741, 740
$142, 662, 93S
703
646
773
618
83, 103, 606
83,
32,
16,
11,
633,
119,
092,
895,
I.— CITIES
31,792,989
15,968,692
11,807,748
BY SOUKCE.
Receipts from departments, offices, enter-
revenues.
Total.
127.]
CLASSIFIED
BY PAYEE.
Receipts from public.
receipts
num-
1907.
service
enter-
Public
Interest.'
prises.B
prises.'
Receipts
Service
Interest
in error.'
transfer.
transfer.
$l,078,8a'i
097
326, 657
134, 181
87,870
.530,
$4,546,118 $10,917,852
434
770,550
344,310
529,824
2, 901,
HAVING A POPULATION OF
$34,370,977
15,989,261
9,659,899
6,536,087
6,393,867
$28,224,024
14,357,032
9,258,326
5, 460, 420
4,971,771
$28, 172, 121
$51,903
14,118,273
9,231,271
5,456,760
4,962,887
238, 759
2,930,238
3,861,682
4,210,029
2,391,870
1,171,058
2,366,672
3,234,236
3,918,916
2,218,903
1,169,080
2,361,664
3,217,566
3,804,571
2,214,275
1, 165, 005
4,018
16, 669
114,345
4,628
4,076
2,227,660
3,498,612
1,383,644
704, 913
1,224,718
2,120,648
3,222,327
1,318,654
569, 927
1,223,868
2, 115,
27, 056
3,660
8,884
300,000
9,019,273
1,173,531
415, 351
309,697
35,890,373
19,420,588
7,484,904
5,866,029
OH OVER IN
473
$6, 042, 008
28, 756
9,341
66,258
256,054
392,232
9,409
1, 166, 042
60,154
504, 412
348, 156
$104, 945
1, 603,
$68,661,894
$2,118,313 $22,148,221
1,677,291
232,816
208,206
service
enter-
$66,277,282
17,335,161
2,592,143
1,308,929
911,988
40,661,685
11,818,180
8,058,601
5,748,916
$6, 389, 483
$17,732,585.
1907.
$10,246,883
8, 489, 404
2,117,501
3,026,693
1,388,694
$2, 026
1,101,298
43, 906
193,544
1,576,697
3,376,993
358,557
1,452,047
4,822,962
4,
166, 405-
2,107,031
3,369,682:
;
Baltimore,
Md
Pittsburg, Pa
Cleveland, Ohio...
N.Y
Buffalo,
San Francisco, Cal
Detroit,
Mich
Cincinnati, Ohio.
iMilwaukee, Wis . .
New
Orleans, La.
Washington, D. C.
473
3,204,175
1,306,847
563,860
1,219,868
5,075
279, 191
225, 716
15,334
18, 152
12,807
16, 067
4,000
63,337
111, 400
GROUP n.— CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF
16
17
18
19
20
Newark, N.J
21
22
23
St.
Minneapolis, Minn.
Jersey City^. J
Louisville, Ky ..:...
IndianapoUs, Ind
Paul,Minn......
Providence, R. I
Rochester,
N.Y
24
25
Kansas City, Mo
ToledOjOhio
26
-27
28
29
30
Denver, Colo
Oolumbus, Ohio
31
32
33
34
35
Iios Angeles, Cal
Worcester, Mass
'Seattle,
Wash
$2,269,367
1,349,949
1,647,337
1,134,226
1,444,650
$1,998,111
1,283,166
1,500,839
1,133,856
1,443,330
$1, 992, 642
1,032,867
1,472,087
1,578,934
2,826,136
798,861
994,675
1,236,281
1,563,692
2,778,629
728,693
988,776
1,235,759
2,768,063
721, 628
1,062,663
924, 132
3,664,037
847, 098
4,594,439
1, 049, 244
717,247
3.384,989
.3,374,219
421,223
407,830
409, 129
350, 133
68.5,986
4,502,496
1,196,612
1, 495, 757
1,110,759
1, 441, 962
1,544, .571
1,012,669
713, 612
681,182
4,469,804
Memphis, Tenn
Omaha, Nebr
New Haven, Coim.
253, 418
Scronton, Pa
Syracuse, N.
239,067
959,838
416,063
362,360
252,398
225,939
968,392
304,076
210,620
1,346,135
676,701
747, 129
278,208
209,553
1,341,420
629, 630
679,819
278,063
209,073
1,338,111
629,630
679,397
383,658
422,602
467,063
677, 694
370,894
346, 894
452,274
604,888
363,243
342,946
444, 607
600,276
St. Joseph,
Y
Mo
36
37
38
39
40
Faterson, N. J
Portland, Oreg
Atlanta, Ga
41
42
Fall River, Mass
Nashville, Term
43
Dayton, Ohio
44
Grand Rapids, Mich
Richmond, Va
166
224, a59
924,262
2-52,
65,397
68,709
104,258
1,973
100,000
1,524,466
2,3a5,084
1,209,063
91, 778
276,285
1,653
23,586
850
TO
300,000
$261, 918
$9,338
4,541
799
522
19,021
10, 466
7,065
16, 645
21, 647
67,218
8,167
27,248
173
168,588
7,175
20,359
69,995
62,242
146, 498
370
1,320
1, 121,
887
795, 795
646, 908
290,872
668,908
IN
547,739'
161,324
337,768
1,114,827
10,581
39,334
622,235
419,330
858,025
1,919,106
413,534
40,886
267, 019
98,581
79,052
112,827
369,74fr
136,270
185,676
57,448
169,667
75,377
25,487
273,565
1,035,660
10,260
39,582
62, 190
31,590
360,294
443
1,037
895,259
401,766
2,470,929
12,5,228
91, 691
252
6,924
2,217
242
1,880
34, 130
1,470
37,267
3,700
213
1,020
13,118
1,446
145
480
25,710
158
1,067
3,309
2,115
47,071
7,619
2,600
59, 691
181,239
651,269
338,790
81,809
499
69,523
44
63,259
12,265
6,185
14, 745
9,547
47,698
95,674
259,813
368,298
$6, 547
63, 135
264, 111
3, 664,
403
50, 679
330, 661
190, 191
37, 144
207,467
562,548
266, 082
$1, 124, 407
600,689-
785,738
622,328.
827,978
272,500-
413, 420'
854,659
312,087
25,320
68,428
43,242
Subsequently corrected by refund payments, together with accrued interest received from and paid to public.
^
For details, see Tables 14 and 16.
For details, see Table 13.
< For details, see Table 16.
' For details, see Table 17.
1
'
»
,
647,866
210, 681
162, 456
143, 416
36,884
3,949
7,667
4,612
900,014
1,060, 069'
$291, 045
4,762
422
925, 193-
370,054
390,221
1,394,736
139, 422
7,651
205,759
1,652,748
88,870
90,998
8,071
1,291,441
1,560,228:
1,329,789'
$85.3,915
850, 867
8,557
18,
112,362
748,619
552,733
575,156
257,614
3,016
1907.
67, 463
179, 048
36,575
3,635
10, 770
4,804
32,692
224,156
1, 168, 0.37
$5,469
86,664
6,082
23, 097
1,378
6,
890, 278
10,872
29,125
51,239
8,949
102,424
21,694
24,503
53, 135
1,802
256-
643,637
328,962
595,468
233, 636.
246,806
182,747
213,01»-
'
GENERAL TABLES.
Tabl* 12.— receipts
[For a
list of
FROM COMMERCIAL REVENUES:
the cities arranged alphabetically
GROUP
III.—CITIES
by
states,
Total
receipts from
num-
commercial
ber.
revenues.
1907— Continued.
with the number assigned to each, see page
HAVING A POPULATION OF
CLASSIFIED
City
257
50,000
TO
100,000
IN
127.]
1907.
BY PAYEB
CLASSIFIED
BY SOUECE.
Receipts from departments, ofQces, enter-
Receipts from public.
funds,
accounts.
prises,
and
Public
Municipal
Special
services.
service
enter-
Interest.*
prises.*
Total.
Cambridge, Mass.
Albany, N.Y
Hartford, Conn...
Lowell, Mass
Beading,
Pa
Trenton, N.J
Bridgeport, Conn.
Wilmington, Del.
Camden, N. J
Des Moines, Iowa..
Kansas City, Kans.
Lynn, Mass
New Bedford, Mass.
Springfleld,
Mass
Troy,N.Y
Oakland, Cal
Lawrence, Mass. .
SomervUle, Mass..
Savannah, Ga
Duluth, Minn
Norfolk,
Peoria,
111
Yonkers, N.Y..
Utica,N.Y
Manchester, N. H...
Schenectady, N.Y.
Evansville, Ind
San Antonio, Tex.
Elizabeth,
N.J
Waterbury, Conn
Salt
Lake
City,
Wilkes-Barre,
Erie,
Utah.
Pa
Pa
Houston, Tex
Tacoma, Wash..
Harrisburg, Pa.
Charleston, S. C.
Portland,
Me
Youngstown, Ohio..
Dallas,
Tex
Terre Haute, Ind.
Port Wayne, Ind.
.
.
Akron, Ohio
Holyoke, Mass...
Brockton, Mass
Covington, Ky..
Service
transfer.
Interest
transfer
$18,304
26,466
22,388
2,355
6,148
$149,354
167, 710
157,510
97,562
353,830
$112,752
94,297
69,366
63,811
8,875
$401,355
365,676
292,523
230,999
230, 118
34,978
19, 108
95,331
68,065
46,740
74,021
334,788
63,992
27,402
14,408
36,843
5,163
206,743
79
214,888
242,340
16,988
353,856
174,228
117,172
135,581
73,271
6,541
65,465
65,291
37, 165
9,288
317,601
253,557
296,817
181,656
729, 760
51,785
116,276
38,389
266,067
20,762
17,498
11,641
10, 123
12,288
15,030
141,455
234,596
145,138
379,970
36,527
2,080
1,961
11,016
71, 774
59,566
110,779
89,608
201,770
36,978
6,993
22,927
24,838
38,962
184,594
226,116
21, 792
248,147
3,636
26,324
16,428
8,930
2,640
56
7,373
11,411
210,825
132,772
21,060
140, 1?6
22,189
34,169
3,594
13,939
12,501
156,822
128,856
138,861
18,811
68
20
4,986
6,148
38, 103
286,572
31,655
69,495
41,360
30,066
7,369
2,594
31,689
6,588
186,636
178,478
1,045
201,461
191, 127
10,985
12,404
18,598
11,377
1,091,376
234,092
34,494
57,377
17,064
23,214
29,773
83,149
577,754
213,054
3,98»
42,611
7,073
4,554
220,519
54,999
128,979
133,328
16,651
21,121
2,361
7,132
135,983
209,026
18, 113
100,638
153,404
26,642
145, 147
86,386
13,009
23,362
33,722
4
1,865
452,417
130,056
120,315
$3,384
(641,773
601,217
473,375
383,210
586,675
$635,869
599,828
472,488
381,907
585,790
$5,904
1,389
887
1,303
885
356,066
95,546
276,036
353,204
356,939
321,088
76,438
276,036
337,292
356,939
317,504
74,994
271,948
335,209
355,833
3,584
1,444
4,088
2,083
1,106
360,397
557,294
436,020
469,563
264, 115
360,397
523,745
422,412
452,996
258,723
360,397
523,577
419,691
449, 162
257,476
168
2,721
3,834
1,248
616
3,462
5,721
2,918
32,933
10,146
10,846
2,474
765,552
765,552
204,026
359,008
193,650
612,638
757,690
203,436
356,618
193,650
608,623
7,862
590
2,390
1,663
3,505
5,049
4,015
42,654
293,346
292,675
155,498
362,593
244,368
256,819
289, 158
152,075
286,202
237, 105
256,819
288,335
151,822
283,611
233,973
823
253
2,591
3,130
1,437
1,462
65,375
7,263
190,422
373,850
275,227
53,810
152,694
147,670
364,920
272,587
53,754
145,321
147,441
361,999
271,826
44,456
138,879
229
2,921
761
9,298
6,442
253,705
472,419
35,295
302,645
239,075
247,537
467,434
34,823
285,835
239,075
244,223
448,658
3,314
18,776
642
2,194
522
1,686,194
470,360
68,256
183,137
1,601,670
457,956
39,383
171,760
1,598,467
454,335
39,383
156,007
15, 753
373, 153
285,146
149,453
241,098
365,984
280,592
148,953
240,896
358,256
277,897
148,080
240,291
7,728
2,695
873
605
168,278
502,421
308,925
206,705
161,754
441,782
288,365
206,173
161, 164
590
1,082
362,513
193,650
658,325
J..
Receipts
in error.i
(663,461
627,683
519,399
392,362
592,823
210, 738
Va
Hoboken, N.
For meeting
governmental
34, 181
'
283,641
238,553
440,700
287,735
206,169
3,203
3,621
23,636
6,797
472
16,810
73,539
'i6,'275
630
4
96
'566
202
52,164
5,982
532
6,524
8,475
14,578
interest received from and paid to public.
Subsequently corrected by refimd payments, together with accrued
For details, see Tables 14 and 15.
' For details, see Table 13.
* For details, see Table 16.
« For details, see Table 17.
>
2
service
enterIjriSBS.*
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
258
Table 12.— RECEIPTS
[For a
list
FROM COMMERCIAL REVENUES:
of tlie cities arranged alphabetically
GROUP
IV.—CITIES
by states, with
CLASSIFIED
Total
City
from
commercial
receipts
Dumber.
Pa
Spokane, Wash.
Altoona,
Lancaster, Pa...
Birmingham, Ala.
Bayonne, N. J
South Bend, Ind .
100
101
Butte, Mont
102
103
104
105
106
McKeesport, Pa
Binghamton, N. Y.
Johnstown, Pa
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
assigned to each, see page 127.]
30,000
TO
50,000
Receipts from departments, ofSces, enterfunds,
accounts.
prises,
and
revenues.
Saginaw, Mich..
Lincoln, Nebr...
111
number
BY FAYEB.
Receipts from public.
Total.
107
108
109
110
the
HAVING A POPULATION OF
1907— Continued.
Pawtucket, R. I
.
Dubuque, Iowa
Sioux City, Iowa. .
Ga
Augusta,
Mobile, Ala
Topeka, Eans
Springfield, Ohio.
Allentown, Pa
East
St. Louis, 111.
Wheeling, W. Va.
Montgomery, Ala.
Passaic,
.
N.J
Davenport, Iowa.
.
AtlanticCity, N. J.
Little Rock, Ark...
Bay City, Mich
York, Pa
Maiden, Mass
Springfield, 111.
Quincy, ni
Canton, Ohio..
Superior, Wis..
Chester,
Pa
Mass
South Omaha, Nebr.
$2,610
28,298
265
476
S2,679
6,441
4,420
777
1,545
311,013
323,081
270,849
131,325
345,351
281,013
309,317
270,849
131,325
275,343
279,981
305,128
269,366
131,128
275,343
1,032
4,189
1,483
197
30,000
1,005
12,769
16,953
53,055
150,037
170,460
16,126
107,778
120,431
146,968
170,460
10,999
107,778
119,593
146,901
169,754
10,549
107,592
119,487
67
706
450
186
106
799
217,193
182,657
211,764
174,094
118,770
195,579
179,614
194,179
172,520
117,228
194,984
178,594
192,924
171,114
117,223
506
1,020
1,256
1,406
5
21,614
3,043
17,585
123,634
296,999
166,770
82,661
350,123
123,634
259,868
160,470
82,483
350,123
123,229
259,330
156,734
81,676
340,741
405
538
3,736
807
9,382
382,287
69,989
180,623
21,074
240,502
358,209
52,981
165,435
18,615
234,081
346,963
52,620
153,974
18,423
230,167
11,246
361
1,461
297,398
47,481
147,336
131,390
22,980
266,505
47,481
144,032
131,390
19,961
266,314
47,481
136,135
131,382
19,893
232,992
30,298
87,962
322,629
381,772
190,586
30,298
87,962
320,804
301,237
190,228
28,301
87,344
319,936
294,762
358
1,997
618
868
6,476
199,570
461,267
144,641
99,484
128,669
189,724
393,418
144,541
97,343
128,669
188,682
393,045
143,680
96,717
128,471
1,042
373
861
30,407
45,511
247,425
173,029
36,327
30,407
44,919
213,069
172,294
31,027
30,407
44,907
209,088
172,294
30,785
200,949
154,365
140,707
40,027
174,335
178,644
118,219
126,621
40,027
140,468
178,096
115,394
126,423
38,527
140,458
548
2,825
198
1,500
49,695
89,649
686,176
49,392
31,959
88,982
682,176
46,072
31,944
87,850
677,986
46,072
15
1,132
66,620
267,515
375,373
149,727
196,524
89,158
119,737
185,165
137
138
139
140
141
Knox ville, Tenn
142
143
144
145
146
Kalamazoo, Mich.
Woonsocket, R. I-.
Fitohburg, Mass. .
147
148
149
ISO
Macon, Ga
151
152
153
154
West Hoboken, N.
Everett, Mass
273,572
414,789
162,661
155
166
157
158
Taunton, Mass
Newport, Ky
La Crosse, Wis...
Fort Worth, Tex.
204,557
89,158
122,144
206,363
Wichita, Kans
Rocktord, HI
Elmira,N.Y
Galveston, Tex
New Britain, Conn.
Chattanooga, Teim.
Racine, Wis
Auburn, N.
Y
Joliet, 111
Oklahoma City, Okla
Oshkosh, Wis
Sacramento, Cal
Pueblo, Colo
.
Interest
transfer.
163
216
386
847
Haverhill, Mass...
Jacksonville, Fla.
Mo
Service
transfer.
»257,870
194,249
155,299
777,942
141,538
132
133
134
135
136
Joplin,
in error.i
S2S7,933
194,465
155,685
778,789
141,538
Chelsea,
Newton, Mass
Receipts
costs
1263,222
229,204
160,370
779,566
143,559
127
128
129
130
131
Newcastle, Pa
Salem, Mass
For meeting
governmental
J..
1,574
1,642
37,131
6,300.
178
24,078
17,008
25,188
92-
1,237
191
30,893
7,897
8
68
54
1,692
67,849
2,141
242
127
838
3,914
12
3,981
2,270
"5,'
26,796
735
5,300
18,188
23,879
196
33,427
4,190
7,500
667
4,000
66,620
266,448
374,696
149,280
1,067
677
447
6,067
39,416
2,694
195,728
88,493
119,374
183,684
796
665
363
1,481
3,581
2,659
5,184
IN
1907.
GENERAL TABLES.
Table 13.—RECEIPTS
[Cities
259
PROM REVENUES OF MUNICIPAL SERVICE ENTERPRISES, WITH VALU^OP PLANT AT CLOSE
OP YEAR, AND COSTS OP SERVICES RENDERED: 1907.'
having no mvmicipal service enterprises are omitted from this table.
For a list of the
see page 127.]
cities
arranged alphabetically
by
states,
with the number assigned to each,
COSTS OP SERVICES KENDEBED.
Expenses of operation.
From deCITY,
AND KIND OP ENTEKFEISE.
from
revenues of
municipal
service
enterprises.
Grand
Group
Group
total..
I-.
II.-
GroupIV.
GROUP
I.— CITIES
Waterworks shops
St. Louis,
Mo.:
Industrial school bakery
Boston, Mass.:
Printing department
Pittsburg, Pa.:
Electric light systems
Asphalt repair plant
New Orleans, La.:
Asphalt plant
partments,
ofhces.
Value
of year.
meeting
govern-
mental
of
plant at close
funds, and
accounts
Interest
Total costs
of services.
Services,
materials,
and
on present
Depreciation (esti-
value of
system."
mated).2
costs.
(service
transfers).
$2,118,313
$37, 199
$2,081,114
$10,187,095
$3,154,565
$2,063,041
$703,475
$388,049
1,677,291
232,816
208,206
34,333
1,995
871
1,642,958
230,821
207,335
8,347,399
1,274,535
2,549,460
344,961
260, 144
1,644,256
222,877
195, 908
584,204
80,537
38,734
321,000
41,547
25,502
'
HAVING A POPULATION OF
New York, N.Y.:
High pressure water system.
Chicago, ni.:
Electric light systems
From
public lor
Total receipts
$2,026
300,000
565, 161
OR OVER IN
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
260
Table 14
[For a
CLASSmEp BY PAYER.
Receipts from public.
Total
City
receipts
num-
from departmental
ber.
total
Chicago, 111 .. ...^
Philadelphia, Pa.
St. Louis, Mo
Boston, Mass
Baltimore,
Md
Pittsburg, Pa
Cleveland, Ohio..
Buflalo,N.Y
San Francisco, Cal
Detroit, Mich
Cinoitmati, Ohio.
Milwaukee, Wis. .
New
Orleans, La..
Washington, D. C.
BY OBJECT
FOB WHICH RECEIVED.
from deoffices,
For
meeting
Receipts
governmen- in error.i
enterprises,
Fees.
Charges.
Sales.
(service
transfers).
114,343,631
$14,297,396
$46,235
$1,310,335
$5,001,440
$8,061,380
$919, 570
10,481,965
2,326,873
1,398,786
1,446,363
9,648,326
2,000,494
1,362,196
1,332,615
9,617,085
1,998,440
1,360,880
1,320,991
31,241
2,054
1,316
11,624
833,629
326,379
36, 589
113, 738
4,227,269
454, 467
165, 469
154,245
4,638,081
1,417,901
968, 464
1,136,934
608,460
172,927
71,752
66,431
I,— CITIES
Outlays.
lunds, and
accounts
$15,663,966
GROUP
J^ewYork.N. Y..
CLASSIFIED
BY SOURCE.
by states,
Receipts
tal costs.
Grand
of the cities arranged alphabetically
partments,
Total.
Group I
Group II
Group III
Group IV
CLASSIFIED
list
RECEIPTS PROM
HAVING A POPULATION OF
300,000
OR OVER IN
$1,436,880
2,071,200
1,340,683
460,767
1,093,631
$1, 434, 601
1,601,449
1,338,807
460,688
1,030,742
$1,430,345
1,687,614
1,337,807
'
460,588
1,030,742
$4,256
13,836
1,000
206,689
432,371
1,076,404
467,877
469,014
177,566
374,018
890, 188
466, 267
467,041
177,448
373,869
883, 634
465,264
462,966
108
159
6,554
3
4,075
58,363
186,216
2,610
1,973
273, 691
467,180
447, 682
209, 164
446, 508
209, 154
1,174
9,498
209, 154
113,748
231,370
415,087
104,926
231,220
416,087
104,908
231,161
415,087
64, 630
114,894
38,535
146,937
105,832
$2,279
469, 751
1,776
179
62,889
$701,638
1,296,681
616,899
316, 143
125, 789
29, 133
8,822
160
92,948
52,802
253,350
$192,491
1907.
$1,671,576
$13,288,113
$2,365,853
155
281, 578
193, 100
88,743
9,157,002
1,964,119
1,227,603
949,389
1,324,953
372,754
171, 182
496,964
1, 108,
GENERAL TABLES.
DEPARTMENTAL SERVICES:
261
1907.
with the number assigned to each, see page 127.]
CLASSIFIED BT DEPARTMENTS, OFFICES,
AND
ACCOXJNTS.
1
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
262
Table 14.— RECEIPTS
[For a
GEOUP ni.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF
CLASSIFIED
Total
City
receipts
num-
from de-
ber.
partmental
Receipts from public.
Total.
For
meeting
governmental costs.
Cambridge, Mass
Albany, N.Y
{67,040
8,541
43,560
43,526
7,266
S64,193
8,541
43,550
42,248
7,266
$64,072
8,541
43,525
42,248
7,266
19,675
18,116
14,626
15, 162
38,354
19,676
18,116
14,626
15,162
38,354
19,676
18,116
14,626
15, 162
38,354
3,898
127,420
88,315
86,999
12,294
3,898
127,181
87,009
84,831
12,232
6,966
25,860
54, 174
27,772
21,611
24,847
51,461
27,772
21,611
6,931
24,847
61,461
27,772
21,611
51,969
13,445
36,039
12,313
16,442
51,969
13,445
36,239
12,313
9,179
61,969
13,446
35,239
12,313
9,179
Manchester,
.
Schenectady, N. Y..
EvansvUle, md
San Antonio, Tex
EUzabeth, N. I
11,411
7,243
6,514
16,900
12,686
9,327
7,243
6,614
16,900
12,686
Waterbury Conn
Salt Lake City, Utah
11,963
S1,S61
12,108
10,105
33,900
Hartford, Conn
Lowell, Mass
Beading,
Pa
Trenton.N. J
Bridgeport,
Coim
. . .
Wilmington, Del
Camden, N. J
Des Moines, Iowa
Kansas City, Kans...
Lynn, Mass
New
Bedford, Mass.
Springfield,
Troy,
N.Y
Mass
Oakland, Cal
Lawrence, Mass
Somerville, Mass
Savannah, Ga
Dniuth, Minn
Norfolk,
Va
Hoboken, N.J
Peoria,
111
Yonkers,N.
Y
Utioa,N.Y
N H
.
Wilkes-Barre,
Erie,
Pa
....
Pa
Houston, Tex
Tacoma, Wash
81
Harrisburg,
59,191
11,145
34,494
31,566
Pa
C
Charleston, S.
Portland, Me
Youngstown, Ohio.
Dallas,
Tex
Terre Haute, Ind
Fort Wayne, Ind
Akron, Ohio
Holyoke, Mass
Brockton, Mass
Covington, Ky
.
7,513
39,640
9,548
4,446
35,791
16,825
108,645
4,318
BY PAYER.
3,898
127, 181
87,009
84,746
12,232
50,000
TO
100,000
list of
IN
FROM DEPARTMENTAL
the cities arranged alphabetically
1907.
by states,
GENERAL TABLES.
263
SERVICES: 1907—Continued.
with the nun^er assigned to each, see page 127.]
GROUP
III.—CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
CLASSIFIED BY DEPAKTMENTS, OFFICES,
50,000
TO
100,000
AND ACCOUNTS.
IN
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
264
Table 14.— RECEIPTS
[For a
GROUP
IV.-CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
CLASSIFIED
Total
Receipts from public.
receipts
from de-
from departmental
partments,
Total.
For
Receipts
meeting
governmen- in error.'
97
9S
99
Biimingham, Ala.
Bayoime, N. J
South Bend, Ind..
103, 902
Mont
100
101
Butte,
102
103
104
105
106
McKeesport, Pa
Binghataton, N. Y.
Johnstowu, Pa
107
108
109
110
111
Augusta, Ga
112
Dubuque, Iowa
Sioux City, Iowa..
Mobile, Ala
Topeka, Kans
Springfield, Ohio..
Alleutown,
Pa
East St. Louis, 111.
Wheeling,
Va..
W
113
114
115
Montgomery, Ala.
116
Davenport, Iowa.
117
118
119
120
Atlantic City, N. J
Little Rook, Ark...
121
Maiden, Mass
122
123
124
126
126
Passaic,
N
J
Bay City, Mich
York, Pa
Springfield, 111.
Quincy, 111
Canton, Ohio..
Superior, Wis .
Chester, Pa
Mass
South Omaha, Nebr.
127
1?8
129
130
131
Chelsea,
132
133
134
135
136
Haverhill,
Jacksonville, Fla.
Joplin,
Wichita, Kans..'.
137
138
139
140
Knoxville,
Elmira, N.
Galveston,
New Britain,
141
Chattanooga, Tenn.
142
143
144
Kalamazoo, Mich.
Woonsocket, R. I.
Fitchburg, Mass.
145
146
Racine,
147
14S
149
150
Macon, Ga
151
152
153
154
WestHoboken, N.
155
156
157
158
Taunton, Mass
Newport, Ky
Newcastle, Pa
Salem, Mass
Newton, Mass
Tenn
Y
Tex
Wis
6,500
18, 195
8,283
2,373
6,770
6,500
18, 195
8,283
2,373
6,770
6,500
17,858
8,283
2,373
6,762
49,641
6,603
15,607
18,027
2,431
15,607
18,027
2,431
23,370
3,460
15,607
18,027
2,426
16,435
6,509
21,491
5,803
36,756
16,435
1,679
15,191
5,803
36,756
16,435
1,679
15,186
5,803
27,374
163,430
12, 742
3,318
4,095
35,241
163,430
8,617
3,318
4,095
35, 214
163,430
8,617
3,318
4,095
35, 172
6.821
2,859
3,702
3,279
3,873
6,461
2,859
3,702
3,279
3,873
6,461
2,859
3,650
3,271
3,873
27, 921
25,525
1,910
8,967
190, 728
87,958
25,525
1,458
8,957
190,538
87,958
34,853
25,365
3,633
4,354
19,939
34,853
25,365
3,633
4,364
19,939
14,725
3,636
48,761
20,248
30,087
14,725
3,636
14, 725
19,898
24,787
3,636
754
19,898
24,695
15,967
15,945
15,181
21,886
5,314
11,224
22
22,082
5,314
11,224
15,945
15,181
21,886
5,314
11,224
16,506
1,683
58,372
3,044
9,006
1,016
54,372
3,044
9,006
1,014
54,372
-3,044
7,500
667
4,000
1,464
9,546
7,419
13,944
1,464
3,489
5,919
12,641
1,464
3,489
5,919
12,641
6,057
1,500
1,303
30,092
2,215
2,946
19,206
29, 176
29, 168
916
2,215
2,946
19,206
2,970
2,970
33,652
3,633
6,495
19,939
111
Auburn, N.
,9,238
2,783
6,570
15,174
35. 152
Mo
Rockford,
Coim.
15, 181
Y
Joliet, lU...
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Oshkosh, Wis
Sacramento, Cal
Pueblo, Colo
Everett, Mass
. .
La Crosse, wis
Fort Worth, Tex..
San Juan, P.
R
J.
$1,056
300
73,877
7,557
2,783
6,570
16,174
1,910
8,957
190,728
91,814
CLASSIFIED BY OBJECT
FOR WHICH RECEIVED.
3,460
48, 761
$64
25
676
30,000
1,006
$7,110
1,461
3,176
6,^24
798
22,285
1,439
1,981
6,932
18,902
3,043
3,830
6,300
4,125
27
360
452
190
3,856
299
8,287
92
350
5,300
$16,187
7,636
2,664
24,336
128
73,487
7,290
670
4,374
5,197
483
3,489
11,999
6,466
1,248
4,377
20
6,402
1,649
235
40,539
6,083
7,106
13,446
1,310
2,686
910
2,700
3,250
2,213
13,665
4,166
12,943
1,766
22,690
5,293
1,671
1,005
580
1,247
151,643
10,621
790
2,371
30,312
4,624
663
1,790
583
1,342
877
669
337
530
2,511
1,731
381
1,994
2,146
2,700
25,289
1,174
3,321
184,301
86,359
1,271
201
877
10,362
29,151
32,064
3,129
5,192
8,878
1,310
1,203
83
6,219
1,185
12,712
924
47, 792
3,062
27,003
3,996
3,925
1,551
1,926
3,166
10,228
3,943
17,617
1,423
6,366
2,461
4,817
2,289
48,
'
Expenses.
Outlays..
$1,093
1,464
623
5,987
657
$24,475
6,693
7,074
$4,250
1,481
91,802
9,238
2,783
6,570
15,174
Rents.
accounts
73,902
8,233
2,783
6,570
15,174
.
Pawtucket, R. I.
by states,
funds, and
$23,419
10,643
7,074
37,087
2,596
S23.
Charges.
enterprises,
419
10,643
7,074
37, 151
2,596
2,596
the cities arranged alphabetically
1907.
(service
transfers).
tal costs.
37. 151
IN
offices,
services.
S24,475
10,943
7,074
list of
50,000
Receipts
City
Saginaw, Mich..
Lincoln, Nebr...
Altoona, Pa
Spokane, Wash.
Lancaster, Fa. .
TO
CLASSIFIED BY SOURCE.
BY PAYER.
number.
30,000
FROM DEPARTMENTAL
106
2,830
479
14,678
622
51,096
$85
392
611
404
1,013
16
1,442
726
232
831
132
754
3,320
18, 195
2,002
400
1,149
638
325
42,641
6,503
9,432
18,027
1,138
184
787
10,523
3,060
5,509
21,251
6,803
21,532
6,257
160
1,523
839
3,682
13,430
10,683
3,318
4,095
35,241
584
1,131
1,525
6,821
2,859
3,702
3,279
3,873
917
950
2,394
661
150
5,209
1,330
237
300
305
756
50
1,200
198
3,346
1,636
1,000
1,387
11
60
4
2,596
318
548
538
265
703
355
296
2,645
1,755
125
7,779
2,373
6,770
150,000
67,213
6,177
1,893
90
966
321
288
12
114
150
15
1,424
.7,960
850
2,285
12,849
2,215
2,946
19,206
2,874
540
276
430
20,615
1,537
1,364
17,574
153
60
680
2,970
204
1,500
911
1,227
240
"16,224'
150,000
2,069
27,921
1,910
8,957
40,728
24,601
5,504
15,967
15,181
22,082
5,314
5,720
43,276
6,057
10,784
355
13,375
4,372
6,450
78
561
6,175
"i,'293
10,187
3,636
48,761
20,248
25,715
1,743
1,136
1,021
1,875
1,507
667
4,434
66
504
35,152
33,652
3,633
6,495
19,939
3,343
1,577
243
422
310
1,193
1,774
12, 100
6,500
4,538
524
9,774
222
12
Subsequently corrected by refund payments.
493
37, 151
16,506
1,683
15,096
3,044
1,464
3,489
7,419
13,944
30,092
2,215
2,946
8,422
GENERAL TABLES.
265
SERVICES 1907— Continued
:
with the
number
assigned to each, see page 127.]
GROUP
IV.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
CLASSIFIED
BY DEPARTMENTS,
OFFICES,
30,000
TO
AND ACCOUNTS.
50,000
IN
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
266
Table 14
RECEIPTS PROM DEPARTMENTAL
[For a
CLASSIFIED
III.
BY DEPAETMENTS,
OFFICES,
list
of the cities arranged alpbabetlcally
IV.— Highways.
Snow
Sanitation.
and
Health
conservation.
Sewers
and sewage dis-
General
super-
Total.
Refuse
Street
cleaning.
disposal.
Streets.
vision.
Grand total...
11,431,877
$276,611
$567, 696
$127,258
$460, 312
721,392
192, 110
235, 684
175, 776
144,422
86,299
lOfi, 182
230, 793
95,608
23,291
3,987
4,372
305,586
49,039
86,302
19,385
33,481
39,213
28, 141
282, 691
GROUP
NewYork.N. Y....
Chicago,
111
PMladelphia, Pa
St. Louis,
Mo
Boston, Mass
Baltimore, Md
Pittsburg, Pa
Cleyeland, Ohio
N.Y
Buffalo,
San Francisco, Gal...
Detroit, Mich
Cincinnati, Ohio
Milwaukee, Wis
New Orleans, La
Washington, D. C.
..
NewarkjN. J
Minneapolis, Minn...
Jersey City^. J
Ky
Louisville,
Indianapolis,
Ind
Minn
Providence, R.I
St. Paul,
Rochester, N.
Y
Kansas City, Mo
Toledo, Oluo
Denver, Colo
Columbus, Ohio
Los Angeles, Cal
Worcester, Mass
Seattle,
Wash
Memphis, Tenn
Omaha, Nebr
New Haven, Conn...
Scranton, Pa
Syracuse, N.
St. Joseph,
Y
Mo
Paterson, N.J
Portland, Oreg
Atlanta, Ga
Richmond, Va
Fall River, Mass
Nashville, Tenn
Dayton, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.
I.— CITIES
$172,025
117,638
74,090
3,311
35,532
$55,905
31,965
22,327
2,681
5,697
18,559
2,017
188,745
30,930
925
18,015
2,017
546
2,179
925
8,606
400
11,168
41,064
16,382
617
400
576
31,484
442
I
I
I
ice
removal
walks.
Bridges
other
than toll.
street
sprinkling.
Side-
posal.
Group I
Group II
Group III
Group IV
states,
AND ACCOUNTS— Continued.
—Health conservation and sanitation.
Total.
by
and
$3,842,943
$11,871
$2,220,728
$184,298
$72,156
$20,642
2,444,112
583,788
370,633
444,410
1,799
3,944
3,812
2,116
1,135,746
459,065
297,621
328,296
111,992
40,054
17,912
14,340
44,766
10,191
7,011
10,198
7,627
2,855
6,471
HAVING A POPULATION OF
300,000
OR OVER IN
1907.
All other.
$1,333,448
192
67,679
37,806
1, 142,
85, 771
GENERAL TABLES.
SERVICES: 1907—Continued.
with the numlier assigned to each, see page 127.]
CLASSDTED BY DEPARTMENTS, OmCES, AND ACCOTJNTB— continued.
267
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
268
Table 14=.— RECEIPTS
[For a
GROUP
III.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
50,000
TO
100,000
list of
IN
FROM DEPARTMENTAL
the cities arranged alphabetically
1907.
by states,
GENERAL TABLES.
269
SERVICES: 1907—Continued.
with the number assigned to each, see page 127.]
GROUP
III.— CITIES
CLASSIFIED
HAVING A POPULATION OF
BY DEPAJBTMENTS,
OFFICES,
50,000
TO
100,000
AND ACCOUNTS—Continued.
IN
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
270
Table 14
RECEIPTS FROM DEPARTMENTAL
[For a
GROUP
IV.—CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
30.000
TO
50,000
list of
IN
the
1907.
cities
arranged alphabetically by
states,
GENERAL TABLES.
271
SERVICES: 1907—Continued.
with the
number assigned
to each, see
page
127.]
GROUP
IV.—CITIES
CLASSIFIED
HAVING A POPULATION OP
BY DEPABTMENTS,
OITICES,
30,000
TO
50,000
AND ACCOUNTS— Continued.
IN
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
272
Table 15.— RECEIPTS
[For a
list of tlie cities
FROM SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS AND PRIVILEGES:
arranged alphabetically by states,
with the number assigned
1907.
to each, see page 127.]
RECEIPTS FROM PRIVILEGES.
RECEIPTS FROM SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS.
Classified
City
by payer.
Receipts from public.
nunt
Receipts
For expenses.
by object.
For outlays.
Irom en-
bet.
Total.
Total.
govern-
mental
Receipts
in error.
Grand
total
$47, 562, 023
21,691,720
16, 928, 504
5,721,118
4,210,681
$47,516,695
21,658,631
15,927,267
5,720,294
4,210,513
GROUP
$47,200,639
$315,956
21,648,624
15,767,912
5,681,394
4,202,709
109, 907
159, 346
38,900
7,804
I.— CITIES
Original
accounts
assess-
(service
ments.
transfers).
costs.
Group I. ..
Group II..
Group III.
Group IV..
Penal-
offices,'
and
Public
Total.
terprises,
For
meeting
1
Classified
$35,428
$1,309,301
33, 189
342,386
1,247
824
168
613, 487
ties and
collectors'
fees.
assess-
ments.
300,000
4,257
1,084
ties and
collect-
20, 899, 630
445, 447
16,208,613
6,442,198
3, 990, 676
205,320
22,009
23, 585
OR OVER IN
Minor.
ors' fees.
$5,344 $45,541,017 $696,361
256,911
196,517
HAVING A POPULATION OF
Original
service.
Penal-
1907.
2 $5, 455,
8
905
3,716,698
1,165,211
365,001
'
208, 995
'$4,681,358
8
2,967,561
1,169,348
360,876
'203,573
$774,547
8
I
749, 137
5,863
14,125
6,422
8
GENERAL TABLES.
Table 15.— RECEIPTS
[For
Et
list.of
FROM SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS AND PRIVILEGES:
the cities arranged alphabetically
GROUP
273
III.— CITIES
by
states,
1907—Continued.
with the number assigned to each, see page
HAVING A POPULATION OF
50,000
TO
100,000
IN
1907.
127.]
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
274
Table 15.— RECEIPTS
[For a
list
FROM SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS AND PRIVILEGES:
of the cities arranged alphabetically
GROUP
IV.— CITIES
by
states,
1907— Continued.
with the number assigned to each, see page
HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
TO
50,000
IN
1907.
127.]
GENERAL TABLES.
Table 16.— RECEIPTS
[For a
list of
the cities arranged alphabetically
Total gross
City
FROM INTEREST:
hy states, with
Receipts from public.
from divisions, funds,
from
interest.
For meetTotal.
ing govern-
mental
Accrued
and
Interest
receipts
prises
(interest
transfers) .3
and
in error.2
Grand
total
Group I
Group II
Group III
Group IV
$11,191,083
$10,750,274
$440,809
$10,957,138
17,336,161
2,592,143
1,308,929
911,988
8,276,892
1,418,322
893,578
602,291
8,105,318
1,281,979
812, 180
550,797
171,574
136,343
81, 398
51,494
9,058,269
1,173,821
415,351
309, 697
NewYorlc.N. Y..
$6,389,483
1,575,597
3,375,993
358,557
1,452,047
111
Pliiladelphla, Pa.
St. Louis,
Mo
Boston, Mass
Baltimore, Md
Pittsburg, Pa
Cleveland,' Ohio.
$347,475
1,546,841
$347, 476
1, 476, 140
2,958,515
337, 125
333, 465
285,705
285,233
217, 434
204, 577
217,434
190,217
503, 678
184, 536
3,016
.
N.Y
Detroit, Mich
Cincinnati, Ohio.
Milwaukee, Wis.
New Orleans, La.
Washington, D. 0.
.
257,614
3,016
509,759
188, 905
3,016
205,759
1,652,748
88,870
90,998
8,071
1,376,463
87,217
67, 412
7,221
113, 981
GROUP
Newark, N. J
Mirmeapolis, Minn
Jersey City, N. J
.
Ky
Louisville,
Indianapolis, Ind.
St. Paul,
.
Minn
Providence, R. I
Rochester, N.
Kansas City, Mo
Toledo, Ohio
Y
Denver, Colo
Columbus, Ohio
Los Angeles Cal
Worcester, Mass
,
Seattle,
Wash
Memphis, Term
Omaha, Nebr
New Haven, Conn
Scranton, Pa
Syracuse, N.
St. Joseph,
.
Y
Mo
Atlanta,
Ga
Richmond, Va
Fall River, Mass
Nashville, Tenn
Dayton, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich
$207, 516
$66,560
20,424
785
300,000
2,979,440
139,285
1,243,486
381,644
100,641
101, 300
3,016
100,000
TO
$261,918
62,242
146,498
370
1,320
$276, 955
6,478
3,346
13,389
178
17, 101
2,138
134
417
7,579
3,762
21,647
168,878
7,176
20,359
69,995
29, 878
15, 185
4,762
139,422
23
8,742
4,457
30,983
10,250
39,682
62, 190
31, 590
85,203
6,550
21.369
61, 170
18,472
83,757
2,306
19,591
60,988
16,592
77,454
872
10,714
28,058
48,639
8,949
10,171
10,579
27,578
45,464
8,949
90, 159
82, 508
15,509
9,758
43,688
11,610
7,642
40,324
104, 641
147, 127
80,915
8,506
$211,289
687,031
317,321
218, 487
34,621
41,367
104,366
36,137
11,442
78,860
137,111
67,500
48, 670
27
350
,16,919
3,119
126,228
252
52,820
28,298
23,706
4,987
43,668
4,245
1,778
182
1,880
6,303
3,700
18,213
1,020
13, 118
1,446
4,365
19,071
26,460
18,918
3,014
1,640
19,379
4,339
10,792
25,1^1
135
480
3,186
158
757
1,067
2,600
26,069
1,890
59, 691
64,077
10,115
2,602
14,177
2,039
6,419
12,265
6,185
14,745
9,547
89,404
185
14,745
6,306
11,610
7,642
26,330
$753
345
18,082
12,343
14,031
1907.
$10,476
19,654
14, 146
48,742
1,180
7,550
146,727
25,000
146,301
726
15,628
6,005
4,369
6,237
IN
196,054
39,089
28,165
80,916
7,651
3,899
2,116
3,264
$68, 808
132, 574
300,000
132,573
77, 941
50, 654
1907.
47, 133
151, 589
468, 510
7,861
60,690
26,260
44,600
30, 176
10, 171
40,710
125,801
69, 137
OR OVER IN
$6, 414
116,323
46,231
48,706
39,882
44,142
53, 136
753
11,007
$23,713
93,604
12,612
129,657
9,083
131,608
46,254
57,448
44,339
75, 125
102,424
21,694
24, 603
$15, 990
158, 572
HAVING A POPULATION OF
136,270
185,676
57, 448
169,567
76,377
terprises.5
$419, 640
109,285
1,497,555
9,027
28,297
2,807
98,007
90,989
51,114
39,070
Invest-
ments in
280,363
258, 694
52,251
85, 593
91,778
276,285
1,653
23,586
850
12,050
14,031
deposits.
Accrued
interest on
municipal
original
service enloans.
$676, 901
14,360
6,081
4,369
19,239
98,141
91,406
68,693
42,832
51,239
8,949
69,862
of special
233, 106
701, 386
40,886
267, 019
98,681
79,052
112, 827
29, 125
payments
$468,764
531,085
348, 156
65,397
68,709
$29, 127
99,082
15, 958
143,046
9,261
Deferred
payments
2,572,515
567,348
203, 699
158, 412
14,089,852
1,591,811
•
849,237
544, 062
$6, 178, 194
614, 490
18, 152
Current
$17,074,962 $3,491,974
$6,042,008
28,766
392,232
21,432
1,166,342
$291,045
161,324
162,456
143, 416
10,581
10,
Paterson,N. J
Portland, Oreg
II.— CITIES
BY SOURCE.
ments.
$70,701
26,246
3,660
472
2,452
111,629
1,358,311
75, 167
53,381
7,221
CLASSIFIED
Deferred
HAVING A POPULATION OF
2, 983, 761
748, 619
552, 733
575, 156
Buffalo,
San Francisco, Cal
I.— CITIES
1907.
assigned to each, sec page 127.]
Assets of
invested
funds.*
enter-
$22,148,221
GROUP
Chicago,
number
Receipts
receipts
ber.
the
BY PATER.
CLASSIFIED
num-
275
$34,628
$3,614
2,501
1,183
13,759
895
$9,062
1,313
33,826
417
6,287
1,736
i
16,888
10,651
8,742
4,272
30, 983
12,654
4,245
1,132
32,391
50,765
1,880
6,303
464
3,895
6,910
1,302
3,899
2,116
4,157
$6,000
5,067
1 Interest receipts for meeting governmental costs are the total interest receipts from the public, less the sum of accrued Interest received on the city securities sold to
the public and later repaid and of receipts in error subsequently corrected by refund payinents.
...
j- ^
-^ ^
^
,
.^
, ^i.
,
'Accrued interest received on loans issued to the public by the various divisions of the government of the city; aocnied mterest paid by sinkmg, investment, and
error are given
public trust funds to the public on securities purchased for Investment; and receipts in error subsequently corrected by refund payments. The receipts
m
held by them; accrued interest received by a fund or
"Interest ^nsfers comprise interest received by sinking, investment, and public trust funds on city securities
division of the city govemment on securities sold to another fund or division; and accrued interest received by divtoons of the city government on loans issued to sinking,
column
of
this table, together with "service transfers" which are
last
investment, and public trust funds. This column also includes "accounting transfers" given in the
given separately on page 49.
<Siiiking, investment,
'Amounts shown
and public trust funds.
on cost of plant" (accounting
as "interest
,
transfers).
m
.,1
«
Table
b.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
276
Table 16.— RECEIPTS
(For a
list
ol the cities arranged alphabetically
GROUP
III.—CITIES
Total.
Cambridge, Ma.ss.
Albany, N.Y....
Hartford, Conn...
interest
mental
and receipts
(mterest
oosts.i
in error.2
transfers).^
6,886
10,556
18, 848
4,057
3,799
5,760
10,489
6,196
4,057
6,541
32,532
65,145
26,319
6,814
6,641
32,403
52,454
22,603
5,579
129
2,691
3,716
1,236
32, 933
20,762
12, 449
11,641
10, 123
9,266
12,935
11,933
9,803
10, 123
6,276
451
4,913
451
4,196
20,851
11,231
15, 613
,14,408
20,931
5,163
6,541
65,465
65,291
37,165
9,288
Oakland, Cal
Lawrence, Mass..
Somerville, Mass.
Savaimah, Ga
Duluih, Minn
20, 762
Norfolk, Va....
36, 978
Hoboken, N.J.
Yonkers, N. Y.
Utica, N. Y....
6,993
22,927
24,838
38,962
Manchester, N. H.
Schenectady, N. Y.
22, 189
34, 169
City, Kans..
Springfield,
Troy, N.
Peoria.
Y
Mass
Ill
E vansville,
Jiid
San Antonio, Tex.
Elizabeth, N. J
Waterbury, Conn
Salt
Lake
City, Utah.,
Wilkes-Barre,
Erie,
Pa
Pa
Houston, Tex
Tacoma, Wash..
Harrisburg, Pa..
Charleston, S. C.
Portland, Me
17,498
11,641
10, 123
12,288
Covington,
Ky.
2,933
6,080
9,264
109
19,256
10,762
3,594
66
7,578
3.288
6,148
18.654
7,924
642
472
16,810
2)400
473
20,813
1,479
9,277
10,985
12, 404
18,598
11,377
10,985
14, 660
22,331
61,088
6,074
4,968
7,442
1,062
5,384
7,073
4,654
13,863
10,746
1,672
6,115
2,465
1,762
1,613
10,381
2,302
3,896
6,947
7,189
11,175
56,157
9,578
16,567
2,361
6,930
9,273
16,567
1,488
6,880
305
6,897
13,819
18,553
588
1,068
591
4
6,485
14,887
19, 144
4
4
20
3,033
14, 176
14,222
18, 462
522
132
3,621
15, 615
433
4,066
6,624
8,475
14,578
13, 180
20, 432
192
1,652
3,809
1,470
17,427
3,228
7,922
7,827
267
9,630
7,803
294
1,838
2,979
8,030
'i6,'877'
4,186
733
718
98
2,591
3,040
450
9,264
857
4,969
121
873
50
3,401
1,408
3,852
2,080
1,106
8,261
16,428
8,930
2,640
56
7,373
229
450
5,049
$522
206
8.40
2,056
8,653
8,026
9,430
10,146
10,846
2,474
terprises.'
'26,'294'
4,219
718
115
2,591
3,040
6,079
10,810
11, 175
71,772
13,009
23,362
3,490
1,176
$161
18,391
InvestAccrued
ments in
interest on
municipal
original
service enloans.
749
451
17,064
23,214
29,773
33, 722
$9, 708
11,631
35, 794
20,630
7,369
1,480
14,869
2,361
7,132
of taxes.
36,527
2,080
1,961
11, 016
2,979
23,918
7,369
2,122
14,879
6,588
16,651
of special
12,487
2,498
1,800
4,198
5,967
30,066
7,369
2,594
31,689
6,588
'83,149
payments
448
5,203
200
5,631
3,342
7,827
616
1,838
3,594
939
12,601
13,
21, 121
Akron, Ohio
Holyoke, Mass..
Brockton, Mass.
35,022
16, 912
Deferred
2,251
1,892
6,198
3,625
5,632
24, 789
954
4,619
6,019
Tex
Terre Haute, Ind. ..
Fort Wayne, Ind...
13,822
BY SOURCE.
payments
272
45,173
68,519
19,236
4,193
5,761
25,239
954
13,883
6,128
Youngstown, Ohio.
Dallas,
20, 966
127.]
ments.
46,792
20,234
67
20,306
014
8,294
New Bedford, Mass.
deposits.
34,978
19, 108
19,
Lynn, Mass
Accrued
Current
3,401
1,408
3,862
2,083
1,106
53,992
37,402
14, 408
36,843
5,163
46,116
60,773
1,887
page
1907.
Deferred
Assets of
invested
funds. 4
$3,130
14, 104
67, 155
Des Moines,Iowa..
IN
$99,241
61,596
57,086
40,027
6,869
$92,727
67,831
46, 978
61,456
2,727
Camden N.J
to each, see
100,000
$18,304
26,466
22,388
2,356
6,148
S94, 448
94,297
69,366
63,811
8,875
Lowell, Mass
Reading, Pa-
TO
$1,721
676
862
683
840
J112, 752
Trenton, N. J
Bridgeport, Conn.
Wilmington, Del.
87
ing govern-
and enterpvises
For meet-
50,000
CLASSIFIED
from divisions, funds,
from
interest.
number assigned
Receipts
receipts
ber.
the
1907— Continued.
BY PAYEK.
Receipts from public.
Total gross
num-
49
by states, with
HAVING A POPULATION OF
CLASSIFIED
City
FROM INTEREST:
220
6,467
1,005
3,686
iSj'eis'
323
789
2,017
4,909
11,565
278
326
1,377
591
4
1 Interest receipts for meeting governmental costs are the total interest receipts from the public, less the sum of accrued interest received on thecity securities sold to
the public and later repaid and of receipts in error subsequently corrected by refund payments.
^ Accrued interest received on loans issued to the public by the various divisions of the government of the city; accrued interest paid by sinking, investment, and
public trust funds to the public on securities purchased for investment; and receipts in error subsequently corrected by refund payments. The receipts in error are given
separately on page 48.
8 Interest transfers comprise interest received by sinking, investment, and public trust funds on city securities held by them; accrued interest received by a fund or
division of the city government on securities sold to another fund or division; and accrued interest received by divisions of the city government on loans issued to sinking,
investment, and public trust funds. This column also Includes "accounting transfers" given in the last column of this table, together with "service transfers" which are
given separately on page 49.
* Sinking, investxnent, and public trust funds.
'Amountsshown as "interest on cost ofplant" (accounting transfers). Table 6.
GENERAL TABLES.
Table 16.—RECEIPTS
[For a
list of
FROM INTEREST:
the cities arranged alphabetioaUy
GROUP
IV.-CITIES
by states, with
the
277
1907— Continued.
number assigned
HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
TO
to each, see page 127.]
60,000
IN
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
278
Table 17.— RECEIPTS
[For a
CLASSIFIED
Total
re-
ber.
For meeting
govern-
Total.
mental
Grand
total
CLASSIFIED
costs.
ces, enterprises, funds,
Receipts
in error."
S65,197,327
$64,929,933
$267,394
$1,079,955
40,651,685
11,818,180
8,058,601
5,748,916
40,298,923
11,606,367
7,751,704
40,089,794
11,577,452
209, 129
28, 915
352, 662
7, 739,
137
5, 523,
550
12,567
16,783
5, 540,
I.-CITIES
333
HAVING A POPULATION OF
211,813
306,897
208,583
Rates.
$45, 173
$1,932,946
665
7,188
8,429
14,891
760,226
504,403
380,416
287,901
7,088,393
315,834
93.934
76,775
30^625,«26
10,600,638
7,296,751
6,162,413
$5,773,863
114,893
196
$118,842
89,404
160,346
27,058
79, 878
409,481
$10,606,469
4,602,189
3,876,856
1,911,404
2,561,816
2,937
2,448
62,247
1,300
96,389
92,632
125,282
36,760
71,939
1,128,622
1,417,946
1,119,141
863,254
69, 187
1,360
38,702
607,347
978,508
683,293
14,
OR OVER IN
300,000
$17, 732, 685
4,822,962
4,166,405
2,107,031
3,359,582
$17,662,526
4,769,289
4,168,840
2,008,307
3,359,267
$17,650,594
4,619,102
4,168,091
2,098,307
3,368,067
$11,931
150, 187
749
1,210
$70,060
53,673
7,666
8,, 724
315
1,291,441
1,560,228
1,329,789
926, 193
1,287,093
1,553,750
1,290,289
823,646
1,283,749
1,551,624
1,255,054
823,485
3,344
2,126
35,235
60
4,348
6,478
39,500
101,648
900, 014
1,060,069
647,866
210, 681
547, 739
894, 178
1,060,069
693, 351
210,681
547, 739
1,060,069
593,272
208,704
546,298
N.Y
Rents.
Charges.
Fees.
(service
transfers).
Chicago, 111
Philadelphia, Pa.
St. Louis, Mo
Boston, Mass
Buffalo,
BY SOURCE.
and accounts
New York, N.Y.
Baltimore, Md
Pittsburg, Pa
Cleveland, Ohio
states.
Receipts
$66,277,282
GROUP
by
from departments, offi-
prises.
Group I
Group H
Group III
Group IV
FROM REVENUES OF
of the cities arranged alphabetically
BY PAYER.
Receipts from public.
ceipts from
revenues of
public service enter-
city
num-
list
I
$7,573,9
$53,576,627
1907.
$54
4,096
2,438
72, 332
116, 134
San Francisco, Cal
Detroit, Mich
Cincinnati, Ohio...
Milwaukee, Wis. .
New Orleans, La.
Washington, D. C.
GROUP
Newark, N.
J
Minneapolis, Minn.
Jersey City^. J. .
Ky
Louisville,
Indianapolis, Ind.
St. Paul,
Minn.
.
Providence, R. I.
Rochester, N. Y.
Kansas
City,
Mo.
Toledo, Ohio
Denver, Colo
Columbus, Ohio..
Los Angeles, Cal.
Worcester, Mass..
30
Seattle,
Wash
Memphis, Tenn
Omana, Nebr
New Haven, Conn.
Scranton,
Syracuse,
5,836
79
1,977
1,441
'64,'5i5
HAVING A POPULATION OF
$1,124,407
337, 758
1,114,827
600, 589
39,334
$1,116,499
337,768
1,114,827
600, 589
39,334
$1,116,469
369,746
786,738
622,328
827,978
272,500
355,494
355,285
731,190
615,378
819, 349
272,368
26, 487
273, 665
1,036,660
413,420
864,659
26,487
268,369
1,035,405
402,141
776, 065
360,294
443
1,037
731, 190
621, 785
822,236
272,358
337, 192
1,114,607
690,886
39,334
$40
666
220
100,000
TO
$7,!
19,862
7,268
9,501
28,954
300,000
IN
14,252
54,648
643
5,742
35,843
479,981
$294
3,900
9,114
7,829
40
$49,545
60
$1,074,049
18,954
35, 194
288, 184
1,080,626
664,778
4,080
57,433
38,816
28,032
27,849
31,632
19,393
2,126
10,596
33,647
9,649
289,271
716,793
477,566
742,013
203,393
20,104
24,971
4,020
6,383
220,743
975,825
360,023
809,680
1907.
$519
211
1,703
6,407
2,887
96
48
5
1,978
142
25,
3,411
402,
774,
138
5,206
255
11,279
79,694
358,944
443
1,037
356,
2,679
1,360
312,087
312,087
311,695
1,802
256
643,637
328,962
696,468
1,802
256
641,522
328,962
587,839
641,
328,
687,
2,115
233,636
246,806
182,747
213,019
233,400
246,711
182, 747
193,090
233,
246,
182,
191,
6
236
1,095
503
1,332
19,929
264,
1,036,
199, 182
25,320
37,964
42,038
27, 145
7,781
3,437
8,201
443
1,037
348,299
1,976
13,414
1,
61
Pa
N.Y
Mo..
Faterson, N. J..
St. Joseph,
Portland, Oreg.
Atlanta, Ga
40
II.-CITIES
790
Richmond, Va.
Fall River, Mass
Nashville, Term
Dayton, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich.
1
392
4,132
2,362
166
256
121
1,352
Subsequently corrected by refund payments.
1,636
!
;
554,811
87,327
9,043
4,344
1,261
924
18,476
288, 122
17,095
2,682
12,269
26,878
3,277
13,266
26,682
3,675
201,888
230,969
141,101
161,964
557,773
GENERAL TABLES.
PUBLIC SERVICE ENTERPRISES:
279
1907.
with the nuSiber assigned to each, see page 127.]
CLASSiriED BY
SOURCE—Continued
GROUP
GROUP
I.— CITIES
II.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
HAVING A POPULATION OF
300,000
100,000
OR OVER
TO
300,000
IN
IN
1907.
1907,
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
280
Table 17.— RECEIPTS
[For a
GROUP
III.-CITIES
HAVING A POl-ULATION OF
Total re-
number.
list of
IN
the cities arranged alphabetically
by states,
1907.
CLASSIFIED
BY SOUECE.
Receipts
Receipts from public.
ceipts from
revenues of
public service enter-
100,000
BY PAYEB.
CLASSIFIED
City
TO
50,000
FROM REVENUES OF
from departments, ofaFor meeting
prises.
Total.
govern-
mental costs.
ces, enterprises, funds,
Receipts
and accounts
in error.'
(service
Rents.
Fees.
Rates.
transfers).
49
46
47
48
49
Cambridge, Mass.
Albany, N.Y....
Hartford, Conn. .
£0
51
52
53
54
$401,355
365,676
Lowell, Mass
230,999
Reading, Pa
230, 118
230, 118
364,963
269,711
224,876
230,073
Trenton, N.J
Bridgeport, Conn-.
Wilmington, Del..
Camden, N. J.....
Des Moines, Iowa..
206,743
79
214,888
242,340
16,988
206, 743
206,590
79
214,888
242,340
16,988
214,888
242,340
16,988
317,601
253,557
296,817
181,556
317,224
251,401
293,264
178,700
317,224
251,401
293,231
178,700
15,030
141, 455
234, 596
15,030
140,806
233,814
145,138
337,316
15,030
140,805
233,262
145,138
337,316
184,594
224,679
21,130
182,772
184, 594
55
56
Kansas City, Kans.
Lynn, Mass
57
5S
59
New
60
Oakland, Cal
Lawrence, Mass.
Somerville, Mass.
Savannah, Ga
Duluth, Minn
61
62
63
64
$396, 756
$400,818
365,676
269,711
225,480
292, 523
Bedford, Mass.
Sijringfleld,
Troy, N.
65
66
Norfolk,
67
68
Peoria,
Y
Mass
145, 138
379,970
Va
184,594
Hoboken, N.J.
226, 116
21,792
111
Yonkers, N. Y.
Utica,
248, 147
N. Y....
Manchester, N.
3,636
H.
Schenectadjr, N.
Evansville, Ind
Y.
San Antonio, Tex.
Elizabeth, N. J
Waterbury, Conn
Salt Lake City, Utah.
WUkes-Barre, Pa
Erie,
Pa
Houston, Tex
Tacoma, Wash.
Harrisburg, Pa..
Charleston, S. 0.
Portland, Me
Youngstown, Ohio.
Dallas,
Tex
Terre Haute, Ind...
Fort Wayne, Ind.
.
Akron, Ohio
Holyoke, Mass..
Brockton, Mass.
Covington,
Ky.
'
224,574
21,067
182,772
3,636
132,582
128,856
138,861
18,811
68
132, 582
185,536
178,478
1,046
201,461
191,127
185, 516
174,474
1,046
201,461
191,127
185,500
174,442
1,046
201,389
191,127
577,754
213,054
3,989
42,611
504,215
213,054
3,989
42,611
604,215
213,054
3,989
42,611
135,983
209,026
139,983
209,026
135,843
206,959
18, 113
18, 113
18, 113
100,638
100,638
100,083
1,869
400,275
127,006
119, 783
1
604
45
$9,434
2,213
3,309
19,625
5,061
$99
22,812
6,619
126,662
138,100
18,811
400,275
127,006
119,783
$199
4,560
39
4,104
7,704
876
79
1,653
20, 111
377
2,156
3,563
35,897
38,019
7,794
2,8.'i6
1,606
1,496
27
16,780
5,944
8,198
18,99P
650
782
552
42,654
105
63
1,437
662
65,375
14,116
2,887
387
1,263
2,681
151
$377,059
356,083
282,676
200,608
221,337
204,618
2,129
79
156,822
128,856
138,861
18,811
1,865
452,417
130,056
120,315
$637
$4,062
713
13,959
4,970
6,'
213,174
236,456
277,859
212, 590
259,109
171,749
9,771
120,410
228,692
113,769
339,851
156,163
220,225
599
239,667
3,636
24,240
8,560
7,382
9,238
6,567
414
2,194
'i,'2i2
761
72
73,539
5,663
9,236
4,785
18,212
191,013
163,679
25,406
15,632
25
548,569
186,121
10,597
3,765
38
4,790
5,424
5,525
5,486
365
3,511
18
1,921
202
33
491
'
2,068
52,142
3,050
532
Subsequently corrected by refund payments.
142,799
121,115
105,168
430
185,411
147,946
125
18,118
20
4,004
140
2,467
646
4,957
9,244
7,680
10,596
400
1,865
150
1,100
127,919
198,498
84,653
427,855
115,457
113,336
GENERAL TABLES.
281
PUBLIC SERVICE ENTERPRISES: 1907—Continued,
with the
number assigned
to each, see
page
127.]
GROUP
CLASSIFIED
BY SOURCE—continued.
III.-CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
50,000
TO
100,000
IN
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
282
Table 17.— RECEIPTS
GROUP
IV.-CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
CLASSIFIED
Total re-
loer.
[For a
list of
50,000
IN
the cities arranged alphatietically by states,
1907.
CLASSIFIED BY SOURCE.
Receipts
from departments, ofiQ-
revenues of
public serv-
num-
TO
BY PAYER.
Receipts from public.
ceipts from
City
30,000
FROM REVENUES OF
ice enter-
For meeting
prises.
govern-
Total.
Tiental costs.
ces, enterprises, funds,
Receipts
Fees.
Charges.
Rents.
Rates.
and accounts
in error.'
(service
transfers).
Spokane, Wash.
Lancaster, Fa. .
194
Birmingham, Ala..
Bayonne, N. J
South Bend, Ind..
3,525
226,666
82,834
3,526
226, 666
82,834
3,526
226,666
81,467
239,025
222,072
222,072
NeDr
.
Fa
$87,
106,
110,
345,
127,
$1,
Butte,
102
103
104
105
106
McKeesport, Pa
Binghamton, N.
Johnstown, Pa
107
108
109
110
Augusta,
Pawtueket, R.
I..
72,608
120,894
298
56,938
76,642
Y
Dubuque, Iowa
Sioux City, Iowa.
.
Ga
147,044
139, 157
86, 109
81,260
97,236
Mobile, Ala
Topeka, Kans
Springfield, Ohio
Allentown, Fa...
East St, Louis, 111.
Wheeling, W. Va..
Montgomery, Ala..
Passaic,
71,809
71,782
120, 894
120, 601
298
66, 938
74,804
298
56, 762
74,804
144, 332
139, 157
144, 114
138, 137
84,922
81, 260
97,236
84,686
81,234
97, 236
127
127
127
252,228
90,904
250, 950
260, 412
90,904
90,904
476
81,367
$8,296
13,092
1,255
53, 325
404
$242
$71,061
72,928
107,447
291,776
121, 704
284
1,709
1,798
2,440
216,758
74,381
799
27
293
838
218
1,020
236
26
2,712
538
1,278
2,544
1,678
60
370
67,055
113,366
1,608
1,948
50
54,211
70,455
396
764
138,295
108, 137
79,468
70,263
85,684
9,013
545
226,005
83,049
2,446
16,640
12,
5
10,078
127
I'SOO
1,296
1,295
AtlantioCity, N. J.
146, 676
146. 676
146, 676
Little Bock, Ark.
City, Mich
6,200
100,260
6,200
75,072
6,200
75,072
25,188
York, Pa
Maiden, Mass
106,687
105,477
105,254
1,210
122
123
124
125
126
Springfield,
111.,
138, 934
138, 634
138,
300
Quincy, 111
Canton, Ohio.
Superior, Wis..
1,063
1,063
86, 811
86, 767
634
1,063
80,830
690
690
690
127
128
129
130
131
Chelsea,
;
Mass
South Omaha, Nebr.
143, 109
136,518
136, 511
Newcastle, Pa
Salem, Mass
148
104,990
162,613
148
104,990
156,957
148
104,965
153,300
132
133
134
135
136
Haverhill, Mass.
Jacksonville, Fla
Joplin, Mo
105,365
18,805
1,372
76,981
105,356
306,888
18,800
1,372
76,981
137
138
139
140
141
Knoxville,Tenn....
Elmira, N.
10, 812
9,498
122,002
117,186
2,561
10,812
9,498
122,002
116,801
2,551
10,812
9,498
122,002
116,801
2,551
142
143
144
145
146
Kalamazoo, Mich..
Woonsocket, R. I.,
ntchburg, Mass. .
45,838
103,469
88,303
8,640
111, 140
45,838
79,590
88,303
8,540
97,344
45,838
79,590
88,303
8,640
97,344
147
148
149
160
Macon, Ga
9,130
30,022
79,398
1,805
9,130
30,022
79,398
1,805
9,130
30,002
79,398
1,806
151
162
West Hoboken, N.
132,064
132,064
.
Bay
.
Pa
Newton, Mass
106,748
365,751
18,805
1,372
76,981
Wichita, Kans
Eooklord, 111
Y
Galveston,
Tex
Britain,
Conn.
Chattanooga, Tenn.
Racine,
462
380
793
117
118
119
120
121
Chester,
218,877
16,953
3,291
2,568
N.J
Davenport, Iowa.
New
$817
Mont
100
101
112
113
114
115
116
!87,
106,
110,
345,
664
2,249
266
979
102
421
504
718
979
102
421
504
127, 718
Lincoln,
Altoona,
111
533
361
686
604
139,
108,
110,
346,
128,
Saginaw, Mich..
Wis
Auburn, N.
Y
Joliet, 111
Oklahoma City,
Oshkosh, Wis
Sacramento, Cal
Okla..
306, 189
146,676
"
6,927
225
2
7,453
1,614
1,011
"54
"
120
11, 714
"3,'266'
301
i
6,666
2,616
11,046
1,393
69,562
6,472
6,081
90,921
107, 903
52
12,475
2,088
25
3,657
'99,' 778'
"76,2i2
140,813
148
1,081
1,040
97,706
151,568
98,927
357,133
16,757
5
1,092
10,242
2,149
385
23,879
is,'
20
796
4,825
2,907
4,941
59,657
8,663
378
120
3,934
2,551
11,087
3,269
9,678
1,643
3,003
37
81
3,687
44
6,443
116,326
100,257
31,446
100,119
76,967
5
105,016
28,302
68,862
J..
355
125,897
GENERAL TABLES.
283
PUBLIC SERVICE ENTERPRISES: 1907—Continued.
with the
numl^r assigned to
each, see page 127.]
GROUP
CLASSIFIED
BY SOURCE —Continued.
IV.-CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
TO
50,000
IX
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
284
AND RECEIPTS FOR, OTHER CIVIL DIVISIONS. AND IN CORRECTION OF ERROR,
TOGETHER WITH RECEIPTS FROM SALES OF REAL PROPERTY, FROM INSURANCE, AND ON ACCOUNT OF
Table 18.— PAYMENTS TO,
DEPRECIATION:
1907.
[For a
list of
the cities arranged alphabetically
by
states,
with the number assigned to each, see page
127.]
Receipts
on
For other
City
To
num-
other
civil divi-
ber.
sions (taxes,
licenses,
etc.).
Grand
total.
$21,893,443
In
of error
(refunds).'
$1,856,739
Liquor licenses and
Total.
$21, 923, 062
General
property.
All other.
$17, 525, 567
$2,860,190
4,980,179
4, 096, 324
2, 240, 812
I.— CITIES
correction
of error
Taxes.
10, 605, 747
GROUP
account
In
correction
Group I
Group II.
Group III.
Group IV.
1
civil divisions.
HAVING A POPULATION OF
All other,
(refuiids).2
From
sales otreal
property.8
in-
of
depreciation (ac-
surance.*
counting
From
transfers).*
taxes.
$1,386,060
$151,246
806,790
292,206
212, 636
74,628
59,409
23,640
43,252
24,944
300,000
OR OVER IN
$1,608,078
1907.
$1, 598, 357
$95,360
815,727
143,631
495,272
143, 727
43,727
18,019
15, 666
18,048
$11, 191
1,396
3,622
6,173
GENERAL TABLES.
285
18.-PAYMENTS TO, AND RECEIPTS FOR, OTHER CIVIL DIVISIONS AND IN CORRECTION OF ERROR
TOGETHER WITH RECEIPTS FROM SALES OF REAL PROPERTY, PROM INSURANCE, ANt> ON ACCOUNT OF
Table
DEPRECIATION: 1907— Continued.
[For a
list
of the cities arranged alphabeticaUy
GROUP
in.-CITIBS
by states, with
the
number
HAVING A POPULATION OF
50,000
assigned to each, see page
TO
100,000
IN
1907.
127.]
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
286
AND RECEIPTS FOR, OTHER CIVIL DIVISIONS AND IN CORRECTION OF ERROR,
TOGETHER WITH RECEIPTS FROM SALES OF REAL PROPERTY, FROM INSURANCE, AND ON ACCOUNT OF
Table 18.—PAYMENTS TO,
DEPRECIATION: 1907—Continued.
[For a
list
of the cities arranged alphabetically
GBOUP
IV.— CITIES
by
states,
with the number assigned to each, see page 127.]
HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
TO
50,000
IN
1907.
GENERAL TABLES.
Table 19.—PAYMENTS, RECEIPTS,
287
AND BALANCES OF PRIVATE TRUST FUNDS AND ACGOUNTS:
{Cities having neither private trust funds nor private trast accounts are omitted from this table.
For a list
of the cities arranged alphabetically
j
assigned to each, see page 127.
by
states with the number
j
City
ber.
For investments
purchased.!
For
,
CASH,
PAYMENTS.
num-
1907.
CASH
CREDITS,
AND INVESTMENTS AT
Aggregate of
Cash and all payments, Cash and
cash credits
cash credits and cash and
at beginat close
cash credits
ning of
of year.
at close of
year.*
purposes
year.
of trusts.
Par value
CLOSE OF YEAR.
of invest-
ments at
From
invest-
From
ments
disposed
interest.
For
purposes
close of
year.
Private
Private
trust
funds.3
trust
accounts.*
$3,717,046
$8,608,093
$2,964,133
3,213,246
358,836
88,440
56,524
7,219,502
1,098,665
144,388
145,638
1,992,206
710,012
148,943
112,972
$2,866,503
1,000
$5,767,578
19,326
158,022
2,969
151,513
$760,705
369,106
of tnists.
of.i
Grand
total.
Group I
Group II..
Group TLl.
Group IV.
$1,284,779 $19,550,018
$7,855,180
15,117,612
3,462,363
468,720
501,333
5,998,462
1,449,841
204,891
201,986
1,162,266
77,355
45,169
GROUP
NewYork, N. Y.
Chicago, lU
Philadelphia, Pa.
St. Louis, Mo
Boston, Mass
Baltimore,
Ud
$1,138,710 $11,697,665
a, 022,959
158,036
394,896
77,964
Buffalo, rr.Y
San Francisco, Cal.
$8,635,720
$724,381
6,669,404
1,475,647
212,017
178,762
702,694
20,533
HAVING A POPULATION OF
$174,700 $19,265,628
168,591
3,566'
1,467
1,076
300,000
14,737,460
3,489,903
460,789
567,476
OR OVER IN
1007.
$16,498,155
1,410,391
316,067
591,210
229,477
$4,384,456
419,978
165,635
175,674
161,075
14,194
108,853
220,166
.218,391
209
1,716
342,899
34,700
96,324
2,109
16,910
451,752
254,856
314,716
368,130
40,780
104,749
16,319
83,622
214,076
200,966
137,272
67,190
146,046
271,328
592,663
14,364
30,198
116,220
505,734
301,037
151,636
5 87,388
262,266
777,062
916,346
10,191
69,632
123,100
307,778
347,548
141,446
9,391
139,166
469,284
640,618
Detroit, Mich
Cincinnati, Ohio...
21,645
GROUP
16
$28,690, 639
522,278,329
4,989,649
5 674,273
5 748,488
$3,661,780
387,432
158,022
196,314
151,513
1,900
Pittsburg, Pa
Cleveland, Ohio
Milwaukee, Wis...
New Orleans, La..
Washington, D. C.
I.— CITIES
=
II.— CITIES
$675,515
$159,036 $11,279,148
40
990,373
160,622
416,280
68,402
287
974
29,013
591
HAVING A POPULATION OF
27,179
100,000
TO
300,000
IN
1907.
29,222
396
342,899
193,345
1,320
34,' 700
96,324
14,364
195,500
'i2i,'236'
225,698
3,288
422,267
116,220
502,446
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
288
Table 19.—PAYMENTS, RECEIPTS,
[Cities having neither private trust
funds nor private trust accounts are omitted from this table. For a list of the cities arranged alphabetically by
assigned to each, see page 127.]
GROUP
City
numr
ber.
AND BALANCES OF PRIVATE TRUST FUNDS AND ACCOUNTS:
III.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
60,000
TO
100,000
IN
1907.
1907— Continued.
states,
with the number
GENERAL TABLES.
Table
289
20.-PAYMENTS, RECEIPTS, AND BALANCES OF PUBLIC TRUST FUNDS FOR NONMUl^ICIPAL USES:
[Cities having
no public trust funds
tor
nonmunioipal uses are omitted from tWs
For a list of the cities arranged alphabetically by
to each, see page 127.]
'
table.
states,
1907.
with the number assigned
PAYMENTS.
Aggregate
Cash on
City
For
num-
invest-
ber.
Grand
total.
New
Haven, Conn..
Fall River, Mass.
. .
Par value
at
ning of
of in-
From
begin-
invest-
From
ments
inter-
For
purposes
vestments
at close of
year.
Total
assets at
close of
year.3
of trusts.
$292,948
$236,384
$56,664
$87,053
$380,001
$118,926
$261,075
$79,448
$58,916
$122,711
$1,447,843
$1,534,896
22,186
146,371
77,387
47,004
18,036
126,717
52,362
4,150
19,654
25,025
7,735
2,879
25,065
170,426
91,596
92,914
1,989
66,262
9,260
41,415
23,076
104, 164
82,336
51,499
1,500
54,710
8,900
14,338
4,240
19,144
25,761
9,771
17,336
30,310
47,675
27,390
129,676
456, 145
132,565
480,200
683,478
238,663
$1,550
$16,861
475
128, 126
$1,621
128,664
2,270
GROUP
Y
Cash on
hand
purposes
22,067
25
Providence, R. I-...
Rochester, N.
Toledo, Ohio
Worcester, Mass
close of
year.
ments
GKOUP
Philadelphia, Pa.
Boston, Mass
Cleveland, Ohio..
For
of all
purchased.'
Total.
Group I- Group IIGroup ni.
Group IV.
hand at
payments,
and cash
on hand
$71,786
53,382
79
13,553
7
7,564
I.— CITIES
$86
17,950
14,209
45,910
year.
$71
538
2,270
$165
22,605
2,275
Total.
disposed
of trusts.
of.i
HAVING A POPULATION OF
$8
4,117
25
11.— CITIES
24, 055
at close of
year.>
300,000
OR OVER IN
$U4
$51
127
1,748
22,478
547
HAVING A POPULATION OF
100,000
TO
$1,500
300,000
IN
1907.
$61
4,117
72
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
290
Table 21.— PAYMENTS, RECEIPTS,
.
AND BALANCES OF
[Cities having no public trust funds for municipal uses are omitted from this table.
For a list
PAYMENTS.
Num-
For investments
City
ber of
purchased.'
num-
funds
ber.
re-
ported.
Total.
From city
From
publift.
(invest-
ment
transfers).
Grand
Grbup I
Group II
Group III
Group IV
total
379
$11,445,543
151
76
9,537,750
947,258
682,689
277, 846
GEOUP
1
For accrued interest on investments purchased.
I.— CITIES
From
From
public.
city (interest
trans-
To public
Transfer
lor purposes of
trusts.
pay-
at
close of
year.
ments.'
of all pay-
ments and
ca,sh on
hand at
beginning
dose of
of year.
Cash on
band
at
year.'
fers).
$2,391 $6,549,714 $1,403,200
$2,356,674 $1,121,091
$12,473
364,611
369,338
316,870
70,272
10,788
633
434
564
618
324
1,914,743
170,754
141, 114
130,063
Cash on
hand
HAVING A POPULATION OF
5,979,686
351, 481
195
300,000
172,657
1,267,358
53, 744
51, 419
30,679
OR OVER IN
1907.
$3,262,711
$14,698,254
$3,409,589
2,207,198
472, 407
415, 722
157,384
11,744,948
1,419,665
1,098,411
435,230
2,387,682
484,322
365,645
171,940
GENERAL TABLES.
PUBLIC TRUST FUNBS FOR MUNICIPAL USES:
of the cities arranged aiphabetically
1907.
by states, with the number assigned
RECEIPTS.
to each, see
page
127.]
291
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
292
AND BALANCES OF
Table 21 .—PAYMENTS, RECEIPTS,
[Cities
GROUP
III.— CITIES
having no public trust funds
HAVING A POPULATION OF
50,000
(or
TO
municipal uses are omitted from
100,000
IN
tiiis table.
For a list
1907.
PAYMENTS.
City
number.
Nura-
For investments
her of
funds
purchased.!
re-
tor pur-
Total.
From city From
(investpubment
lic.
transfers)
Cambridge, Mass . .
Albany, N.Y
S2,938
14,082
774
18,266
11,569
Hartford, Conn
Lowell, Mass
Trenton,N. J
29,
Conn .
448
5,092
8,174
4,769
5,753
Wilmington, Del - -
Camden, N. J
Kansas City, Eans.
Lynn, Mass
Mass
Troy, N.Y
Oakland, Cal
Lawrence, Mass
Somerville, Mass
. .
111
Yonkers.N.
Y
Utica,N.Y
Manchester, N. H.
Schenectady, N.
Y
Evansville, Ind
Elizabeth, N. J
Waterbury, Conn .
Charleston, S. C...
Portland, Me
Yoimgstown, Ohio.
Terre Haute, Ind .
Fort Wayne, Ind .
Akron, Ohio
Brockton, Mass
GROUP
Saginaw, Mich
Spokane, Wash
2,787
2,018
916
96,022
1,299
119
120
121
122
123
York, Pa
Maiden, Mass
Springfield, lU
Bay
City, Mich
135
Wichita, Kans
Rockford, 111
Knoxville, Teim
Ehnira, N.
Galveston, Tex
136
137
138
139
140
143
144
146
18,562
16,264
18,343
43,812
2,098
Chelsea, Mass
Salem, Mass
Newton, Mass
Haverhill, Mass
2,936
348
1,439
Y
28, 961
11,324
200
1,280
161
3,520
7,520
7,650
6,394
1,355'
3,749
4,029
3,446
187
20,096
2,289
7,999
11, 779
10,100
30.078
HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
$5,000
$1,900
3,482
78
51,800
20
15,944
4,717
New Britain, Conn.
1,392
Woonsocket, R. I.
Fitchburg, Mass
Auburn, N. Y
1,290
2,116
151
Oshkosh, Wis
West Hoboken, N.
Sacramento, Cal
Taunton, Mass. .
.
25,500
$60
at
of year.
TO
$8,663
99,957
75,302
20,692
27,604
448
5,445
22,752
18,310
$5,943
72,775
68,072
3,449
17,509
378
8,944
11,970
3,026
91
315
435
91
515
315
2,818
3.049
16,837
7,290
39,835
4,098
3,210
27,868
24,810
63,352
2,067
5,660
8,080
35,368
16,559
9,144
2,235
935
20,588
16,630
6,076
6,260
10,300
90
13,018
12,672
71, 134
35,564
22,816
54,852
201
24,404
35,548
11,453
19,842
11,467
26,625
35,210
7,501
6,235
3,242
$548
2,049
1,812
24
1,693
$3,769
317
325
9,763
3,627
$4,307
7,366
4,037
13,269
6,220
$3,790
807
601
2,787
1,940
789
8,987
130
1,408
7,837
23,489
23, 495
1,660
4,195
9,855
24,404
119,617
2,859
50,000
6,978
IN
1907.
$126
9,675
1,169
3,060
490
5,836
21,-012
61,728
60
$82
'442'
8,466
""29'
846
781
376
12,378
40, 000
5
14,722
15, 000
688
652
5,366
3,288
2,888
226
600
211
13, 160
2,039
2,902
42S118
4,308
2,025
2,936
348
10,
000
5,799
492
31
'"'872'
900
"456'
Far value and premiums less discounts.
Other than investment and interest transfers.
1,225
1,660
3,320
23
1,000
737
21,912
1,288
810
20,601
19, 156
60, 461
48, 120
6,087
420
741
4,688
546
38,772
4,641
2,098
1,228
: .
2
at
close of
year.3
284,443
61,359
68,866
737
5,736
3,320
23
1,000
1
hand
Cash on
hand
beginning
4,436
4,987
3,616
2
..
J
cash on
23,827
24,878
33,240
9,236
2,292
1,801
3,777
64
872
152
155
150
10,616
13,606
14,302
120
$185
29
Canton, Ohio
14,578
13,541
3,576
50
737
14,273
442
Quincy,Ill
124
127
130
131
132
$5,726
85,875
45,528
2,426
16,035
935
4,655
12,809
26,600
Pawtuoket, R. I
Binghamton, N. Y.
Topeka, Kans
Springfield, Ohio . .
Wheeling, W.Va. ...
"i,"73i
200
7,031
21, 638
31,594
64
101
103
109
110
113
'.
$1,409
6,174
4,769
2,683
3,000
38,000
4,649
Mont
South Bend, Ind.
.
924
14,082
12,365
8,007
4,769
$21
250,000
12,690
68, 116
22,882
22,816
45,616
Butte,
Pa
pay-
men ts.2
$2,
""'76'
4,040
2,654
100
Lancaster,
year.
5,000
935
4,029
7,486
2,841
$648
7,049
3,712
3,506
1,693
95
96
99
Transfer
of all pay-
ments and
fers).
2,000
1,100
10,000
4,512
IV.— CITIES
trusts.
at
close of
350
1,280
161
11,031
17, 520
13, 517
.
poses of
$5,069
26,481
25,626
344
200
. .
From
city (interest
trans-
$14
16,000
10,238
260, 616
Duluth, Minn
Hoboken, N. J
Peoria,
hand
ported.
public.
New Bedford,
Cash on
To public
From
Bridgeport,
Aggregate
For accrued inon investments purchased.
terest
4,829
379
1,439
30,859
872
288
4,748
8,490
1,392
288
6,038
10,606
1,622
1,788
513
4,942
1,811
1,613
2,184
312
211
3,765
238
3,196
6,427
1,651
""937'
GENERAL TABLES.
PUBLIC TRUST FUNDS
of the cities
FOR MUNICIPAL USES:
asjanged alphabetically
by
states,
1907— Continued,
with the number assigned to each, see page
GEOUP
III.— CITIES
127.]
HAVING A POPULATION OF
RECEIPTS.
293
60,000
TO
100,000
IN
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
294
Table 22.—PAYMENTS, RECEIPTS,
[Cities
having no Investment funds are omitted from this table.
For a
AND
list
of the
PAYMENTS.
City
Number
num-
of funds
reported.
ber.
For investments purchased.'
For accrued interest
on Investments purMiscellar
neous pay-
ments
From city
From
public.
(invest-
From
ment
public.
transfers).
Grand
.
total
69
$2, 944, 179
$219, 679
$55,867
2,406,700
179, 137
253, 726
104, 616
39, 933
64, 900
1,000
9,000
11,000
34,867
GROUP
1
hand
chased.
Total.
Group I
Group II.
Group III.
Group IV.,
Cash on
I.— CITIES
97,597
17,249
From city
to
public.
Transfer
at
close of
year.
payments.'
Aggregate
of all pay-
ments and
cash on
hand at
close of
year.'
Cash on
hand
at
beginning
of year.
(interest
transfers).
$614
$50,592
22
592
6,835
1,640
39,821
2,296
HAVING A POPULATION OF
300,000
$2, 617, 427
$322, 183
$3,266,362
932
103.575
104; 716
50,204
131,676
67, 414
94,172
28,921
2,538,376
246,551
347,898
133,537
2, 358.
OR OVER IN
1907.
$303,808
51,893
100, 969
52,258
GENERAL TABLES.
BALANCES OF INVESTMENT FUNDS:
cities arranged alphabetically
by
states,
1907.
with the number assigned to each, see page
RECEIPTS.
127.]
295
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
296
Table 23.— PAYMENTS, RECEIPTS,
[Cities
baving no sinking funds are omitted from this
table.
AND
For a list of the cities
PAYMENTS.
For accrued interest on investments purchased.
For investments
City
purchased. 1
num-
For redemption of
ber.
From
public.
city
(invest-
ment
From
public.
Group
Group III.
Group IV.
total
$121, 669, 748
89, 698, 673
19,510,451
7,665,406
4,795,218
GROUP
1
laneous
close of
year.
$6,408,337 $61, 520, 667 $35, 443
1,756,819
1, 690, 012
1, 193, 235
769,271
I.— CITIES
49, 188,
013
18,551,046
143
1,624,465
2, 157,
city
(interest
To
public.
To city
to
public.
Transfer
at
payments.'
of all pay.
ments and
cash on hand
at close of
year.*
(transfers; .2
transfers).
transfers).
I- .
II.
hand
ments
From
From
Grand
Miscel-
pay-
Total.
'Group
Cash on
debt.
4,998
21, 914
5,904
2,627
$109, 010 $33,077,680 $18, 926, 633
$331,613
$2,260,465
$19, 100, 782
$140,770,630
14,948,962
1,957,394
1,619,927
400,350
236,876
68,733
8,716
17,289
189, 728
10, 622, 978
1,778,348
179, 934
112,455
3,579,617
2,861,986
2,036,302
100,321,651
23,089,968
10,527,391
6,831,620
84, 722
18,077
4,193
2,018
23,289,656
5, 424, 9272, 496, 366
1,866,743
HAVING A POPULATION OF
300,000
OR OVER IN
1907.
GENERAL TABLES.
BALANCES OF SINKING FUNDS:
arranged alphabetically
Cash on
hand at
beginning
oiyear.
1907.
by states, with the number
assigned to each, see page 127.]
297
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
298
Table 23.— PAYMENTS, RECEIPTS,
[Cities
GROUP
III.— CITIES
having no sinking funds are omitted from this
HAVING A POPULATION OF
50,000
TO
100,000
IN
1907.
table.
AND
For a list of the cities
GENERAL TABLES.
299
BALANCES OF SINKING FUNDS: 1907—Continued.
arranged alphabetically
by states, with the number
GROUP
Cash on
hand
at
beginning
of year.
assigned to each, see page
III.—CITIES
127.]
HAVING A POPULATION OF
50,000
TO
100,000
IN
1907.
300
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
Table 23.-PAYMENTS, RECEIPTS,
[Cities
having no sinking funds are omitted from this table. For a
GROUP IV.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
TO
60,000
IN
1907.
list of
AND
the
cities
GENERAL TABLES.
301
BALANCES OF SINKING FUNDS: 1007—Continued.
arranged al^ahetioally
hy states, with the number assigned to each,
GROUP
Cash on
hand at
beginning
olyear.
IV.— CITIES
see
page
127.]
HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
TO
50,000
IN
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
•302
Table 24.—GROSS
AND NET DEBT OUTSTANDING AT CLOSE OP YEAR, TOTAL AND PER
'
[For a
list
CAPITA,
of the cities arranged alphabetically
by states,
GROSS DEBT OUTSTANDING AT CLOSE OF YEAK.
Classified
by
division ot the government of
the city issuing.
Classified according to provisions
made for payment.
Current.
Total.
Other
City corpora-
School dis-
tion.
tricts.
di-
visions of
the government of
Funded
or
flxed.s
the city.
Grand
Group I
GroupII
Group III
Group IV
total
$1,889,922,704
$1,793,890,963
1,348,274,910
263,163,615
160,472,486
118,011,693
1,286,167,904
247,763,961
160,696,071
109,273,017
GROUP
1
I.— CITIES
$42,267,231 $53,764,520
10,224,466
14,208,222
9,222,726
8,611,818
61,892,641
1,191,432
553,689
126,868
HAVING A POPULATION OF
Special
issessmen
loans.'
$1,666,672,954 $90,766,383
1,198,892,107
224,886,992
142,469,448
100,324,407
300,000
48,976,540
23,460,096
8,685,693
9,654,154
OR OVER IN
1907.
Revenue
loans.)
Outstanding
$100,887,796 $24,424,144
77,256,152
11,349,063
6,992,694
6,289,887
All other.
warrants.*
17,338,745
3,061,166
1,566,881
2,467,352
$7,271,427
6,811,366
426,298
757,870
275,893
GENERAL TABLES.
TOGETHER WITH CHANGES DURING YEAR IN DEBT AND IN SINKING FUND ASSETS:
with the
number assigned
to each, see
GR0S8 DEBT OUTSTANDING AT CLOSE
OF YEAH—continued.
page
127.]
303
*
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
304
Table 24.—GROSS
AND NET DEBT OUTSTANDING AT CLOSE OF YEAR, TOTAL AND PER
'
I
GROUP
III.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
50,000
TO
For a
100,000
list of
IN
CAPITA,
the cities arranged alpliabetically
1907.
by states,
GENERAL TABLES.
305
TOGETHER WITH CHANGES DURING YEAR IN DEBT AND IN SINKING FUND ASSETS:
with the nuSnber assigned to each, see page
127.]
GROUP
—
Classified as held
III.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
NET DEBT '> ' 0UT5TAND-
GBOSS DEBT ODTSTANDING AT CLOSE
or TEAR continued.
1907—'Continued,
60,000
TO
100,000
IN
1907.
INCREASE DURING YEAR IN-
INQ AT CLOSE OF YEAR.
by—
Sinking fund
Gross debt.
assets.'
City
numPer
capita.
PubUe.
J10,140,350
3,461,192
7,469,906
4,357,148
2,312,600
4,168,154
1,697,139
3,047,133
4,1*4,450
1,639,850
3,191,091
4,095,700
5,371,735
2,530,800
4,081,196
3,012,436
2,378,094
1,902,000
3,077,387
6,659,521
1,900,915
1,186,545
5,213,834
1,708,897
1,223,501
3,032,395
2,043,352
2,987,715
3,023,959
1,921,369
4,991,607
1,007,471
780,217
4,744,768
Total.
Invested
J621,600 1107.99
41.48
666, 191
602, 454
71.97
44,700
46.26
193,800
26.90
.535,000
5,000
401,200
966,500
543,100
313,900
78,314
69.91
26.81
36.32
52.65
20.24
39.63
62.92
74.76
36.41
64.19
m
111,900
34.09
26.30
44.04
96.50
$7,993,392
2,641,269
6,397,833
3,673,453
2,220,393
3,012,436
2,364,462
1,902,000
3,077,387
6,598,992
32.37
26.30
44.04
94.63
477,000
25.77
50.58
32.20
47.00
49.92
1, 135, 362
2,964,993
2,079,134
2,613,374
2, 969, 451
32.68
80.23
16.51
16.39
79.13
(»)'
6,645,473
2,297,281
3,329,660
2,910,200
248,989
268,300
461, 600
287,284
1,580,176
2,297,395
739,632
881,158
161,766
158,260
Held by
6,205,081
1,886,186
1,028,107
139
1,705,349
5, 169,
19.
17.21
46.18
31.85
213,376
111,466
274,832
678,646
92,914
132,060
4,000
5,000
24,600
107, 107
107, 107
8
8
162,500
642,000
200,600
18,660
47,861
24,500
23,361
239,000
357,000
101,300
66,840
6,963
74,947
62,412
69,356
9,140
236,000
107,000
101,300
55,208
6,963
8 161,063
8 54, 588
8 31,944
8 46,068
10,000
25, 625
10,000
15, 525
88,704
8 8,500
8 3,660
8 44,400
123, 404
508, 373
91, 764
26,000
67, 160
7,000
454,624
75,337
76,474
8
40.66
46.60
98,764
464,624
151,811
1,900,194
4,962,514
991,922
620,226
4,744,758
79.76
16.12
10.13
79.13
122,096
197. 470
68, 437
8 250,682
8 39, 145
122,096
197,470
69,437
10, 452
8 39, 145
46.28
67.22
57.09
5,707,829
2,218,735
3, 784, 678
1,893,907
39.16
67.10
33.82
615,894
243, 257
341, 467
351,460
3,700
364,360
32.02
45.19
13.77
16.87
1,619,651
2,196,839
734,089
810, 460
29.77
40.43
13.67
15.62
(»)
127,050
4,000
216,666
146,941
8 123,814
568,823
8 66,389
404
$220, 609
8
8
$81,509
10,625
167,660
60,969
8 20, 355
8
184,416
40,286
e
$12, 509
8
214,516
63,899
10, 148
27,032
8
113,667
8
60
51
100, 144
55
1,653
946,588
232, 444
76, 360
67
58
894,658
113,049
74,600
88,704
8 8,500
72,342
8 4,301
788
8 20, 484
3,548
8
8
23,254
8
44, 400
87, 441
26,000
57, 160
17,110
5,625
102, 752
76, 474
8
26, 169
8
8
677,168
8
8
3,130
14,367
1,000
261, 134
38,736
98,200
3,700
12,900
8
201, 249
8
26,955
157,821
8
36,628
71,260
304, 424
164,058
226,099
8 21,229
8
8
8,800
314
23,000
8
8
8
8
31,577
73,200
1,500
23,000
24,709
71,260
47,612
6,946
26,628
9,658
8
8
8,800
60
460
213,259
64
233,027
142,742
8 128,252
534,907
8 69,937
67
68
49,254
30,281
17, 110
6,625
26,278
8
74,150
476,092
81, 654
448,999
49,059
70
26, 169
95,926
194,340
54,070
8 49, 433
8 39,146
75
76
588,939
401,078
8 314
374,460
80
4,622
84,621
8 1,
8
56
16,362
4,199
788
23,916
3,548
8
8
54
61
62
63
3,130
15,367
69,886
1,000
261, 134
52
53
42, 126
8 62,
176, 127
45
46
47
4S
49
402,792
71, 180
279,832
665,295
92,914
8
8
341,052
235,308
225,099
8 30, 029
assets.
57,366
44,286
306,369
563, 533
Other
rities.
$139,000
8 19,657
4,000
2,500
44,000
894,658
128, 574
74,600
8 42, 126
150,799
8 97,
City secu-
9,032
171,560
63,469
23,645
894,668
138,574
74,500
8 42, 126
37, 132
127,464
514,423
8 66,389
Total.
funds.^
345,426
116,466
279,532
703,146
92,914
138, 441
8
Invested
$139,000
8 19,657
4,000
2,500
44,000
76,600
999,000
301,800
85,500
P)
Held by
$69,000
203,890
231, 459
71,117
6,677
S208,000
223, 647
235. 469
73,617
50,677
1#
90.56
27.84
15.19
77.23
26.62
public.
8
43.18
38.91
47.27
56.19
29.95
52.26
28.43
18.08
81.86
25.68
8,000
222,655
64.96
37.56
23.83
3,133,219
3,802,967
4,366,964
2,339,894
4,011,155
24,000
37,360
265,200
160,000
25.i60
35.32
46.63
20.24
102. 75
69,000
33,000
164,000
J80.21
822, 383
1,659,417
3,052,083
4,026,635
1,639,850
Sf,
812, 222
286, 964
Net debt. «.
Total.
funds.*
1,135,536
ber.
Per
capita.
186
22,903
64,305
26,628
18,358
71
72
73
74
77
78
79
81
82
83
293, 440
84
228,363
251,727
8 39,587
85
86
87
I
1,194,676
2,872,000
2,862,100
2,115,700
166,515
107,100
405,500
26.14
57.71
64.21
41.90
1,188,390
2,674,220
2,706,846
2, 104, 167
22.82
61.80
63.19
41.67
9,593
8 23,600
106,560
1,316
8
24,808
500
67,650
1,316
8
34,401
24, 100
39,000
8
43,296
92,904
37, 188
2,771
8
42,541
24, 100
39,000
'
Sinking, investment, and public trust funds.
Gross debt less sinking fund assets.
For amount of sinking fund assets at close of year, see Table 23.
9
Per capita average not computed, because no reliable estimate of population could be made.
8
«
755
8 68,804
8 1,812
2,771
8
33,703
69,304
69,362
8 1,466
90
91
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
306
Table 24
GROSS AND NET .DEBT
GROUP
IV.— CITIES
OUTSTANDING AT CLOSE OF YEAR, TOTAL AND PER CAPITA,
HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
TO
[For a
list
of the cities arranged alphabetically
50,000
IN
1907.
by
states,
GROSS DEBT OUTSTANDING AT CLOSE OF YEAR.
Classified
City
by
division of the government of
the city issuing.
Classified according to provisions
made
for
payment.
number.
Current.
Total.
94
95
96
Sagiuaw, Mich..
Lincoln, Nebr...
Altoona, Pa
Spokane, Wash.
Lancaster, Pa...
97
98
99
100
101
Birmtngham, Ala.,
Bayonne, N. J
South Bend, Ind
102
MoKeesport, Pa
Binghamton, N. Y.
Johnstown, Pa
103
104
105
106
.
Butte,
Mont
Pawtucket, R.
I...
Dubuque, Iowa
.
107
108
109
110
111
Augusta,
112
113
114
115
East
.
Ga
Mobile, Ala
Topeka, Kans
Springfield, Ohio.
Allentown, Pa
St. Louis, 111.
Wheieling,
W.
Va..
Montgomery, Ala..
Passaic,
N.J
116
Davenport, Iowa.
117
118
119
Atlantic City, N. J.
120
121
York, Pa
Maiden, Mass
122
123
124
125
126
Springfleld,
127
128
129
130
Chelsea, Mass
131
Newton, Mass
132
133
134
135
136
Haverhill, Mass .
Jacksonville, Fla.
Joplln, Mo
137
138
139
140
141
Knoxville, Tenn...
Elmura, N.
Galveston, Tex
142
143
144
145
146
Kalamazoo, Mich .
Woonsocket, R. I.
147
148
149
150
Macon, Ga
151
152
153
154
WestHoboken, N.
156
156
157
158
Taimton, Mass .
Newport, Ky
Lacrosse, Wis...
Fort Worth, Tex.
Little Rock, Ark
Bay City, Mich
111.
Chester,
Pa
South Omaha, Nebr.
Newcastle, Pa
Salem, Mass
,
Wichita, Kans...
Rookford, 111
Y
New
Conn.
Chattanooga, Tenn.
Britain,
Fitchburg, Mass...
Racine, Wis
Auburn, N.
Y
Oklahoma City,
Oshkosh, Wis
8
*
Okla..
Sacramento, Cal
Pueblo, Colo
Everett, Mass
.
J.
tion.
tricts.
di-
visions of
!
the govern-
ment of
the city.
Funded
or
flxed.2
loans.'
$1,353,600
1,384,100
2,051,500
2,930,000
1,234,500
$1,167,980
353,008
136,900
609, 160
2,324,000
491,823
236,000
2,912,883
2,719,250
819,601
936, 437
5,840,218
2,912,883
2,719,250
747, 803
885,396
654,443
1,583,198
1,793,009
1,135,803
885,396
377, 035
1,457,198
1,438,265
1,799,806
3,696,512
2,375,356
1,276,661
1,147,400
3,696,512
1,782,418
1,187,661
660, 100
1,573,260
472,033
2,671,756
934, 667
581,209
1,247,384
472,033
2, 671, 765
934, 657
276,219
3,997,926
617, 782
1,713,239
1,196,801
2, 191, 900
3,997,926
397,860
1,713,239
779,866
2,191,900
1,420,133
873,241
1,842,978
1,084,790
944,600
1,293,275
779, 908
1,523,978
1,084,790
673,000
2,246,560
1,325,979
529,823
987,600
6,143,458
2,246,550
1,225,979
331,756
987,600
6, 143, 458
1,869,000
1,861,859
409,394
1,520,267
877, 147
1,869,000
1,861,869
168,852
1,268,769
877, 147
1,734,000
1,768,000
372, 000
1,087,931
351,800
1,487,071
1,163,282
4,377,479
2,380,099
2,286,850
1,487,071
1,163,282
4,377,479
2,380,099
2,286,860
1,376,000
1,129,600
4,283,038
2,000,000
2,281,000
1,042,204
3,098,000
1,953,110
619,878
778,821
853,761
3,098,000
1,953,110
619,878
778,821
904,458
904,468
480, 667
1,121,174
508,868
1,415,114
608,868
859, 761
842, 047
563, 601
761, 437
533,500
990, 892
310, 000
'2,439,260
793,477
575, 000
5,345,000
256,000
176, 000
5,840,218
277,408
126,000
354,764
387, 100
811,500
648, 700
1,215,282
1,768,100
692,938
89,000
487,300
1,733,500
•2,984,192
1,691,327
1,145,336
1,136,200
612, 000
839,021
3,124,378
1,729,003
2,273,675
1,211,300
884,235
2,064,525
2,273,675
1,211,300
884,235
2,064,626
1,
947,000
424,000
2,304,000
747,260
575, 000
325,876
304,990
3,904,000
257, 000
1,210,694
1,166,810
2,051,900
219,922
416,936
$126,868
93,333
319,000
271,600
100,000
198,067
240,542
261, 498
188,443
977,874
848,333
1,392,966
774, 334
852,600
1,925,100
1,263,468
398,000
987,600
5,777,700
712, 464
2,553,000
1,763,110
614,000
525,445
36,630
293,940
835,900
214,430
1,299,500
603,400
3,026
333,064
475, 125
811,100
2,386,265
1,466,003
859, 761
3,457,432
1,729,003
662,463
$210, 170
Special
assessment
;
$2,530,237
1,591,328
1,694,900
3,205,613
925,500
517, 187
Joliet.Ill
2,211,775
1,211,300
767,200
1,864,828
Revenue
loans.
Outstanding
All other.
warrants.3
$8,657
64,390
$20,000
207,000
$21,000
540,245
1,000
97,060
46,000
26,000
92,593
324,492
328,676
3,419
26,000
11,000
136,881
5,768
225,041
1,124
268,844
170,726
7,127
59,477
5,743
5,994
3,391
66, 306
699,820
615,276
121,209
200
12,500
5,660
9,348
445, 600
30,966
39, 172
305,256
154, 407
74,694
8,861
62,500
33,000
92,926
172, 639
435, 858
1,000
188,036
66,200
63,103
11,000
75,000
6,209
107
10,487
7,976
22,016
140,000
164,340
409,977
309,686
62,000
211,771
1,600
7,000
72,860
23,308
33,035
770
3,288
30,000
321,450
62,511
131,635
188
331,500
368,246
97, 917
135,000
48,916
7,665
67,877
398, 600
111,071
1,000
306,260
5,850
269, 206
59,550
545,000
200,000
188,860
67,266
2,121
166,433
250,556
582,231
'34,'258'
18,687
16,729
16,213
7,237
32,782
94,441
699
10,769
13,000
74,260
5,878
7,260
66,437
2,229
116,614
5,468
134, 080
3,304
30,947
486,632
263, 000
61,900
117,035
'i85,'i66
600,000
as here used, includes all bonds; temporary and other loans, including overdrafts by the treasurer; all warrants outstanding at the dose
judgments rendered against the government of the city and not paid during the year.
Including allgeneral bonds, and special debt obligations to public trust funds.
Outstanding warrants to be paid from special assessments are tabulated under "special assessment loans.
Including all short-term loans in anticipation of taxes, commonly designated as revenue bonds, revenue loans, tax warrants, tax certificates, temporary loans,
'The term "debt,"
'
.
Quincy, 111
Canton, Ohio...
Superior, Wis..
San Juan, P. R.
year;
.
School dis-
$2,530,237
1,801,498
2,228,400
4,286,405
1,235,500
1,
. i .
Sioux City, Iowa.
Other
City corpora^
and
of the
all
etc.
GENERAL TABLES.
TOGETHER WITH CHANGES DURING YEAR
with the
number
held
Total.
S50. 80
2,907,883
2,394,400
819,601
936,437
4,451,530
5,000
324,850
61.85
59.01
17.82
20.58
129. 66
125,700
5,000
43,907
46,000
1,420,133
873,241
1,762,913
1,062,659
867,600
1,351,500
1,325,979
529,823
954,600
4,299,608
1,636,000
1,861,859
409,394
1,520,267
877,147
1,487,071
1,154,782
4,107,479
2,380,099
2,286,850
957,704
2,720,000
1,562,804
619,878
761,741
675,458
517,187
1,415,114
425/868
859,761
842,047
3,457,432
1,457,003
2,078,375
1,211,300
785,235
2,064,525
662,463
12,480,682
1,788,213
1,981,860
4,270,866
1,235,500
S49.80
36.06
40.55
Held by
public.
25.70
$240,851
11,996
58,900
472, 140
50,000
2,894,478
2,305,197
808,844
936,437
4,103,354
61.46
50.03
17.68
20.68
91.10
137,763
264,000
4,887
141,684
169,918
132,763
301,500
4,887
141,584
119,770
38.97
19.91
14.76
35.82
40.67
1,245,964
885,396
495, 982
1,557,164
1,791,495
27.78
19.91
11.19
36 23
40.63
93,253
111,906
36,241
6,005
8 61,207
41.15
84.70
55.51
29.89
26.92
1,799,806
3,583,127
2,368,340
1,273,554
1,010,792
41.15
82.10
55.35
29 82
23.72
1,478,570
436,307
2,671,755
926,973
681,209
34.77
10.41
63 85
22.20
13.97
832,357
187, 493
264,592
36, 187
169,300
(»)
25.70
•
'11.26
63.85
22.38
13.97
IN
1907.
Sinking fund
(')
8
4,044
128,047
26,407
144,778
65, 490
8
66,528
29,370
126,690
133,883
8 47,487
8
8
84,253
111,906
22,241
6,005
8 61,207
8
Held by
Invested
Total.
funds.'
$275,691
12,996
210,900
473,803
50,000
36.33
45.59
36.99
1,573,260
472,033
2,671,755
927,029
581,209
50,000
assets.'
Netdebt.».'
Total.
$98,840
32, 190
199,000
15,200
33,500
301,600
TO
Per
capita.
Inrested
funds.
1,388,688
30,000
Gross debt.
(2,431,397
1,769,308
2,029,400
4,271,205
1,202,000
3,351,926
617,782
1,712,046
1,070,291
2,057,550
1907^Contmued.
INCREASE DURING YEAR IN—
by—
Per
1,799,806
3,696,512
2,370,356
1,232,654
1,101,400
HAVING A POPULATION OF
INQ AT CLOSE OF YEAB.
capita.
1,446,203
885,396
528,743
1,583,198
1,793,009
IV.—CITIES
NET DEBT«,' 0UT3TAND-
GBOSS DEBT OUTSTAHBING AT CLOSE
OF TEAR—continued.
Public.
DEBT AND IN SINKING FUND ASSETS:
IN
assigned to each, see page 127.]
GROUP
Classified as
307
8 4,044
128,047
26,407
123,727
60,490
$34,740
1,000
152,000
1,663
5,000
37,500
8
$26,390
8 6,428
44,493
16,639
18,406
32,473
18,201
8
8
City securities.
9,000
666'
410
6,428
8 $4,
$30,800
8
'i52,'666'
8
107, 507
16, 639
5,000
37,500
8
197,316
'is,'
Other
13,405
5,027
18,201
»
92,372
8
49,744
111,906
15,568
8 6,718
8 61,207
9,000
34,509
19,673
12,723
'i3,'566
6,173
12,723
21,051
5,000
8
8
6,000
7,628
8
8
7,628
29,370
126, 690
129,883
8 47,487
"3,'932'
4,000
119,000
166,632
16,644
15,612
41, 175
8 62,925
119,000
47,632
16, 644
16,612
69,300
45,725
3,180,234
568, 463
1,630,032
1,046,696
1,492,346
1,420,133
867, 139
1,783,572
986,681
825,808
35.83
21.91
45.77
25.47
21.36
8 32, 380
8 87,694
80,065
22,131
77,000
35.83
22.06
47.29
28.01
24.43
58.24
34.39
13.77
25.79
161. 15
1,366,500
1,326,979
516,741
963,172
4,034,674
35.42
34.39
13.43
25.15
105.83
157,376
197,703
21,471
8 400
230,607
71,500
197,703
21,471
8 3,900
89,607
49.07
48.93
10.98
41.20
23.90
1,332,258
1,861,859
399,224
1,520,267
877, 147
34.97
48.93
10.71
41.20
23.90
79,000
93,859
108,602
240,274
126,988
55,000
93,859
108,602
240,274
126,988
40.61
32.54
124.28
68.71
66.45
1,472,759
1,163,282
4,078,288
2,209,473
2,254,186
40.22
32.54
115.78
63.78
65.50
6,472
830,384
563,412
291,103
919,619
6,472
831,384
636,412
291, 103
919,619
30.82
91.68
58.10
18.47
23.32
912,187
2,657,631
1,570,166
596,858
760,998
78.65
46.71
17.78
22.79
145 511
103,000
51,279
2,365
173,624
61,011
68,000
33,349
2,365
163,624
84,500
36,000
17,930
10,000
10,460
10,000
460
551,702
517,187
1,415,114
508,868
898,708
81,479
364,293
8 25,296
885,708
81,479
364,293
8 25,296
813,000
825,308
813,000
812,308
83,000
27.60
15.84
43.61
16.16
16.84
15.84
43.61
16.16
272,000
27.31
26.89
110.85
55.74
837,400
842,047
3,375,663
1,429,432
26.60
26.89
108.23
46.08
22,931
288,406
19,067
64,200
22,931
288,406
19,067
32,200
73.49
39.50
30.33
1,498,001
1,165,975
705,347
2,002,003
48.42
38.02
24.20
465,263
13.04
895,050
33,000
1,843,850
233,000
8,500
270,000
84,500
378,000
390,306
17,080
229,000
195,300
9,000
(«)
18.57
8
'
'
»
8
8
94,562
48,646
36, 100
35,900
33,700
42,990
10,542
62,463
166,500
8
8
8
32,380
87,694
86,917
48,645
22, 400
811,600
33,700
8 2,010
10,542
50
59,300
8 7,200
8 18,
8
126
7,200
8
47,487
666, 825
170,849
248,980
8 4,988
212,225
32,380
84,258
109,525
8 43,395
8 27,694
8
8
Vis,' 700
85,876
85,876
3,600
141,000
601
1,575
182,622
81,000
181,000
9,482
22,000
8
3,436
14,973
8 5,250
6,294
8
3,436
14,973
8 5,260
8 8,406
7,635
8
13,700
8
8
85,876
71,500
197, 703
8
8
24,000
8
"'4,'
8
31,482
1,000
73,000
47,500
8
45,000
62,463
reliable estimate of
88,482
93,869
103,617
240,274
126,988
6,128
30,384
670,466
267,843
918,369
8
8
107,054
23,260
1,260
73,612
44,231
31,646
8
34,054
23,260
1,260
73,000
8
84,500
35,000
17,930
810,888
9,231
13,716
5,215
5,215
32,000
985
344
344
8
22,072
81,975
48,085
601
2,575
1,522
"'4,'
985
13,934
22,200
68,773
83,860
44,497
15,652
13,934
9,800
32,000
8
47,600
21,273
83,860
24,497
"26,060
35,607
Sinking, investment, and public trust funds.
Gross debt less sinking fund assets.
For amount of sinking fund assets at close of year, see Table 23.
Per capita average not computed, because no
66,628
36,898
126,690
8
96.35
14.99
42.24
29.86
55.09
8
8
129, 961
4,000
1,193
126,510
134,350
113
044
92, 038
28,935
143,522
103,277
8 4,
8
8 23,
23,088
141,584
27,398
36,009
2,528
1,256
42,787
8
76.64
13.80
40.19
28.12
37.61
646, 000
119, 358
296, 473
»
43,509
36,009
2,528
1,266
37, 787
8
8
713,357
187,493
264,642
$249,201
18,424
166,407
458,264
50,000
population could be made.
71,899
58,769
19,633
2,365
163, 164
73,400
8 1,479
364,293
8 25,296
8
17,716
288,406
5,133
42,000
15,652
8 32,873
829,840
81,507
8 6,110
35,607
26,856
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
308
Table 25.— FUNDED
DEBT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT LOANS
[For a
ISSUED FOR
list
of the cities arranged alphabetically
PUBUC SERVICE ENTERPRISES.
by states.
ISSUED FOR GENERAL PUBPOSES.
Issued for
City
num-
municipal
Electric
Total.
ber.
Total.
Watersupply
systems.
light
gas-
and
All other.
service
enterprises.
Total.
supply
City
buildings.!
Police and
depart-
fire
ments.
systems.
Grand
Group I
Group II
Group III
Group IV
total
11,757,339,338
1600,124,775
1,247,868,648
248,337,088
151,155,041
109,978,561
366,733,373
70,988,480
37,883,247
26,519,676
GROUP
1
I.— CITIES
$281,940,329
156,381,752
67,166,380
35,418,447
22,973,750,
t5, 750, 600
$212,433,846
$4, 507, 750
$1,023,020,718
$43,383,663
119,261,753
1,550,000
1,840,000
1,848,100
512,600
207,801,621
1,982,100
616,700
2,033,425
3,374,760
1,048,000
716,482,422
149,457,708
88,803,960
68,276,628
31,183,063
7,493,400
2,740,700
1,966,500
14,174,287
2,378,900
1,454,715
1,263,851
HAVING A POPULATION OF
300,000
85,000
OR OVER IN
1907.
GENERAL TABLES.
AT CLOSE OF YEAR, CLASSIFIED BY PURPOSE OF ISSUE:
with the
namher assigned
1907.
to each, see page 127.]
ISSUED FOE GENERAL PURPOSES—continued.
309
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
310
Table 25.—FUNDED
DEBT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT LOANS
[For a
GROUP
III.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
50,000
TO
100,000
list
of the cities arranged alphabetically
IN
1907.
hj states,
GENERAL TABLES.
311
AT CLOSE OF YEAR, CLASSIFIED BY PURPOSE OF ISSUE: 1907—Continued,
with the number assigned to each, see page
127.]
GROUP
III.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
ISSUED FOR GENERAL PURPOSES—Continued.
60,000
TO
100,000
IN
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
312
Table 25.— FUNDED
QEOUP
IV.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
30.000
DEBT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT LOANS
TO
[For a
list
60,000
IN
of the cities arranged alphabetically
1907.
by states,
"
GENERAL TABLES.
AT CLOSE OF YEAR, CLASSIFIED BY PURPOSE OF
with the
number assigned
313
ISSUE: 1907— Continued,
to each, see page 127.]
GROUP
IV.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
ISSUED FOB qenekIl pukposes— Continued.
30,000
TO
50,000
IN
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
314
Table 26.— FUNDED
DEBT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT LOANS
[For a
City
num-
Prior to
Total.
1887
ber.
Grand
total..
Group I
Group U
Group lU
Group IV
$1,757,339,338
1,247,868,648
248,337,088
151,155,041
109,978,561
Chicago, 111
Philadelphia, Pa...
St. Louis, Mo
Boston, Mass
Baltimore, Md
Pittsburg, Pa..'....
Cleveland, Ohio
N.Y
Buffalo,
San Francisco, Cal.
Detroit, Mich
Cincinnati, Ohio.
.
Milwaukee, Wis
New
Orleans, La.
.
Washington, D.C..
29,871,235
15,400,950
14,251,150
5,461,392
$726,661,465
75,008,846
71,407,720
18,344,178
104,086,706
2,319,145
4,290,000
3,268,000
559,900
1891
189«
8,489,705
5,856,800
3,277,800
1,942,000
1,828,209
6,900,000
3,006,200
2,057,000
9,842,748
7,165,923
4,226,950
2,696,016
HAVING A POPULATION OF
I.—CITIES
$4,582
$3,060
$427,662
1,985,000
300,000
10,576,992
9,338,450
3,282,600
5,562,551
OR OVER
$6, 120, 168
"275," 666'
$270,748
2,760,000
12,000
188,000
5,280,000
242,000
452,500
660,000
600,000
'440,000
86,000
92,000
400,000
358,836
148,000
$226,361
"
46,756,283
42,551,102
32,844,287
22,060,726
3,865,600
9,134,000
9,005,788
1,704,000
150,000
4,850,000
198,000
2,171,447
370,000
642,500
"645," 66o'
12,240,942
50,516,043
9,593,980
21,324,440
10,606,330
300,000
5,660,398
92,085
250,000
134,543
2,000
260,000
203,848
30,000
2,497,488
3,591,440
3,580
GROUP
16
1889
1888
of the cities arranged alphabetically
1892
1894
by
states.
1896
$64,984,727 $10,437,045 $19,566,305 $lo,791,409 $23,930,630 $28,760,593 $49,076,872 $28,057,861 $42,550,465 $31,872,777
GROUP
New York, N.Y...
1887
list
II.—CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
100,000
TO
300,000
6,285,786
11,154,000
7,257,700
3,360,375
23,316,324
7,915,500
6,322,141
4,996,500
16,458,827
6,942,000
4,227,950
4,244,000
$2,384,115
700,000
1,155,000
$522,533
2,625,000
1,250,690
$3,866,518
9,681,000
2,000,000
$4,676,202
2,890,000
975,000
6,000,000
100,000
18,000
450,000
473,000
500,858
225,000
4,000,000
883,000
500,000
545,000
100,000
360,205
238,600
1,425,000
309,851
106,965
22,802,003
19,359,000
2,847,800
4,068,069
IN
1907.
905,000
849,-888
240,000
10,000,000
IN
1907.
5,339,200
176,425
1,718,600
183,000
500,500
GENERAL TABLES.
AT CLOSE OF YEAR, CLASSIFIED BY YEAR OF ISSUE:
with the number
1896
assigned to each, see page 127.]
1907.
315
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
316
Table 26.— FUNDED
DEBT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT LOANS;
[For a
GROUP
City
number.
III.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
50,000
TO
list
100,000
of the cities arranged alphabetically
IN
1907.
by states,
GENERAL TABLES.
317
AT CLOSE OF YEAR, CLASSIFIED BY YEAR OF ISSUE: 1907—Continued.
witli
the numlaer assigned to each, see page 127.]
GBOUP lU.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF
1896
50,000
TO
100,000
IN
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
318
Table 26.—FUNDED
DEBT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT LOANS
[For a
GROUP
City
number.
rV.—CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
TO
list of
50,000
IN
the
cities
1907.
arraaged alphabetically by
states,
GENERAL TABLES.
AT CLOSE OF YEAR, CLASSIFIED BY
YEAR OF
319
ISSUE: 1907— Continued,
with the QUfiiber assigned to each, see page 127.]
GROUP
1896
IV.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
TO
50,000
IN
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
320
Table 27.—FUNDED
DEBT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT LOANS
[For a
City
num-
Prior to
Total.
1908
ber.
Grand
Group I
Group II
Group III
Group IV
total
$1,757,339,338
1,247,868,648
248,337,088
151,155,041
109,978,561
1909
1910
1911
1912
of the cities arranged alphabetically
I91S
1914
1915
by
states.
1916
$8,324,427 $49,831,202 $53,061,896 $40,783,910 $47,466,257 $45,529,764 $45,907,087 $47,847,271 $50,377,711 $50,476,804
2,331,987
1,565,920
1,497,788
2,928,732
GEOUP
1
2
1908
list
34,193,666
7,686,529
4,144,513
3,806,494
I.— CITIES
29,941,262
9,474,427
10,363,905
3,282,302
24,101,390
7,506,128
4,682,859
4,493,533
30,'402,028
6,380,028
5,123,481
6,560,720
HAVING A POPULATION OF
300,000
27,522,011
7,063,419
7,947,374
2,996,960
28,254,423
7,626,657
7,756,040
2,369,967
OE OVEE IN
1907.
33,673,344
5,457,437
5,636,829
3,079,661
34,376,547
8,741,535
4,274,526
2,985,104
36,518,569
6,646,362
4,403,406
2,908,467
GENERAL TABLES.
AT CLOSE OF YEAR, CLASSIFIED BY YEAR OF MATURITY:
with the nilmber assigned to each, see page 127.]
1917
1907.
32i
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
322
Tablb 27.— funded
GROUP
City
num-
Total.
ber.
45
Cambridge, Mass
Haxtford, Conn
Lowell, Mass
454
3,601,848
2, 606, 400
Trenton, N.J
Bridgeport, Conn
Wilmington, Del
Camden, N. J
Des Moines, Iowa
Kansas City, Kans.
Lynn, Mass
New Bedford, Mass
Springfleld, Mass
.
.
Troy,N.Y
Oakland, Cal
Lawrence, Mass
Savannah, Ga
Duluth, Minn
Va
Y
Utica,N.Y
H
Manchester, N.
Schenectady, N. Y..
E vansTille, Ind
San Antonio, Tex
Elizabeth, N. J
Waterbury, Conn
Salt Lake City .Utah.
Wilkes-Barre, Pa
Erie,
Pa
Houston, Tex
Tacoma, Wash
Youngstown, Ohio.
Tex
Terre Haute, Ind
Fort Wayne, Ind
Akron, Ohio
Holyoke, Mass
Brockton, Mass
Covington,
Ky
4,881,910
2,194,000
3,010,160
4,473,960
1,418,200
66,646
234, 166
2,989,319
4,341,200
5,367,835
2,844,700
4,019,366
92,439
1,666,000
2,966,636
2,094,000
2,654,600
3,105,000
2,001,000
4,817,232
1,003,600
982,251
4,252,031
5,628,985
400
3,791,150
3,192,984
Harrisburg, Pa
Charleston, S. C
Portland, Me
Dallas,
188,400
365,872
40,930
20,000
6,523,650
1,901,223
1,063,100
4,818,316
1,537,586
Hobokeu, N.J
Yonkers.N.
1908
1817,600
2,924,887
2,121,066
1,622,000
2,893,060
6,699,008
Somerville, Mass
111
1908
HAVING A POPULATION OF
7, 442,
Beading, Pa
Peoria,
Prior to
$10,741,950
4, 117, 3S3
Albany,N.Y
Norfolk,
III.— CITIES
2, 564,
.
1,736,979
2,358,760
620,000
819,800
1,360,754
2,734,100
2,987,600
2,063,950
'i,'666
'
'2,666
14,000
8,300
46,000
3,660
600
300
308,885
57, 104
'i3,'666
1909
S131, 500
296,372
955,973
64,220
28,000
3,600
2,019
1910
1911
$668,500
282,087
$168, 500
94,510
8,000
161,440
8,000
345, 747'
369,012
TO
[For a
list
100,000
IN
1912
by states,
of the cities arranged alphabetically
1907.
1913
$360,500
518,452
126,000
268,742
163,000
$172,500
223, 452
77, 675
48,000
89,000
60,250
365,000
289,587
41,000
112,650
260
1914
1915
1916
$177,500
370, 162
36,000
178,090
20,000
$632,500
267, 207
$998,600
190,482
288, 120
231,704
78,000
38,000
250
16,700
130,836
163,000
114,800
250
330,000
396,675
38,000
128,300
40,260
300,000
160,000
241,000
371,000
238,200
179,962
80,000
145,500
65,000
39, 200
198, 462
80,000
114, 600
33,000
73,200
310,523
76,362
73,700
111,000
52,200
96,600
232, 392
132,000
227,900
48,000
67,860
83,750
29,600
195,600
48,000
300,900
77,760
2,000
227,750
216,000
22,957
209, 600
170, 000
77,200
171,838
202,000
399,000
229,000
32,200
163, 596
50,000
277,900
111,000
43,200
174,962
67,000
364,000
90,000
42,200
182, 462
200,000
303,000
39,200
182,962
96,363
136,600
151,500
96,362
126,600
146, 600
2,650,100
12,000
96,363
116,600
142,000
96,362
105,000
137,000
96,363
103,600
130,000
115,000
100,000
76,363
83,200
117,000
239,660
70,000
320,000
91,000
24,000
38,100
169,000
68,668
110,000
21,000
27, 650
177,000
53,086
458,000
50,000
27,000
152,000
60,660
64,000
151,700
49,270
106,500
35,000
11,000
166,600
54,270
53,750
43,289
365,800
608,000
77,840
10,000
76,934
27,200
13,000
49,900
427,100
74,028
60,000
70, 645
13,200
42,400
30,000
180,570
107,750
229,095
67,966
48,000
103, 100
41,600
138,000
61,063
75, 113
i
•
8,000
199,200
33,000
39,200
154,262
74,362
41,600
78,500
547,000
75,000
107,645
29,200
68,300
110,000
134, 645
1,946,200
68, 300
82,000
330,000
133,646
13,200
68,300
160,000
130, 646
13, 200
68, 300
260,000
142,345
13,200
70, 230
140,000
148,345
13,200
70,230
264,000
49,000
64,000
220,000
69,600
4,000
23,032
39,000
800,000
41,000
502,000
23,032
29,000
29,000
42,000
8,600
23,032
42,000
7,600
23,032
189,300
178,900
12,000
29,000
33,732
22,000
66,000
33,632
22,000
11,000
33, 332
22,000
21,000
23,032
49,000
395,000
27,000
3,000
547,032
48,400
36,400
700,000
86,400
51,900
000
182,900
182,900
'499,'666'
106,000
"79,' 666
201, 135
162,952
112, 798
10,000
20,000
10,000
20,000
10,000
20,000
75,193
68,000
10,000
36,800
123,000
6,000
61,193
11,000
40,000
5,000
179,885
259, 100
90,000
2,463
127,970
178, 100
104,370
93,100
50,000
2,463
81,380
186,000
76,000
2,613
53,640
226,500
25,000
1,242
37,840
167,000
60,000
761
""ii,'666
36,400
1,728,700
1,013,000
1,100
235,578
268,027
233,392
6,000
24,000
25,000
24,000
49,000
211,311
183, 100
176,638
130, 100
2,463
126, 300
110,000
67, 646
13,200
68,300
46,000
400
2,960
18,000
5,000
60,000
198,000
44,160
60,760
1,000
84,000
34, 696
DEBT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT LOANS AT CLOSE
"22,' 566'
15,000
2,463
2, 240,
52,000
10,000
319,0'jO
111,380
345, 100
2,363
'
'36,' 666'
66,718
63,000
GENERAL TABLES.
323
OF YEAR, CLASSIFIED BY YEAR OF MATURITY: 1907—Continued,
with the
number
assigned to each, see page 127.]
GROUP m.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF
1917
50,000
TO
100,000
IN
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
324
Table 27.— FUNDED
GROUP
City
IV.—CITIES
DEBT AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT LOANS AT CLOSE
HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
TO
[For a
list
of the cities arranged alphabetically
50,000
IN
1907.
by states,
I
num-
Total.
ber.
Saginaw, Mich..
Lincohi, Nebr..
Altoona, Pa
Spokane, Wash.
Lancaster, Pa.
.
Birmingham, Ala.
Bayonne, N. I
South Bend, Ind..
Butte,
Mont
Pawtucket, R. I...
McKeesport, Pa
Binghamton, N.
Johnstown, Pa
Y
Dubuque, Iowa
Sioux City, lowa...
Augusta,
Ga
Mobile, Ala
Topeka, Kans
110
Springfield, Ohio..
111
Allentown,
112
113
114
lis
116
East St. Louis,
Wheeling,
Pa
111..
W.Va..
Montgomery, Ala.
Passaic, N. J
Davenport, Iowa..
Atlantic City, N.J.
117
118
119
120
Little Rock, Ark..
Bay City, Mich
121
York, Pa
Maiden, Mass
122
Springfield, 111.
123
124
125
126
Quincy, 111
Canton, Ohio..
Superior, Wis..
Chester,
Pa
127
128
129
130
131
Chelsea,
Mass
132
133
134
135
Haverhill, Mass.
Jacksonville, Fla.
South Omaha, Nebr.
Newcastle, Pa
Salem, Mass
Newton, Mass
Joplin,
Mo
Wichita, Kans
Rockford, Bl
Knoxville, Tenn
Ehnlra, N.Y
Galveston, Tex
New
Conn.
Chattanooga, Tenn.
Britain,
Kalamazoo, Mich.
Woonsocket, R.I.
Fitchburg, Mass..
Racine,
Wis
Auburn,
N.Y
Macon, Ga
JoUet.ni
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Oshkosh, Wis
West Hoboken, N.J.
Sacramento, Cal
Pueblo, Colo
Everett, Mass
Taunton, Mass
Newport, Ky
La Crosse, Wis
Fort Worth, Tex.
San Juan, P. R.
1
Prior to
1908
S2, 521,580
!t350
1,737,108
2,187,400
3,539,160
1,234,500
6,600
2,815,823
2,674,260
793,477
667,593
5,345,000
1,715,676
814,919
648,700
1,352,163
1,773,868
1,733,500
3,684,012
2,306,603
1,266,645
1,136,400
1,392,600
424,000
2,609,255
901,657
575,000
'i6,'666
1,925,100
1,325,979
629, 635
987, 600
5, 777, 700
1,734,000
1, 783, 487
372,000
1,446,177
1910
1911
$216,780
402,000
$224,780
196,600
$193,820
215,000
$196,420
80,000
16,000
16,000
250,000
46,000
1,200,000
16,000
16,000
41,000
147,000
11,000
17,000
17,500
475,000
31,000
50,000
'eoojooo
264,323
172,000
61,000
107,000
20,000
107,000
20,000
3,450
42,000
30,500
25,000
29,200
378,500
2,375
25,000
35,845
25,000
1,894,192
10,000
97,062
57,000
10,000
109,564
57,000
13,400
10,000
176,420
69,000
10,000
84,321
62,600
75,200
39,000
400
1,376,000
1,120,500
4,283,038
2,000,000
2,281,000
3S
1915
1916
$160,920
146,000
$199,860
50,000
16,000
50,000
33,250
63,250
63,250
39,500
23,000
66,000
32,000
40,000
140,000
13,600
13,000
18,000
8,500
48,000
68,000
102,600
227,000
69,000
50,000
150,000
35,000
17,000
10,000
2,600
25,800
35,000
22,000
10,000
4,650
25,800
36,000
22,000
41,000
22,000
41,000
22,000
41,139
25,000
13,622
25,000
327,000
76,100
10,000
168,578
58,000
200,000
10,000
128,623
64,000
45,000
10,000
91,732
66,000
24,500
10,000
53,869
51,000
23,600
10,000
42,628
63,000
15,700
$129,960
90,000
60,000
9,000
10,000
18,436
23,000
18,000
23,600
18,435
28,000
17,000
18,435
23,000
276,000
18,435
34,500
18,435
32,500
18,435
32,500
115,000
18,435
33,500
18,435
45,500
185,000
110,000
22,719
49,500
164,200
52,000
109,500
134,000
7,000
57,200
16,000
22,600
95,000
5,000
174,200
104,000
22,500
141,500
8,000
66,200
16,000
22,500
35,000
33,600
78,200
26,000
12,500
135,000
10,000
114,200
25,000
12,500
32,000
31,000
86,200
16,000
2,500
20,000
10,000
48,200
79,000
2,600
50,000
48,500
68,000
16,674
62,000
113,944
16,674
53,333
113,100
16,674
94,333
57,286
16,674
84,334
136,360
12,000
5,500
16,674
83,333
166,900
12,000
7,000
16,674
83,333
92,000
6,674
83,333
90,000
62,600
13,000
6,674
67,000
137,420
28,000
16,674
83,334
95,500
114,084
92,500
69,200
1,370
43,700
112
42,700
2,660
23,000
129,965
4,400
31, 520
142,320
99,950
69,000
70,450
29,000
63,650
128,000
1,081,500
68,280
15,000
59,650
290,600
64, 860
23,000
46,850
391,000
43,350
424,000
50,000
6,054
60,000
40,000
172,000
72,500
138,000
105,000
72,000
28,000
25,000
21,000
13,000
164, 477
31,005
3,576
38, 374
1,500
16,500
131,635
6,480
1,069
1911
18,435
67,073
650,000
33,700
309,686
2,100
1918
$216,532
139,600
13,000
27,985
103,834
1912
S20e,262
26,000
338,676
27,434
449, 717'
981,670
2,553,000
1,753,110
614,000
714,305
1909
166,600
3,904,000
429,639
1,646,552
1,166,810
2,061,900
1,132,214
848,333
1,802,943
1,084,020
914,600
1908
54,850
303,000
75,848
43,711
79,255
54,817
236,479
26,817
23, 417
65,366
11,517
54,896
11,617
10,600
54, 820
10, 917
50,000
62,000
275,000
65,000
51,500
36,000
37,000
31,000
95,000
48,600
30,000
'4i,'666
31,000
125,000
11,000
111,000
156,000
'ii'666'
'26," 666'
11,000
11,000
"ii,'666'
97, 947
57,719
41,460
200,000
127,406
29,000
36,751
70,450
92,000
19,286
27,000
32,734
112,450
75,306
31,000
84,418
67,806
46,000
77,056
106,376
90,000
162,506
31,000
42,699
61,950
78,906
39,000
66,658
90,606
131,000
41,986
247,206
35,600
32, 158
59, 106
836, 900
1,000
2,000
6,105
7,500
20,000
2,000
6,105
7,500
15,000
2,000
6,106
25,000
15,000
2,000
114,905
53,000
16,000
2,000
7,500
26,400
391,900
26, 106
7,500
20,000
2,000
348,525
1,299,500
603,400
1,000
6,105
7,600
20,000
7,600
15,000
31,000
10,000
112,258
26,500
10,375
26,600
107,375
26,500
44, 875
66,675
4,500
21,600
245,600
32,760
4,600
21,600
8,000
31,550
4,600
21,600
68,175
21,500
70,000
61,288
4,500
26,500
76,675
21, 875
26,500
468,000
166,075
40,300
62,500
20,200
12,000
53,600
102,000
13,378
12,000
92,000
70,800
88,128
12,000
13,088
8,828
44,892
16, 571
725,681
811,100
2,967,496
1,466,003
2,211,776
1,211,300
884,235
1,864,828
662,463
127,946
4',
800
' '
"576
174,423
7,100
3,500
200
2,000
21,100
69, 750
'i7,'976
17,970
12,000
1,000
69,000
17, 970
12,000
93, 800
37,000
34,970
12,000
23,000
22,773
12,000
39, 250
30,000
41, 601
I
25,050
GENERAL TABLES.
325
OF YEAR, CLASSIFIED BY YEAR OF MATURITY: 1907—Continued,
with the
number
assigned to each, see page 127.]
GEOUP
1917
IV.-CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
TO
60,000
IN
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
326
Table 28.— FUNDED DEBT, SPECIAL
[For a
list of
ASSESSMENT LOANS, AND REVIENUE LOANS AT CLOSE OF YEAR, CLASSIFIED
BY RATE OF INTEREST: 1907.
the cities arranged alphabetically
City
num-
Total.
3 per cent.
3J per cent.
ber.
Grand
Group
Group
Group
total...
I
GROUP
Baltimore, Md
Pittsburg, Pa
Cleveland, Ohio
N.Y
Buffalo,
San Francisco, Cal..
Detroit,
Mich
Cincinnati, Ohio
Milwaukee, Wis
New Orleans, La.
Washington, D.
C
.
I.— CITIES
4i per cent.
5 per cent.
6 per cent.
7 per cent.
reported
rates.
$217,643,565 $304,067,458
48,070,933
42,636,670
32,844,287
22,169,288
3,866,600
35,634,200
6,128,600
19,956,000
'4,'i8i,'466
12,250,942
50,516,043
10,391,605
21,515,295
14,296,893
550, 000
,130,000
104,000
331,804,377
287,500 116,297,344
104,000 75,463,628
570,500 46,754,352
19, 6^?, 750
HAVING A POPULATION OF
$788,777,602
82,164,076
72,188,782
18,344,178
105,092,706
GROUP
16
Other
4 per cent.
Rate not
reported.
244,664,965 501,528,930
6,169,000 46,291,600
1,447,750 28,760,428
271,000
11,695,680
115,268,448
Boston, MaoS
127.]
$252,452,715 $588,266,638 $20,604,750 $570,309,601 $103,280,599 $150,483,713 $77,051,756 $20,062,945 $69,019,494 $6,694,9^
GipuplV
.
per
cent.
with the number assigned to each, see page
1,325,124,800
269, 686, 151
158, 147, 735
Chicago, 111
Philadelphia, Pa.
St. Louis, Mo
states,
tl,858,227,134
II
III
New York, N.Y...
3.65
by
2,394,162
44,429,500
2,655,000
56,986,281
300,000
65,042,196
32,968,300
27,273,976
25,199,242
OR OVER IN
46,137,638
14,251,921
6,317,429
10,344,768
51,234,623
11,160,920
4,500,760
2, 123, 191
3,134,000
24,594,544
29,055,238
5,086,368
100,000
7,028,000
6,748,742
13,528,365
4,263,761
17,733,000
490,500
157,297
13,000
409,771
6,280,000
4,393,015
3,564,277
140,600
2,191,167
1,958,616
3,602,240
HAVING A POPULATION OF
100,000
TO
300,000
IN
2,176,314
1,582,723
1,158,221
1,777,665
1907.
1,314,650
186,000
67,475
185, 180
1,663,267
7,500
1,041,333
835,000
52,000
117,000
10,602,750
II.— CITIES
13,817,767
3,939,457
2,087,748
217,973
$20,000 $114,891,214 $44,626,672 $19,885,768 $43,155,200 $10,581,500 $33,906,125
63,320,942
3,210,000 22,235,551
128,300
825,121
6,950,000
781,062
72,220
1,892,000
9,888,178
4,009,000
42,612,025
268,000
10,000
29,000
14,119,550
3,865,600
5,243,200
23,341,875
2,763,504
49,175,240
26,737,386
11,053,896
16,314,077
1907.
621,000
1,708,083
5,668,675
$50,000
1,006,000
554,336
564,923
10,532
1,301,724
10,000
3, 694, 143
1,055
GENERAL TABLES.
Table 28.— FUNDED DEBT, SPECIAL
[For a
list ol
City
number.
ASSESSMENT LOANS, AND REVENUE LOANS AT CLOSE OF YEAR, CLASSIFIED
BY RATE OF INTEREST: 1907— Continued.
the cities arranged alphabetically
GROUP
327
III.—CITIES
by states, with
the
number
HAVING A POPULATION OF
assigned to each, see page 127.]
60,000
TO
100,000
IN
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
328
Table 28.— FUNDED DEBT, SPECIAL ASSESSMENT LOANS, AND REVENUE LOANS
BY RATE OF IN.TEREST: 1907—Continued.
[For a
list of
the cities arranged alphabetically
GROUP
City
number.
IV.— CITIES
by states, with the number
HAVING A POPULATION OP
AT CLOSE OF YEAR, CLASSIFIED
assigned to each, see page 127.]
30,000
TO
50,000
IN
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
330
Table 29.—ASSESSED
VALUATION OF PROPERTY, BASIS
[For a
list
of the cities arranged alphabetically
ASSESSED VALUATION OF PROPASSESSED VALUATION OF PROPERTY FOR CITY CORPORATION.
ERTY FOR
INDEPENDENT
DIVISIONS OF CITY
GOVERN-
MENT.
by states,
REPORTED BASIS OF
ASSESSUENT
m
PRACTICE
(PER
CENT OF TRUE
VALUE).'
Subject to general property
City
taxes.
number.
Subject to special property
Total.
Real property.
Grand
total
Groupl
Group II
Group III
Group IV
Chicago, 111
Philadelphia, Pa.
St. Louis, Mo
Boston, Mass
Baltimore,
Md
Pittsburg, Pa
Cleveland, Ohio...
Buffalo,
San Francisco, Cal.
N.Y
Detroit, Mich
Cincinnati, Ohio...
Milwaukee, Wis . .
New Orleans, La.
Washington, D. C.
taxes.
School dis-
Other divi-
tricts.
sions.
erty.
$22,629,939,558
$18,162,769,241
$3,046,157,130
$1,421,013,187
$4,817,424,465
$3,014,201,036
15,077,407,729
3,712,421,811
2,354,171,833
1,485,938,185
12,215,678,451
2,850,649,213
1,920,309,044
1,176,232,533
1,531,145,659
821,500,440
391,158,471
302,352,660
1,330,683,619
40,272,158
42,704,318
7,353,092
2,227,821,920
1,368,952,243
677,844,952
552,805,350
2,595,895,744
295,305,050
114,347,367
8,652,875
GBOUP
New York, N.Y..
Personal prop-
I.—CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
$7,796,175,039
477,921,976
1,287,287,123
571,791,577
1,316,709,757
$6,240,480,602
346,843,590
1,285,380,150
387,512,610
1,070,884,400
628,763,439
686,742,887
240,262,316
325,776,081
454,708,331
337,421,871
681,957,037
176,819,230
290,831,169
349,511,992
339,217,690
242,988,590
216,975,945
217,366,255
277,727,824
6
241,373,710
242,988,590
165,014,470
143,234,196
255,324,834
$654,861,313
131,078,386
1,906,973
300,000
OR OVER IN
1907.
Beal
Personal
property. property.
GENERAL TABLES.
OF ASSESSMENT, AND TAXES LEVIED:
with the ntltaiber assigned to each, see page 127.]
BATE OF GENERAL PKOPERTT TAXES
PEB $1,000 OF—
1907.
331
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
332
VALUATION OF PROPERTY, BASIS
Table 29.—ASSESSED
[For a
GROUP m.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF
60,000
TO
100,000
list of
IN
the cities arranged alphabetically
ASSESSED VALUATION OF PKOP-
ERTY FOB
ASSESSED VALUATION OF PKOPE^TY FOB CITY COKPOKATION.
INDEPENDENT
DIVISIONS OF CITY
GOVEBN-
MENT.
Subject
City
to general
by states,
1907.
BEPOETED BASIS OF
ASSESSMENT IN
PBACTICE
CENT
OF
(PEE
TEUE
VALITE).!
property
taxes.
number.
Subject to special property
Total.
Real property.
Cambridge, Mass
Albany, N.
Hartford, Conn...
Lowell, Mass
Beading, Pa
Y
Personal prop-
tricts.
Other
divisions.
Real
Personal
property, property.
erty.
$107,009,290
82,814,082
72,535,383
75,454,738
51,663,400
$89,235,300
69, 440, 697
63,429,342
59,690,910
61,616,190
$17,601,000
5,259,850
9,106,041
14,863,340
148,210
68,978,869
74,608,171
49,238,867
49,897,528
18,610,340
59,826,976
65,494,566
49,238,867
44,845,829
14,490,090
9,151,894
9,013,606
13,888,502
65,912,157
71,279,611
92,378,624
59, 224, 212
9,096,397
52,420,790
43,293,200
73,319,860
53,027,521
4,792,105
12,614,905
26,407,675
18,355,010
2,954,463
103,653,400
54,246,294
61,527,760
47,392,051
35,153,158
85,773,400
41,442,650
55,372,500
34,049,926
25, 978, 197
17,880,000
12,341,900
6,084,700
13,342,126
8,023,021
48,027,360
65,856,619
11,376,291
66, 417, 644
44,194,304
36,232,040
58,887,700
8,304,531
56,424,060
32,406,160
2,064,540
6,968,819
3,070,760
3,596,700
4,542,780
35,388,394
45,287,076
32,637,960
54,661,470
49,988,620
29,648,673
33,976,614
22,818,040
40, 304, 906
•49,988,620
6,739,821
9,076,639
9, 819, 920
14,366,666
55,963,821
46,917,627
43,120,243
22, 520, 599
60,876,142
46,279,446
33,363,731
42,959,973
'22,520,699
40,791,560
9,684,376
13,663,796
160,270
42,960,214
41,792,207
17,723,953
54,198,386
33,047,460
•41,792,207
12,956,463
38,970,600
9,912,764
4,767,490
15,227,786
28,046,390
49,692,234
28,656,920
30,581,530
19,273,690
34,187,825
20,403,720
22,644,660
8,772,700
15,404,409
8,263,200
7,936,870
25,639,470
44,753,780
37,408,333
25,319,119
17,823,190
33,661,240
30, 485, 730
19,194,643
7, 816, 280
10,605,310
6,696,923
6, 124, 476
Trenton,.N. J
Bridgeport, Conn.
Wilmington, Del..
Camden, N. J
Bes Moines, Iowa..
School dis-
taxes.
61,663,400
100
100
75
100
76
100
100
75
100
75
100
100
18, 510, 340
100
100
70
100
25
20
100
100
90
100
20
100
100
60
100
50
100
100
100
100
75
76
$172,990
8,113,635
$72, 443, 583
900, 488
5,061,699
4,020,250
100
25
r
Kansas City, Kans.
Lynn, Mass
New Bedford,
Mass
Springfield,
Troy, N.
Mass..
Y
Oakland, Cal
Lawrence, Mass...
Somerville, Mass..
Savannah, Ga
Duluth, Minn
Norfolk,
Va
Hoboken, N.
J.
Peoria, HI
Yonkers, N. Y.,
Utica, N. Y
Manchester, N. H...
Schenectady, N. Y.
E vansvUle, Ind
San Antonio, Tex...
Elizabeth, N. J
Waterbury, Conn
Salt Lake City, Utah.
WiUces-Barre, Pa
Erie,
Pa
Houston, Tex
Tacoma, Wash..
Harrisburg, Pa
.
Charleston, S. C.
Portland, Me
Youngstown, Ohio..
Dallas,
87
Tex
Terre Haute, Ind...
Fort Wayne, Ind...
Akron, Ohio
Holyoke, Mass.
Brockton, Mass.,
Covington, Ky..
GROUP
Saginaw, Mich
Lincoln,
Altoona,
Nebr
Pa
Spokane, Wash...
Lancaster,
99
100
101
Pa
Birmingham, Ala
Bayonne, N. J
South Bend, Ind.
Butte,
Mont
Pawtuoket, B.
I..
IV.—CITIES
7,304,439
104, 590, 860
$2,680,499
461,744
70,650
9,730,780
11,745,100
25
40
36, 153, 158
1,151,940
12,592,618
6,397,794
7,246,374
67
100
20
100
65
100
75
70
2,233,923
32,637,960
90
70
100
60
50
46,917,527
43,120,243
22, 620, 599
m
10,084,592
44,853,601
41,792,207
17,723,963
(»)
HAVING A POPULATION OF
$16,974,675
4,490,246
'22,566,236
27,071,790
20,600,421
$9,058,168
3,306,295
28,710,054
33,286,470
21,897,960
23,160,360
42,799,300
19,960,267
29,109,099
15,678,610
"23,150,350
35,728,640
8,759,787
4,177,371
6,219,340
2
976,462
1,578,736
703,754
3,242,238
40
100
20
100
65
100
76
70
{')
$25,032,733
7,795,540
22,566,235
36,796,907
20,537,391
'
13,888,602
60
67
50
"67,'236,"6i6'
28,666,920
30, 681, 630
26,694,650
497,230
225,680
30,000
TO
50,000
IN
100
36,970
21,897,950
23,150,350
(»)
7,070,760
For property subject to general property taxes.
Rate on bank stock was $10 and on mortgages, $2.50.
tax" was$l and "military commutation tax,"
'So-called "poll
* Not reported.
3
smaU portion
60
100
100
76
1907.
$9,178,450
22,565,236
36,084,697
20,537,391
of city.
$2.
60
67
50
100
40
66
60
65
28,046,390
m
8,725,117
Horses and mules are taxed at $1 each.
• Average rate.
Sanitary districts are only
41,838,634
70
100
60
100
100
75
GENERAL TABLES.
333
OF ASSESSMENT, AND TAXES LEVIED: 1907—Continued.
with the number assigned to each, see page
127.]
GROUP
III.— CITIES
KATE OF QI&IEBAL PBOPEETY TAXES
PER
11,000
OF—
Rate oJ
special
property
taxes
per
Assessed valuation lor-
tl.OOO
Other
AU diCity
diviSchool sions of
visions
(aver-
corpo-
dis-
city
age
ration.
tricts.
gov-
Re-
otus-
ported
true
value.
valuation.
ern-
rate).
ment.
{16.64 $16.64
15.52
15.52
17.36
21.40
17.18
17.18
10.00
14.00
$16. 64
15.52
16.05
17.18
10.50
S4.-04
9.44
14.95
10.77
11.10
17.78
9.44
9.44
14.95
16.38
11.10
71.14
14.95
15.38
11.10
43.24
50.00
15.74
15.11
12.86
18.04
30.00
15.74
15.11
12.86
17.09
•12.78
14.22
15.25
13.90
31.00
12.08
14.22
15.25
13.90
16.47
16.50
9.52
51.40
17.19
16.50
9.52
27.90
10.00
15.74
15.11
10.52
18.04
0.66
SI. 00
14.53
20.00
6.70
5.45
14.22
15.25
10.42
11.84
10.62
9.52
10.28
17.19
7.38
11.36
24.70
17.19
11.36
14.49
15.64
19.00
16.55
9.91
14.49
15.64
12.00
16.55
9.91
7.00
14.49
11.73
13.30
13.24
9.91
12.94
22.30
11.50
22.00
18.00
12.94
13.00
6.50
14.00
18.00
9.30
5.00
8.00
11.40
15.61
11.60
13.20
9.00
22.83
15.25
29.75
17.60
13.83
9.00
28.25
17.30
8.00
6.25
1.50
21.20
19.00
18.40
17.50
12.10
19.00
10.50
11.00
9.10
22.80
15.37
17.45
17.00
13.80
15.37
17.45
17.00
1.00
0.30
7.90
6.50
9.00
13.70
10.22
14.88
14.93
8.48
12.54
11.04
11.38
13.68
15.37
17.45
12.95
$18.80
"ig.'io"
Rate
ol
poll
taxes.
HAVING A POPULATION OF
50,000
TO
100.000
IN
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
334
Table 29.—ASSESSED
VALUATION OF PROPERTY, BASIS
[For a
GHOUP
IV.— CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
TO
50,000
list of
the cities arranged alphabetically
by
states,
IN 1907— Continued.
ASSESSED VALUATION OF PEOPASSESSED VALUATION OF PROPERTY FOE CITT CORPORATION.
ERTY FOR
INDEPENDENT
DIVISIONS OF CITY
GOVERN-
MENT.
REPORTED BASIS OF
ASSESSMENT IN
PEACTICE
(PEE
CENT OF TEUE
VALUE).l
Subject to general property
City
taxes.
number.
Subject to special property
Real property.
102
103
104
105
106
McKeesport, Pa
Binghatnton, N. Y.
Johnstown, Pa
107
108
109
110
111
Augusta,
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
Dubuque, Iowa
Sioux City, Iowa.
.
Ga
Mobile, Ala. -
Topeka, Kans
Springfleld, Ohio.
Allentown, Pa
East
St. Louis, 111.
WheeUng, W. Va..
Montgomery, Ala..
Fassaic,
N.J
Davenport, Iowa.
Atlantic City, N. J.
Little Rock, Ark.
Bay City, Mich
.
York, Pa
Maiden, Mass
Springfield,
111.,
Quinoy, 111
Canton, Ohio..
Superior, Wis.
Chester, Pa
127
128
129
130
131
Chelsea, Mass
132
133
134
135
136
Haverhill, Mass...
Jacksonville, Fla.
Joplin, Mo
137
138
139
140
141
Knoxville,
Blmira, N.
Galveston,
South Omaha, Nebr.
Newcastle, Pa
Salem, Mass
Newton, Mass
Personal prop-
m
15,648,865
17,921,561
9,602,850
14,264,650
30,070,614
7,151,673
8,437,479
2,868,005
7,233,330
108,495
12,460,855
22,179,800
30, 179, 109
80
60
40
67
100
6,357,939
58,277,648
21,143,221
28,432,904
21,753,635
26,357,939
36,500,635
13,929,366
24,873,804
13,152,995
21,777,113
7,213,855
3,669,100
8,600,640
51,433,280
19,070,688
15,133,967
19,932,816
32, 759, 650
47,794,410
13,605,010
11,758,180
19,862,111
26,373,500
3,638,870
6,466,678
3,375,787
70,705
6,299,600
8,652,875
5,920,267
16,772,960
15,525,566
17,288,435
6,272,445
3,916,549
12,323,790
13,183,436
17,266,200
2,380,430
2,003,718
4,449,170
2,342,130
23,235
26,414,750
21,926,100
16,961,270
31, 451, 589
67, 523, 685
23,524,850
14,837,010
16,921,710
21,80? 200
60,468,800
2,889,900
7,089,090
39,560
9, 147, 900
16,882,450
28,609,398
22,203,230
7,389,833
7,690,657
22, 165, 010
5, 698, 180
4, 712, 530
2,365,883
1,994,017
2, 588, 404
22,800,438
26,359,040
12, 4 jO, 855
21,4J7,980
30,179,109
m
3, 553,
931
?, 516,
664
Chattanooga, Tenn.
6, 102,
195
142
143
Kalamazoo, Mich..
Woonsocket, R. I.
19,034,110
19,206,150
144
145
146
Fitchburg, Mass.
Racine, Wis
26, 474, 438
19,728,555
18,410,728
12,531,000
15,875,450
20,898,300
15,286,025
16, 278, 610
6,503,110
3,330,700
5,268,625
4,442,630
1,026,882
19,735,901
3, 990, 637
6, 667, 529
19, 102, 153
12,352,319
2, 900, 443
4, 032, 157
14,204,110
7,383,582
1, 090, 194
1,635,372
4,898,043
20,919,200
27,253,150
16,261,148
24,050,350
19,464,300
21,619,200
13,693,240
21, 376, 500
Fort Worth, Tex.
21,907,906
13,288,890
19,651,048
34, 681, 475
16,238,885
10,912,575
13,243,133
24, 618, 515
4,798,196
2,376,315
6,407,915
10,062,960
San Juan, P. R.,
16,848,724
10,547,946
6,300,778
147
148
149
150
Britain,
Auburn, N.
Conn.
.
Y
Macon, Ga
Joliet,Ill
Oklahoma City,
Olda..
Oshkosh, Wis
151
152
153
154
WestHoboken, N.
155
156
157
158
Taunton, Mass...
Newport, Ky
J.,
Sacramento, Cal
Pueblo, Colo
Everett, Mass
La Crosse, Wis
1
2
'
*
'
'
$1,927,870
(2)
14,909,445
17,936,245
17, 479, 594
17,669,100
15,743,865
New
Real
Personal
property. property.
6,646,180
2,178,098
$22,722,383
$1,588,000
167
Y
divisions.
50
80
60
65
25
2822,722,383
21,696,660
216,986,895
17,730,270
5,949,839
7, 645,
Tex
Other
16,986,895
4 7,478,283
8,127,937
$22,722,383
25,212,530
16,986,895
24,376,450
8,127,937
19,008,500
20,934,891
21,033,525
25,184,764
21,846,060
Term
tricts.
erty.
17,490,700
5,023,950
5, 696, 640
5,056,763
Wichita, Kans
Rockford, 111
School dis-
taxes.
4,099,055
1,364,780
6,336,971
58,277,648
'11,204,301
19,521,543
19,932,816
86,550
8,984,707
5,920,267
16,744,610
17,288,435
'4,313,376
16,961,270
501, 489
172, 435
746,208
804
7,690,657
» 7,
590,
1,634,866
21,033,525
19, 489,
925
307, 513
1,
$8,652,875
13
100
50
100
25
10
100
50
100
25
67
33
100
67
100
67
33
100
67
100
15
20
SO
60
70
30
50
70
100
100
60
100
100
100
100
100
80
40
20
16
100
80
40
20
16
80
67
75
65
60
60
67
75
65
65
67
100
45
65
50
60
45
100
20
lOO
20
16
100
100
60
50
100
100
40
50
100
100
67
92
60
100
67
100
60
100
100
105, 336
3,990,637
6,212,449
1,454,900
950
2,567,908
2,673,860
31, 500, 926
6, 633,
16,261,148
870,825
For property subject to general property taxes.
Valuation of personal property included in real property valuation.
Rate on bank stock was $10 and on mortgages, $2.50.
School district taxes assessed on county valuation.
Average rate based on city valuation.
Rate of occupation taxes per $1 ,000 of assessed valuation of occupation.
School tax is levied on county assessment.
60
100
100
15.
GENERAL TABLES.
335
OF ASSESSMENT, AND TAXES LEVIED: 1907—Continued,
with the
number assigned
to each, see page 127.]
GROUP
IV.-CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
BATE OF OENBBAL PSOPEKTY TAXES
PER J1,000 OF—
30,000
TAX
TO
50,000
IN 1907-Contlnued.
LEVIES.
PEE CAPITA.
Rate of
special
property
taxes
per
Assessed valaatlon for—
Other
AU
Re-
Classified
of
poll
taxes.
(1,000
of as-
by
division of city gov-
ernment levying.
Total.
valua-
Other
tion.
City corpo-
School dis-
divisions of
ration.
tricts.
city gov-
ernment.
ern-
rate).
Classified
by character.
Total
ported
diviCity School sions of true
visions
value.
dis(aver- corpocity
ration. tricts.
age
govdi-
Rate
General
property
Special
property
valuaPoll
tion.
Property
taxes.
taxes.
ment.
t20.75 SIO. 75 $10.00
19.31
19.31
11.00
21.13
10.13
«17.14
12.00
17.00
34.73 25.50
tlO.38
15.30
12.68
11.14
15.06
12. SO
13. SO
39.90
20.30
11.44
12.50
13.50
19.90
12.40
6.44
10.00
8.10
16.73
13.60
11.43
69.20
6.45
11.25
9.40
»24.78
35w30
3.85
11.25
9.40
15.36
12. 6S
13.00
21.57
15.50
15.62
12.65
6.00
21.57
8.50
15.62
59.70
64.70
23.90
27.93
16.00
26.00
40.20
13.90
27.93
10.00
19.63
18.50
15.39
14.10
19.63
9.70
10.50
15.39
14.10
15.46
15.86
30.00
41.75
42.86
15.46
15.86
15.00
24.00
42.86
.16.50
22.62
18.00
15.47
15.50
16.50
22.62
16.00
15.47
15.50
16.23
15.29
17.68
16.80
19.74
10.00
15.29
17.68
16.80
19.74
12.50
68.40
38.00
16.40
12.50
29.00
20.00
16.40
7.77
17.85
31.91
16.38
7.77
15.00
20.21
16.38
15.66
16.99
12.24
17.50
15.66
16.09
12.24
17.50
13.50
13.50
•12.95
20.00
7.90
5.00
33.90
2.60
$1.00
16.70
16.50
8.00
15.00
17.75
1.00
6.23
657,329
264,253
326,457
321, 777
530,716
657,329
114,424
326,457
176,468
530,716
525,599
383,215
433,612
284,845
224,975
238, 122
233, 144
433, 612
172,884
540,327
283,854
327,783
607,617
972,507
540,327
212,683
186, 175
507,617
972,507
15.00
467,409
352,239
224,709
321,000
327,694
467,409
352,239
110,847
184,492
327,694
(»)
321,433
446,307
378,603
321,433
446,307
336,536
396, 161
396, 161
338,614
338,614
311,763
293,700
487,662
331,481
349,121
190,341
293,700
487,662
331,481
349,121
250,199
273,264
225,175
313,201
250,199
115,865
113,351
313,201
164,549
498,575
518,893
411,700
164,649
408,797
328,678
411,700
364,416
.225,817
240,529
606,926
364,416
225,817
240,529
606,926
329,639
225,817
240,529
606,926
227,458
227,458
227,458
•8.50
2.00
1.00
2.00
(»)
17.80
16.40
2.00
2.00
17.80
2.00
(")
20.00
1.00
2.00
(".")"
2.00
39.40
18.00
10.00
13.68
5.70
16.40
7.77
9.95
15.96
16.38
1.00
2.85
11.70
•
2.00
18.60
2.00
90196—10-
-22
21,856
6,099
650,087
251,075
326,457
314,760
511,706
$57,974
111,961
7,242
13, 178
1,558
430,787
352,239
219,000
321,000
327,694
113,862
136,508
313,642
436,563
378,603
388,904
338,614
42,067
121,422
tax" was
$1
7,017
17,452
525,599
383,215
400,590
433,612
276, 615
311,763
293,700
462,720
331,481
341,594
708. 13
6.52
8.15
11.62
10.35
8.10
149. 49
1,389.91
505.25
680.85
522. 75
10.33
8.97
5.68
6.04
12.95
1,239.51
462. 86
373. 12
497.34
823.40
15.67
6.09
8.05
7.85
12.90
220. 96
13.42
9.68
10.28
11.19
7.15
149. 57
430.38
400.81
447.08
21,820
618,507
283,854
313,805
476,257
949,503
71,171
141,608
$506.62 $10. 51
566.89
10.41
383.11
8.09
551.53
9.49
184.36
11.10
521.28
603.98
291.20
503.42
8)926
2,828
13,978
22,434
20,176
13,282
23,340
I"
5,
709
7,791
9,754
7,257
(1!)
6,150
18,792
7,527
684.76
568.65
440.96
821.30
1,771.21
751.06
583.54
198.23
208.43
208.31
13.44
7.36
8.16
12.67
6.03
8.70
8.93
585.69
597. 14
727.02
634.76
8.56
12.49
10.75
11.23
9.84
562.87
668.36
787.53
587.77
551.24
9.22
8.69
13.95
9.88
10.46
519. 07
3,500
157,399
111,824
246,699
273,264
225,175
313,201
602.35
122.20
174.64
606.59
7.53
8.37
6.94
162,600
498,575
518,893
394,036
1,949
89,778
190,215
664.59
870.40
521.36
775.29
5.17
15.92
16.64
12.70
708.08
433.33
11.18
7.36
8.25
17,664
16,197
district.
So-called "poll
n Not reported.
i>
$10,175
439,259
376,291
237,861
252,322
539,097
145,309
242,650
145,093
167,446
$13,552
Occupations taxed at rate of $10.50 per $1,000 of assessed valuation, and polls at tl per capita.
Includes property valued at $380,619 subject to special property taxes.
" For school
11
285,005
355,847
497,188
441,795
345,174
203,918
400,-590
I
249,217
175,220
150,896
335, 179
$18.00
9.90
17.68
12.06
11.60
10.08
449,627
358,791
419,653
489,554
214,824
151,522
1.00
1.00
15.46
12.69
12.00
8.35
6.43
•
285,005
365, 847
247,971
266,575
216, 134
$471, 507
182,110
127,136
207,262
224,435
224,769
237,861
258,421
1.00
19.63
12.95
11.10
15.39
14.10
15.66
11.38
11.56
10.50
285,005
355,847
$227,224
439,259
376,291
237,861
258,421
539,097
8.96
12.94
10.15
16.27
11.20
10.55
9.64
15.59
7.56
16.38
$244,283
463,179
186,856
292,517
282,292
441,795
367,030
2.00
8.48
4.29
21.57
10.38
15.62
7.00
1471,607
463,179
368,966
419,653
489,554
497, 188
7.05
6.45
6.62
9.40
6.20
18.20
27.00
24.50
10.00
(•)
and "military commutation tax,"
$2.
Per capita average not computed, because no reliable estimate of population could be made.
18,580
674. 11
(13)
472.28
(18)
6.38
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
336
Table 30
—VALUE AT CLOSE OP YEAR OF PROPERTIES
[For a
list
of the cities arranged alphabetically
LAND, BUILDINGS, AND EQUIPMENT Or PUBLIC SERVICE ENTERPRISES.
by states,
Land,
buildings,
City
nujn-
Watersupply
bei.
Total.
systems.
Grand
Group I.
Group II..
Group;ni.
.
GroijplV.,
total.
$918,852,315
622,606,827
140,580,489
91,848,699
63,916,300
GEOUP
1
$647,334,495
.
381,170,632
128,971,222
83,122,461
54,070,180
I.-CITIES
Electric
light and
gas-supply
Docks,
Cemeteries
Marlcets and
wharves, and
public scales.
and crema-
landings.
All other.
Real prop-
and equip-
erty held as
investment.
ment of
municipal
service
enterprises.
tories.
$14,184,801
$22,502,212
$88,355,884
$12,762,865
$133,712,058
$12,749,778
$10,939,277
5,139,385
4,509,714
3,002,556
1,533,146
17,636,247
2,563,093
1,465,400
837, 472
82,632,372
1,515,072
1,199,887
3,008,553
7,559,865
1,204,760
2,312,180
1,686,060
128,368,326
1,816,628
746,216
2,780,889
7,991,123
2,497,916
1,390,344
870,395
9,059,254
1,283,696
31,167
HAVING A POPULATION OF
300,000
OR OVER IN
1907.
665, 161
GENERAL TABLES.
EMPLOYED OR HELD FOR SPECIFIED PURPOSES:
with the nurtber assigned to each, see page
1907.
127.]
LAND, BUaDINGS, AND EQUIPMENT OF DEPARTMENTS.
337
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
338
Table 30.—YALUE
AT CLOSE OF YEAR OF PROPl^RTIES
[For a
GROUP
III.—CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
50,000
TO
list
100,000
of the cities arranged alphabetically
IN
1907.
by states,
GENERAL TABLES.
EMPLOYED OR HELD FOR SPECIFIED PURPOSES:
and the numBer assigned to each, see page
339
1907— Continued,
127.]
GROUP
III.—CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
60,000
TO
100,000
IN
1907.
LAND, BUILDINGS, AND EQinPMENT OF DEPARTMENTS.
Sewer and
Total.
City build-
Police de-
Fire de-
highway
ings.'
partment.
partment.
depart-
ments.
$55,670
96,900
140,880
128,700
8,826
$287,160
463,700
358,459
448,000
300,400
$250,977
6,900
47,005
196,665
25,000
$102,495
50,000
180,596
224,000
2,034,375
3,390,040
1,673,900
2,018,109
3,838,123
241,100
2^6,000
88,500
163,000
155,000
43,000
126,425
6,500
28,725
56,700
188,865
403,504
80,000
98,000
163,279
308,022
2,000
29,500
11,000
63,950
43,600
2,300,300
3,118,002
2,752,841
4,638,052
2,116,473
30,000
388,070
170,488
102,839
337,000
200
54,262
71,769
99,652
82,600
85,000
293,475
285,500
398,573
422,973
15,000
48,272
102,555
88,879
10,000
7,098,500
2,428,354
3,124,410
5,889,186
3,395,368
1,577,500
117,150
67,555
390,000
115,608
7,600
57,243
57,000
83,015
89, 162
270,000
193,600
256,982
184,871
255,792
138, 190
1,441,221
2,162,400
2,462,287
2,390,840
1,584,296
153,300
187,000
260,000
93,970
196, 616
10,400
26,600
32,830
133,868
23,605
132,021
234,800
188,400
,118,747
189,380
10,000
3,700
10,850
16,000
35,000
2,554,248
'1,812,340
1,279,553
1,803,035
926,576
260,000
107,000
60,000
367,480
133,668
75,750
6,000
21,000
1,719
1,000
308,859
266,500
179,256
121,117
116,480
145,449
3,500
4,000
31,809
26,850
110,510
2,696,070
3,249,793
2,625,400
1,784,026
1,885,437
197,800
580,026
137,000
133,655
655,748
18,200
71,201
7,400
8,997
194, 100
142,387
205,000
217,342
166,000
•256,009
53,670
58,431
5,000
2,508
7,388
2,910,489
1,459,530
1,262,209
2,107,416
263,250
5,000
187,565
250,000
7,650
2,000
125,000
199,075
102,000
137,970
63,975
18,650
4,000
7,500
4,500
2,421,934
1,502,850
1,457,333
1,440,450
66, 123
152,500
34,600
96,000
17,367
223,480
315,250
183,607
142,560
20,355
1,703,084
2,079,651
1,805,146
986,950
15,600
668,000
364,000
285,000
17,274
205,810
243, 80%
146,360
98, 800
11,000
13,300
243,031
7,360
'83,'366
tagious
Jails
reforma-
Schools.
tories.
$16,773
26,000
12, 161
2,900
23,500
4,127
37,000
3,600
122,081
143,426
105,624
24,053
45,604
51,970
1,100
150,600
38,234
8,044
22,794
1,800
3,782
$1,500
50,000
28,667
18,600
36,500
7,500
170,000
15,500
27,000
83,200
"55,660'
9,500
5,000
67,580
32,476
11,120
1,109
15,000
18,014
375
64,267
1,500
24,000
182,500
173,900
4,653
42,500
10,000
10,600
3,000
7,000
37,830
69,500
12,000
5,700
4,000
22,000
'ioi'ooo
50, 175
num-
Libraries,
and
hospitals.
(446,236
558,000
544,264
443,250
28,000
600
8,110
1,500
and con-
houses.
$8,394,953
4,666,700
6,847,411
4,106,990
2,440,075
36,500
53,790
City
General
Asylums
and alms-
art galleries,
Parks and
and
museums.
gardens.
All other.
ber.
$2,290,845
1,338,500
3,538,280
1,852,200
1,478,860
$317,660
814,667
1,468,484
954,900
1,131,655
1,628,000
180,000
249,000
1,957,420
1,321,387
1,420,525
2,766,524
901,200
93,580
385,000
213,526
115,600
386,600
293,600
951,985
325,200
3,060,600
1,214,325
1,544,262
60,000
2,086,000
246,000
65,567
126,000
29,600
169,500
1,866,500
532,128
833,981
5,063,500
566,827
80,130
74,800
193,115
86,216
272,046
415,000
574,600
643,623
171,505
106,800
33,000
15,000
2,500
34,876
29,000
65
66
67
68
69
707,000
500,200
163,500
617,030
124,714
23,600
70
050,200
476,791
1,600,000
180,321
93,232
68,000
53,771
5,270
15,000
140
72,000
80
112,000
679,750
197,530
290,000
496,490
97,600
140,000
200,000
1,028,300
88,100
90,200
85,500
20,266
10,000
10,000
11,000
84
85
206,500
177,906
43,700
2,000
4,000
4,650
1,640
475,000
1,046,000
1,060,469
1,708,659
683,660
270,500
71, 100
167,500
650,000
838,080
919,640
846,797
496,160
462,088
95,000
1,078,200
1,550,968
756,000
1,061,580
743,624
280,000
305,000
1,611,726
1,110,000
331,534
934,550
123,718
1,051,390
727,000
977,916
886,300
1,093,000
930,460
843,960
335,000
95,719
156,500
67,375
135,000
50,000
136,800
$4,295,882
1,973,700
2,004,145
508,375
515,000
$331,255
153,000
21,621
35,300
10,000
45
46
3.35,000
126,243
50
756,000
574,000
260,000
959,901
40,000
60,000
52
53
64
47
48
49
51
96,902
5,850
74,006
36,400
33,600
36,907
40,422
55
56
57
60
61
71
4,421
11,800
15,109
7,539
72
73
74
75
78
77
78
79
81
87
90,
91
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
340
Table 30.—VALUE
AT CLOSE OF YEAR OF PROPERTIES
[For a
GEOUP
IV.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
TO
50,000
list
IN
of the cities arranged alphabetically
1907.
by states,
GENERAL TABLES.
EMPLOYED OR HELD FOR SPECIFIED PURPOSES:
with the
number assigned
to each, see
page
,
3^1
1907— Continued,
127.]
GROUP
IV.—CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
TO
50,000
IN
1907.
LAND, BUILDINGa, AOT) EQUIPMENT OP DEPAETMENTi?.
Sewer and
Total.
Cltyhuild-
Police de-
Fire de-
highway
Ings.i
partment.
partment.
depart-
ments.
$1,563,645
1,105,540
1,359,110
2,615,543
938,565
$172,320
166,500
62,000
285,500
63,400
$24,783
7,040
8,000
19, 650
11,300
$117, 725
$18, 996
51,000
190,848
70,600
6,600
115,000
61, 707
10,000
2,078,984
1,227,754
1,248,749
1,358,623
1,576,933
406,046
70,000
106,570
85,000
66,933
1,468
106,100
14,531
10,000
49,076
157,667
108,538
155,050
123, 623
184,082
31,860
7,000
5,000
26,000
58,609
1,527,000
1,035,569
1,517,900
1,019,383
1,576,292
4,600
180,000
112,000
22,000
131, 663
68,300
1,000
56,000
160,000
170,400
135,500
105,850
20,000
6,000
378, 393
59, 169
106. 402
1,108,700
1,186,875
1,749,413
1,236,100
286,600
112,500
326,000
93,600
11,368
76,000
24,625
47,964
5,000
5,000
4,497
1,562,700
1,090,300
1,087,850
1,003,940
1,472,650
6,000
38,500
122, 500
9,000
425,000
158,000
320,100
165,000
85,000
27,000
1,000
30,000
1,000
19,400
67,000
114,000
89,000
75,440
120, 750
8,200
1,500
60,750
4,700
12,600
2,012,400
1,067,088
1,197,484
1,270,406
2,008,081
250,000
145, 500
220,000
6,800
49,000
26,500
357,000
41,000
135,854
143,500
195,000
6,000
5,000
12,406
8,000
91,205
1,716,242
1,111,250
1, 188, 100
1,053,790
790,900
80,000
105,000
110,000
150,000
40,200
40,000
1,000
6,000
3,300
1,000
151, 120
79, 750
195,000
117,250
21,000
3,184
7,600
28,000
10,000
500
1,364,000
900,700
729,606
1,189,80*
2,570,279
25,000
49,000
80,000
100,000
67,625
82,000
300
10,300
96,093
162,000
40,000
80,600
156,700
265,283
29,800
3,000
3,500
12,000
199, 495
1,532,472
854,294
602,500
1,395,700
1,049,021
124,250
170,000
46,500
160,600
111,810
7,600
66,743
6,600
1,000
12,438
147,225
114,617
28,500
107, 000
100,640
36,350
28,228
5,000
4,000
40,008
497,835
1,083,500
1,045,000
1,605.790
1,116,550
31,500
170,000
162,000
166,760
67,000
1,500
3,000
110,000
29,035
7,000
5,000
46,048
12,000
1,065,000
782,818
1, 668, 490
972,250
534,800
68,000
190,723
72,592
65,500
27,000
379,200
1,066,601
1,331,007
826,900
2,476
6,000
59,964
'
32,000
6,300
134,
,',00
123,000
130. 403
212,000
000
625
32,249
3,7£0
8,000
300
97,000
70, 368
139; 909
56, 500
76,500
79,500
32, 300
72,246
60,000
36,600
4,191
6,925
98,000
78,600
41,518
78,825
477,100
2,193,283
1„869,110
1,084,160
31,200
4,500
46,200
2,600
47,600
2,000
600
5,000
34,000
115, 2t0
135, 000
16, 600
69,600
60,2;;o
1,070,760
652,500
802,719
1,014,216
80,600
50,000
71,697
205,000
12,000
168,000
15,000
103,318
175,837
14,000
7,000
15,546
7,179
367,460
I
104, 400
1,000
35, 636
46, 246
19,
1,060
2,450
7,000
houses.
12,
34,
and contagious
disease
Jails
and
reformat
Schools.
tories.
hospitals.
$1,037,309
640,000
1,053,110
1,662,465
741, 855
$10, 990
'"'5,'666
$1,334
$21, 451
60,500
5,000
10,160
11,200
6,000
44,000
28,600
3,050
120,500
1,100
10,500
3,000
33,000
33,500
45,500
30,400
40,278
16,760
135,000
39,520
31,045
6,800
2,150
2,300
28,000
4,000
7,600
1,300
2,000
56,000
200
2,300
1,200
1,100
2,500
58,000
75,863
3,000
600
700
1,336
'""266
39, 406
13,762
47, 124
70,000
60,000
135,000
326, 961
84,000
125,000
184,483
17,500
8,763
784,000
138,350
141,877
102,218
$19, 200
75, 151
41,000
16,777
7,539
1,721
40,000
15,400
47,000
17,600
397,000
105,500
70,600
33,200
1,200
3,600
91,600,
601,500
60,200
18,000
3,000
125,000
16, 178
83,801
393,600
196, 100
91,197
106, 600
168,000
33,800
826,200
516,400
690,000
662,800
641,000
155,000
75,000
92,000
71,700
444,600
205,000
96,600
36,740
87,200
12,238
810,950
722, 000
632,756
673,000
1,478,593
46,000
215, 9£0
655,745
213, 364
418,000
605,000
579, 390
227,700
668,000
646,000
770, 9tO
486,500
170,000
88,532
28,700
38,200-
40,000
3,000
84,000
78,600
116, 300
17,000
7,600
11,750
24,300
47,134
70,000
7,000
12,000
266,600
30,670
72,706
77,000
7,300
163, 600
232,875
3.0,000
20,o00
610,000
40,000
39,200
30,000
79, 100
22, 600
111,000
194,000
400,000
137, too
125,000
21,000
167, 088
91,000
210, £00
300
29,060
174,808
162,000
10,000
52,927
9,000
9,600
17,4i,0
626,851
1,003,600
419,500
201,000
41, 163
104,000
175,000
53,300
168,000
162,360
26,900
6,672
500
324, 500
1,031,533
919,300
730,900
32,000
700,000
123,000
66,300
39,800
280,000
623,305
69,900
"38,766
486, 300
168,600
56,500
24,600
90,000
71,750
100,000
96, 000
100,000
4,000
42,000
18,600
4,600
600
136, 000
"147,'. 669
8,500
277,063
10,500
776,000
620, 7b0
640,000
973,006
1,159,500
582,000
383, 600
22,000
31,500
110, 000
70,000
26,000
40,000
33,400
289,000
732, 466
1,000
700
44,700
$162, 323
$134,500
All other.
102,000
43,600
70,000
155,000
140,000
203,082
2, £00
21,000
7,606
and
museums.
853,000
730,000
445,000
52'9, 900
806,000
560,000
370,204
300
mmiParks and
66,000
104,000
1,200
2,200
2,260
81
20,000
10,000
3,646
4,600
8,150
Libraries,
art galleries,
831,000
920,000
911,000
19,000
75,500
25,000
16,000
108,000
679,942
720, 227
764,000
940,000
762, 313
1,200,000
496, 369
830,000
661,900
1, 162, 050
14,000
14,000
37,079
100,000
85,500
154,839
176,800
aty
General
Asylums
and alms-
425,000
£06, 435
432, 600
12,060
25,000
1,260
ber.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
342
Table 31.— VALUE
[For a
list
OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS:
of the cities arranged alphabetically
by
states,
1907.
with the number assigned to each, see page
127.]
City
iniin-
Miscella-
Street curb-
Sewers.
Total.
ber.
Street pave-
ments.
ing, gutters,
and side-
Bridges other
than
toll.
walks.
Grand
total
$894,575,349
$380,019,531
$303,686,427
Group I
Group II
Group III
Group IV
GROUP
I.—CITIES
New York, N.Y..
$185,255,024
67,901,874
19,000,000
1,085,000
8,250,000
Chicago, 111
Philadelphia, Pa.
St. Louis, Mo
Boston, Mass
Baltimore, Md
Pittsburg, Pa
Cleveland, Ohio.
Buflalo, N.
San Francisco, Cal
.
Y
Detroit, Mich
Cinciimati, Ohio...
Milwaukee, Wis . .
New Orleans, La.
Washington, D. C.
GROUP
II.—CITIES
Newark, N.J
Louisville,
Ky
1
$130,069,773
$29,208,716
$1,628,503
90,553,659
20,110,799
12,282,675
7,122,640
7,547,727
16,163,772
3,281,253
2,215,964
200,000
779,621
349,852
299, 130
1907.
$116, 875, 300
18,640,138
9,660,000
8,680,000
8,039,000
4,526,538
7,173,378
6,000,000
'6,430,000
4,663,000
ni, 166, 760
m
$23,000,000
13,611,166
19,000,000
1,085,000
8,250,000
8
$2,088,448
(>)
2,160,000
1,032,000
219,000
(»)
HAVING A POPULATION OF
$4,000,000
5,881,417
(»)
100,000
TO
300,000
(»)
$3,381,528
m
8,770,000
IN
857,340
4,004,266
9,647,609
551, 750
96,000
300,000
3,650,000
1,960,000
126,000
4, 626, 638
(»)
6,210,570
2,020,000
1,100,000
St. Paul, Minn
Providence, R.I
Roohestsr, N.
5,150,000
9,700,346
11,441,174
10,638,600
10,905,194
2,300,000
8,760,193
3,371,711
5,000,000
2,560,978
6,802,040
6,600,000
< 6, 462, 464
10,037,312
11,951,386
5,560,910
7,980,217
12,937,516
3,921,544
4,343,577
2,440,000
5,129,693
2,306,783
2,630,975
6,681,646
1,480,000
1,038,308
5,002,357
1,670,000
12,279,900
5,089,499
2,960,000
4,238,606
1,460,000
2,330,000
1,398,000
1,130,000
1,663,465
6,450,000
1,403,000
n, 126, 000
12,347,666
5,055,000
1,581,820
2,101,600
5,323,015
1,125,000
2,000,000
1,581,820
1,600,000
1,348,412
1,125,000
1,870,000
8
2,330,975
(»)
(')
4,484,597
8,475,000
5,070,879
358,140
2,263,300
1,800,000
1,466,118
1,226,000
2,660,000
2,777,784
City,
Mo
Toledo, Ohio
Denver, Colo
Columbus, Ohio
Los Angeles Cal
i
. .
Worcester, Mass
Seattle,
Wash
Memphis, Tenn
Omaha, Nebr
New Haven, Conn.
Scranton, Pa
Syracuse, N. TJ
St. Joseph,
Mo
Paterson, N. J
Portland, Oreg
Atlanta, Ga
Richmond, Va
,
Fall River, Mass
Nashville, Tenn
Dayton, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich
(»)
1
Highway unprovements not reported under other heads
'
Includes drainage canal valued at $30, 074, 527.
1,342,000
1,634,947
m
m
1,272,506
m
a, 426, 600
(»)
2,850,000
1,005,000
951,036
38,600
466,162
(»)
m25,152
41,347
$2,634
(»)
'380,000
898, 760
665, 163
•2,206,043
1,236,000
1,309,346
340,000
130,144
200,000
66,9*)
372,726
'6,428,376
120,000
4,900
816,000
660,000
137,476
1,639,000
12,499
369,000
25,000
790,000
1,000
h
884,413
601,600
759,215
9 447
2,300^000
112,749
604,987
m
(')
m
(")
$200,000
2,000,000
m
$40,524
m30,000
3,326,136
2,813,903
Kansas
m
$2,070,763
(')
$3,261,016
18,586,161
Y
(!)
$3,633,117
160,310
1,764,300
1907.
Indianapolis, Ind. .
6,825,741
provements.
4,467,448
18,882,428
15,774,108
10,838,415
2
110,331,000
120,466,691
13,192,907
119,916,039
18,616,178
neous.
way im-
$49,962,399
OR OVER IN
4,445,848
7,898,007
12,906,040
7,202,028
4,037,476
W
16,488,136
. .
$45,379,724
54,390,708
300,000
15,634,188
35,992,071
37,984,314
29,433,117
24,907,653
$4,000,000
14,635,248
MinneEtpolis, Minn..
Jersey CityJ^. J.
HAVING A POPULATION OF
Other high-
1,866,000
1,460,000
'166,000
* 190, 000
792,600
1,316,000
m
m
193,250
600,000
209,241
358,140
are included with "street pavements."
'Not reported.
<Street curbing and gutters are included with "street pavements."
'Includes flushing tuimels valued at $900,000.
•Street curbing and gutters are included with "other highway imnrovements."
' Street curbing, gutters, and sidewalks are included wift "otTier highway
improvements."
271,000
m
m
m
(»)
GENERAL TABLES.
Table 31
(For a
list
—VALUE OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS: 1907—
of tlie cities arranged alphabetically
GROUP
343
III.— CITIES
by states, with the number assigned
HAVING A POPULATION OF
50,000
TO
Continued.
to each, see
100,000
IN
page
127.]
1907.
HIGHWAYS.
City
num-
Total.
Sewers.
ber.
ments.
Cambridge, Mass
$4,042,869
Albany.N.Y
(')
Hartford, Conn
Lowell, Mass
8,350,000
3,704,019
1,202,500
Reading, Pa
Trenton, N.J
Bridgeport, Coim
(')
P)
(•)
3,167,000
2,089,572
3,783,339
3,665,224
4,076,986
700,000
1,500,000
1,153,812
1,388,584
1,000,000
8,980,000
1,436,411
3,823,221
2,467,248
6,752,035
2,085,000
1,211,411
1,205,845
660,000
1,050,266
8
1,558,749
1,315,042
5,201,319
868,557
<
1,617,144
Sayannah, Oa
Duluth, Minn
Norfolk,
Va
2,622,701
Hoboken, N. J
Peoria, HI
Yoniers. N.
Utica, N.
Y
0)
3,443,500
Y
H.
N. Y.
Manchester, N.
Scheneotadjr,
(')
.
E vansv ille,
Ind
San Antonio, Tex
Elizabeth, N. J
. .
Waterbury, Conn
Salt
Lake
Erie,
Utah
Pa
City,
Wilkes-Barre,
Pa
Houston, Tex
Tacoma,
Wash
Harrisbnrg, Pa
Charleston, S. C
Portland, Me
DallasJ?ex
Terre Haute, Ind
Fort Wayne, Ind
Akron, Ohio
Holyoke, Mass
Brockton, Mass
Ky
1,260,000
()
727,620
h
1,108,033
(')
(')
2
1,850,000
520,000
620,411
1,106,000
2,333,386
5,595,000
(')
586,000
(')
2
822,616
860,000
633,600
1,276,000
(')
()
1,038,627
442,206
8 249,960
1,615,862
(')
(')
918,463
1,172,136
3,600,000
2,768,651
644,390
3,493,728
825,150
1,000,000
578,271
529,390
942,891
1,922,000
3,561,661
1,885,000
2,440,042
1,459,278
1,277,000
1,270,234
640,000
981,848
6,935,170
1,368,000
1,300,000
2,270,000
1,240,000
2
1,990,698
2
1,600,000
1,450,380
<
889,200
548,832
604,651
1,926,000
3,029,651
2,635,000
935,602
9,000
724,311
830,000
935,602
2
«
322,000
(')
(')
32,000
2,600
1,180,000
285,000
110,000
25,000
225,000
20,000
50,000
250,500
600,000
640,000
(')
82,400
851,162
240,000
85,000
102,000
14,425
5,000
141,670
61,860
(')
730,000
115,170
128,000
\
274,852
500,000
200,000
466,671
1,520,000
(')
)
500,000
{')
Q)
t^
687,500
(')
2
606,000
280,000
4,000
762,820
675,000
280,572
450,000
8
Not reported.
Street curbing and gutters are included with "street pavements."
Street curbing, gutters, and " other highway improvements " are included with '* street pavements."
* Hi^way improvements not reported under other heads are included with "street pavements."
1
2
8
(')
(')
954,934
()
O
(')
400,600
1,42,';, 840
1,000,000
1,231,524
930,757
1,246,948
780,000
67,072
6,600
28,640
114,000
1,595,903
1,128,800
1,143,812
526,000
1,850,000
$60,000
500,000
346,986
W
2,705,500
1,692,644
1,835,651
4,349,000
$4,370
(')
W
103,502
10,283
neous.
provements.
4,000,000
600,000
12,500
W
115,000
C)
(')
$1,980,000
(')
0)
W
toll.
way im-
()
(')
2
than
Other high-
137,000
2
(')
Bridges other
(<)
«
152,000
()
1,561,638
(')
Youngstown, Ohio.
Covington,
1,700,000
1,100,000.
3,297,798
500,000
(')
0)
Kansas City, Kans.
Lynn, Mass
New Bedford, Mass
Springfield, Mass
Troy, N. Y
Mass
(')
$1,450,000
(')
1,340,000
Somerville,
(')
(')
Jl, 500, 000
4,622,000
1,100,000
1,835,653
560,000
.
ing, gutters,
and side-
0)
(')
Wilmington, Del
Camden, N. J
Des Moines, Iowa
Oakland, Cal
Lawrence, Mass
65
(2,058,499
1,400,000
3,104,019
1,190,000
Miscella-
Street curbStreet pave-
9,000
200,000
290,000
15,000
8
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
344
Table 31.—VALUE
[For a
list of
the
cities
OP PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS: 1907—Continued.
by states, with the number assigned
arranged alphabetically
GROUP IV.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
TO
to each, see
50,000
IN
page
127.]
1907.
HIGHWAYS.
City
num-
Miscella-
Street curb-
Total.
Street pave-
ber.
ments.
ing, gutters,
and side-
Bridges other
than
toll.
walks.
Saginaw, Mich...
Lincoln, Nebr...
Altoona, Pa
Spokane, Wash..
Lancaster, Pa...
Birmingham, Ala.
Bayonne, N. J
South Bend, Ind.
83,427,968
l,4o2,800
1,040,000
3,892,948
4,600
$1,083,490
320,000
600,000
646,618
2,722,872
565,003
(')
$1,889,898
2 840,000
8 440,000
42,226,740
2
$300, 000
m
<
627,432
600,000
1,005,626
1,498,911
375,935
400,000
230,963
235,000
610,000
1,947,000
1,025,000
836,000
1,081,200
2,885,446
475,000
n, 150, 000
2304,000
90,000
250,000
400,622
625,000
670,000
700,000
1,148,050
130,000
629,908
Topeka, Kans
Springfield, Ohio.
AJientown, Pa
1,914,943
2,450,000
3,299,000
1,340,162
220,000
684,323
450,000
650,000
302,698
70,000
902,915
700,000
=2,044,000
3 654,564
132,706
800,000
2 375,000
2 208,170
112
113
114
115
116
East St. Louis, 111.
Wheeling, W.Va..
Montgomery, Ala.
Passaic, N. J
Davenport, Iowa.
64,750
3,933,000
l,357,t55
3i0,178
2,594,667
4,750
1,052,000
2o7,795
360, 178
544,008
117
118
AtlantieCity, N. J.
Mont
Butte,
101
Pawtuoket, R.
102
103
104
105
106
McKeesport, Pa
Bingham ton, N. Y.
Johnstown, Pa
107
108
109
110
111
Augusta,
119
120
121
I. ..
Dubuque, Iowa
Sioux City, Iowa.
.
Ga
Mobile, Ala.
Little Rock, Ark.
Bay City, Mich
909,827
655,500
966,313
82a, 000
650,000
134,000
109,262
480,000
650,000
3,193,815
1,406,000
1,514,000
3,728,800
924,327
200,000
360,000
360,800
.
York, Pa
Maiden, Mass
122
123
124
125
126
Springfield, HI..
127
128
129
130
131
Chelsea, Mass
132
133
134
135
136
Haverhill, Mass..
Jacksonville, Fla.
137
138
139
140
141
Knoxville, Tenn.
Ehnira, N.
Galveston, Tex
142
143
144
145
146
Kalamazoo, Mich
Woonsocket, R. I.
Fitchburg, Mass
147
148
149
160
Macon, Ga
151
152
153
154
WestHoboken, N.
155
156
157
158
Taunton, Mass
Newport, Ky
La Crosse, Wis.
Fort Worth, Tex.
Quincy,Ill
Canton, Ohio.
Superior, Wis..
.
Chester,
«
Pa
South Omaha, Nebr.
1,271,000
1,864,000
Newcastle, Pa
Salem, Mass
Newton, Mass
Joplin,
1,
Mo
New Britain,
Racine,
Wis
Auburn, N.
Y
JoUet,Ill
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Oshkosh, Wis
J.
.
.
.
San Juan, P.
R
1
(')
294,000
2 4.0,000
«
m
133,000
(')
230,000
174,720
150,000
(')
60,000
300,000
100,000
(')
30,000
(')
11,500
202,990
120,000
500,000
625, 632
240,000
•400,000
2
47, 692
860,233
358, 000
666, 000
66, 834
m
850,000
10,000
1,001,360
1, 110, 788
1,098,944
708, 375
C)
0)
416, 160
385,046
511, 982
342,407
224,000
308, 942
426, 962
220,968
375, 000
1,485,000
2,689,218
673,000
335,000
400,000
629, 700
320,000
(')
(')
(')
1,100
6,000
('J
(')
(')
(')
0)
160,000
m
276,000
'20,000
114,000
60,000
m
10,000
268,500
187,000
160,000
85,000
(1)
C)
(')
(')
1, 194, 500
2,236,000
1,029,130
460,000
875,000
561,240
395, 000
933,000
643,000
1,304,091
909, 791
431, 000
267, 000
165,000
343,000
269, 115
452,512
300,000
804,976
321,406
P)
000
338, 910
P)
2
870, 000
1,614,450
350,000
169,500
2
429, 600
330,000
256,000
266, 390
210,000
(')
63,029
«
«
10, 470
20,000
32, 335
(0
115, 800
1,000
255,000
42,000
80,000
P)
20,000
135, 873
P)
and gutters are included with "street pavements."
Street curbing
319,000
4,000
9,600
600,000
Not reported.
Highway improvements not reported under other heads are included with " street pavements."
(')
188,000
360,000
243,710
«92,700
0)
0)
463,000
443, 774
60,000
224, 800
1,430,000
360,000
2
(')
W
(2)
$40,000
1,130
75,000
40,000
215,000
15, 468
350,000
highway improvements "
(1)
(')
212,000
352,000
2,000
52,600
170, 853
(')
2
Street curbing, gutters, and "other
5 Value of sewer pumps only.
° Includes drainage canal.
$.25,000
80,000
569,369
150,000
2
*
{')
(')
(')
(1)
60,
(')
196,000
(')
(')
600,000
451, 939
m
18,000
400,000
76,000
1,200
137,597
84,376
16,000
555,000
1,100,000
600,000
(')
G)
Sacramfento, Cal
Pueblo, Colo
Everett, Mass
160,000
(')
W
2,208,388
1,200,000
860,000
22,730,000
646, 000
1,
.
(')
(')
Coim.
.
706,837
360,000
458,206
255,000
330,000
211, 484
264, 483
1,
Chattanooga, Tenn.
^]
000
258, 968
264,483
2, 583,
.
Y
631,000
443,860
2,020,669
0)
«
provements.
(')
W
114,000
212,000
(')
1,950,000
64 J, 000
(')
«
737, 81,5
C)
(')
W10,470
650,000
1,262,400
317, 614
Wichita, Kans...
Rocklord, 111
(')
5
72,000
neous.
way im-
(')
C)
2,367,306
1,235,935
2,265,626
100
403,800
4,600
686,279
1,399,590
Q'>
612, 890
(')
(')
(')
$454,580
2,800
Other high-
are included with "street pavements."
P)
GENERAL TABLES.
Table
345
32.—PER CAPITA PAYMENTS AND RECEIPTS FOR MEETING GOVERNMENTAL COSTS, BY PRINCIPAL
CLASSES:'
[For a
list
1907.
by states, with the number assigned
of the cities arranged alphabetically
PAYMENTS FOE MEETING GOVERNMENTAL
to each, see page 127.]
RECEIPTS FOR MEETING GOVERNMENTAL COSTS.
COSTS.
For revenue expenditures.
Expenses and
Total
payCity
From revenues.
interest.
num-
tor
ber.
meeting
govern-
mental
costs.
re-
ceipts
On ac-
for
reve-
count
meet-
nue
of
Inter-
ing
govern-
est.
mental
Expenses.
Air
All ex-
expend!,
penses
tures.
interest.
and
Gen-
ExEx-
eral
Grand
total
and of mu- penses
of
special nicipal of inpublic
service service vested service
exenter- funds. enter-
$29.73
$19.45
$15.60
$0.09
$0.03
35.47
25.60
22.24
19.51
35.25
25.47
22.01
19.26
23.25
15.68
14.70
13.02
18.75
12.60
11.62
10.08
0.12
0.05
0.05
0.01
GROUP
New York, N.Y..
I.— CITIES
$47.88
27.28
26.55
31.19
47.57
$47. 88
$30.17
17.74
18.34
19.59
37.53
$23. 57-
27.28
26.55
27.30
47.57
Baltimore,
Pittsburg, Pa
Cleveland, Ohio. .
Buffalo,
San Francisco, Cal
24.23
32.18
28.67
26.58
24.23
32.18
28.67
26.58
15.60
20.67
18.91
19.10
(<)
(')
W
12.42
16.33
14.81
15.49
Detroit, Mich
Cincinnati, Ohio...
26.02
34.16
23.72
26.63
39.82
26.02
34.16
23.72
26.63
39.12
17.15
22-. 60
16.64
13.56
26.51
14.75
16.47
14.73
10.53
23.79
Chicago, 111
Philadelphia, Pa.
St. Louis, Mo
Boston, Mass... ^..
Md
N.Y
Milwaukee, Wis .
New Orleans, La.
Washington, D. C.
.
15.01
15.21
16.73
28.22
m
lays.
General.
Total.
costs.
Revenues
from
Interspecial
est.
services.!
$1.18 $2.55
$10.28
$0.20
$29. 85
$24. 50
$18. 43
$6.07
3.04
2.03
1.95
1.82
12.00
9.79
7.31
6.25
0.22
0.13
0.23
0.24
34.90
26.46
22.08
20.26
27.67
23,21
19.41
17.30
21.32
16.20
14.56
12.79
6.36
7.00
4.8S
4.51
1.29
0.98
1.13
1.04
HAVING A POPULATION OF
m
debt.
On acAll
revenues.
Revenues
from
count
of
debt.
public
service
enterprises.
prises.
S29. 94
0.08
Out-
Ex-
prises.
Group I
Group II
Group III
Group IV
Commercial.
Total
ments
300,000
OR OVER
IN
1907.
$2.85 $0.46
2.67
4.17
2.25
2.19
0.62
0.28
0.25
0.21
$2.76
$5.35
3.07
2.65
2.35
2.11
7.22
3.25
2.67
2.96
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
346
PAYMENTS AND RECEIPTS FOR MEETING GOVERNMENTAL
Table 32.—PER CAPITA
COSTS,
BY PRINCIPAL
CLASSES:' 1907— Continued.
[For a
list
oJ the cities arranged alphabetically
by
states,
with the number assigned to each, see page
GROUP HI.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF
PAYMENTS FOR MEETING GOVEENMENTAL
50,000
TO
100,000
IN
RECEIPTS FOR MEETING GOVERNMENTAL COSTS.
COSTS.
From revenues.
For revenue expenditures.
Expenses and
Total
pay-
City
nnin-
ments
ber.
meet-
for
ing
govern-
mental
costs.
re-
Expenses.
All
reve-
nue
All ex
expendi-
penses
tures.
inter-
Cambridge, Mass.
Albany, N.Y
Hartford, Coim...
Lowell, Mass
Reading, Pa
126.58
22.72
26.51
19.04
15.03
$26.58
21.14
26.51
19.04
15.03
Trenton, N.J
Bridgeport, Conn.
Wilmington, Del .
18.87
15.38
18.79
18.15
Kansas
City, Kans...
Lyim,Ma6s
New Bedford, Mass..
Springfield,
Troy,N.
Y
Mass
Oakland, Cal
Lawrence, Mass..
SomervUle, Mass..
Savannah, Ga
Duluth, Minn
and
Ex-
eral
penseSi
816.47
12.17
14.79
13.86
7.71
SO. 01
12.19
12.26
10.40
13.68
13.20
9.47
11.52
7.64
10.52
12.33
0.01
2L11
18.87
15.38
16.79
18.15
21.11
13.62
24.58
33.99
26.71
21.26
13.62
22.50
33.99
26.71
21. 26
8.75
18.21
17.64
19.33
17.17
6.76
13.92
13.79
16.34
13.72
99
lays.
JO.
90 $4.61
1.58
L05
m
1.61
74
0.78
0.02
1.28
m
m
L41
0.22
m
0.01
1.92
1.00
1.76
0.06
0.01
h
1.36
$5.69
5.79
8.05
14.25
21.82
32.87
27.53
19.05
12.92
21.82
24.09
24.11
18.79
8.44
15.31
18.78
18.36
15.44
4.48
6.51
5.30
6.76
3.36
4.39
2.16
1.46
1.71
0.95
0.08
0.40
0.66
0.29
0.07
(*)
(.<)
(<)
17.34
19.19
13.86
24.69
15.41
18.76
13.86
24.03
12.63
13.83
11.09
15.31
2.79
4.93
2.77
8.73
0.69
1.57
0.55
3.80
0.16
0.14
0.14
0.09
23.11
18.41
16.24
30.56
22.35
19.97
16.22
15.24
22.00
22.35
16.22
11.97
12.99
17.76
18.84
3.75
4.26
2.24
4.25
3.52
1.05
0.88
1.62
1.34
2.92
0.06
0.31
0.17
0.54
13.40
25.29
16.91
23.27
14.31
13.40
17.27
16.38
16.19
13.13
11.17
11.75
11.22
15.60
10.96
2.23
6.52
4.16
0.69
2.17
19.02
34.29
11.61
14.82
20.85
17.05
31.11
10.35
14.53
20.85
13.21
3.83
7.21
0.56
4.63
m
19.43
40.93
10.56
13.08
19.39
19.43
40.93
10.56
13.08
18.74
12.36
21.77
10.94
16.28
7.36
8.14
0.40
2.21
0.04
1.73
1.01
3.27
0.64
0.37
7.07
19.17
2.63
2.83
L37
4.10
(*)
(0
(<)
22.43
14.21
27.22
22.43
14.21
27.22
11.76
12.27
18.25
9.79
14.91
25.60
25.82
17.47
15.36
25.60
25.82
17.47
14.95
13.51
16.04
10.79
9.74
10.88
12.15
10.18
7.89
Akron, Ohio
Holyoke, Mass...
Brockton, Mass..
18.60
24.61
Covington,
15.37
17.17
24.61
21.60
15.37
11.72
19.56
16.21
10.44
10.67
12.63
12.90
7.76
San Antonio, Tex.
N.J
Elizabeth,
Waterbmy, Conn
Salt Lake City, Utah
Wilkes-Barre,
Erie,
Pa
Pa
Houston, Tex
Tacoma, Wash
.
Harrlsburg, Pa..
Charleston, S.C.
Portland, Me
Youngstown, Ohio
Dallas,
Tex
Terre Haute, Ind.
Fort Wayne, Ind.
Ky
.
.
.
2L50
8.03
10.24
15.46
L16
0.19
0.01
2.08
4.09
2.52
13.77
2.66
2.93
5.09
0.79
0.78
0.01
0.01
0.61
0.86
65
/
W
9.22
2.81
0.21
3.94
3.18
3.75
2.33
(*)
L93
3.23
2.08
4.84
2.69
3.32
0.31
2.74
0.06
2.91
2.80
0.02
3.29
3.19
(*)
(*)
(')
20.31
14.44
22.90
12.29
13.74
20.11
8.02
0.70
2.79
4.13
0.43
L16
1.18
2.07
42
0.69
12.10
9.77
6.68
5.21
26.06
27.44
19.34
16.41
20.22
24.63
15.14
15.41
13.64
19.42
12.38
10.81
0.05
4.78
0.88
0.94
1.00
2.24
2.43
1.74
6.46
6.05
6.29
4.93
19.49
23.69
20.76
13.69
19.49
23.69
19.68
13.66
16.39
16.15
14.02
9.68
1.43
2.46
1.29
0.32
0.12
0.02
0.24
0.10
(<)
0.41
2.33
m
2.49
0.60
4.29
0.51
1.10
0.69
26.34
14.46
29.05
L82
0.01
$2.22
2.01
10.67
1.94
8.97
0.19
(<)
$3.98
3.68
2.74
2.36
2.47
0.08
0.38
0.01
0.07
0.08
0.14
L93
2.12
0.29
«
(*)
L02
0.13
0.20
1.00
^^76
0.07
0.76
6.69
5.11
2.76
4.60
3.92
1.01
2.39
2.65
0.17
0.30
0.03
0.13
2.50
3.80
0.34
3.09
8.54
5.65
4.08
2.95
0.62
2.79
0.11
0.27
0.36
0.04
7.76
2.50
2.37
L72
debt.
public
2.03
0.33
2.10
-3.21
1.34
2.43
2.44
0.05
1.42
m
W
(.<)
(<)
0.91
0.01
23.90
9.79
9.92
16.87
(')
1.59
(«)
L20
{=)
$0.93
0.68
0.47
1.01
0.64
3.80 0.02
4.87
4.28
16.35
7.38
0.93
1.67
1.48
1.95
1.70
Y.
$L47
Log
1.98
2.33
2.83
1.23
2.09
8.46
9.69
7.44
10.78
8.66
Evansville, Ind
$6.38
6.04
4.80
4.01
6.29
0.18
0.08
0.12
0.22
0.05
10.18
12.14
10.09
12.92
10.38
(.')
$19.07
13.65
20.63
16.94
9.65
1.08
0.79
0.54
0.86
4.13
12.71
25.92
12.74
15.85
15.46
.
19.69
25.33
19.95
16.93
of
eirter-
3.69
0.87
3.16
3.88
4.39
13.57
25.92
12.74
15.85
15.46
H
Manchester, N.
Schenectady, N.
$25. 45
ac-
count
prises.
14.80
8.80
9.02
16.12
6.00
2.88
4.08
10.16
6.56
8
$27. 66
Revenues
from
service
13.26
15.67
11.95
12.90
20.51
4.14
1.17
0.89
2.86
1.07
0.01
0.01
special
serv-
16.72
16.96
14.96
21.15
21.67
1.42
3.42
0.18
1.60
Yonkers,N.Y..
Utica,N.Y....
Inter-
5.43
11.91
12.73
11.48
16.39
13.04
23.46
20.21
18.44
31.02
21.68
Total.
6.68
3.11
6.39
4.46
7.91
17.46
17.32
12.54
20.86
14.12
J..
eral.
1.92
0.72
1.48
1.76
0.66
$1.58
1.55.
23.46
20.21
16.63
31.02
20.68
Va
Gen-
Revenues
from
19.69
27.72
20.66
16.06
1.69
2.63
2.02
1.15
(.<)
111
(<)
On
All
revenues.
ices.2
3.20
2.64
2.60
10.00
Peoria,
ing
governcosts.
(')
la
meet-
of
debt.
est.
1.37
2.49
2.22
4.31
(*)
17.29
19.21
13.06
27.82
for
count
mental
1.17
0.76
0.85
2.56
(<)
17.29
19.21
13.66
27.82
On ac-
Inter-
of
and
public
special nfcipal of inservice service vested service
exenter- funds. enterprises.
penses. prises.
15.35
18.46
17.48
9.60
S20.
Out-
Ex-
Exofmu- penses
11.64
13.31
7.49
10.06
Hoboken, N.
88
Gen-
16.56
10.55
17.82
Norfolk,
Commercial.
Total
interest.
ceipts
est.
Camden, N. J
Des Moines, Iowa..
127.]
1907.
L92
2.39
0.71
0.13
3.01
8.25
1.16
8.78
3.42
0.26(<)
L93
0.44
'""6.'66
GENERAL TABLES.
Table
347
32.—PER CAPITA PAYMENTS AND RECEIPTS FOR MEETING GOVERNM.ENTAL COSTS, BY PRINCIPAL
CLASSES:! 1907— Continued.
[For a
list
of the cities arranged alphabetically
GROUP
IV.-CITIES
by
with the numljer assigned to each, see page
states,
HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
TO
50,000
PAYMENTS FOE MEETING GOVERNMENTAL COSTS.
IN
KECEIPTS FOE MEETING
For revenue expenditures.
Expenses and
Total
pay-
From
interest.
re-
meeting
govern-
mental
Saginaw, Mich..
$22.40
14.94
18.86
Lincoln, Nebi...
Altoona, Pa
m
Spokane, Wash.
Expenses.
All
reve-
nue
expenditures.
122.40
14.94
18.86
m
All ex
and
inter-
S12. 90
10.04
9.81
General
Expenses
Ex-
of muof
special nicipal of inpublic
service service vested service
exenter- funds. enterprises
and
$10.22
7.40
7.93
Ou1>
Ex-
lays.
fer
count
meet-
of
ing
gov-
debt.
Inter-
ern-
est.
mental
All
revenues.
General.
Total.
costs,
$0.90 $1.78
l.?2
1.13
0.32
1.55
$0.29
On ac-
$9.50
4.90
9.06
$19.85
14.72
12.69
$14. 67
10.80
9.51
$6.18
3.92
3.18
m
m
m
C)
(')
11.23
11.23
9.00
6.51
1.61
0.88
2.24
10.02
7.07
2.94
23.95
20.69
16.15
18.75
23.08
23.95
20.69
16.15
18.75
23.08
15.02
17.60
10.36
14.35
18.52
11.60
11.57
$.52
13.27
13.18
$0.01
0.10
3.85
0.77
(0
1.37
3.32
2.08
1.07
1.08
3.97
8.93
3.19
5; 79
4.40
4.67
20.69
17.83
16.92
15.81
21.27
14.74
11.21
11.07
12.92
15.16
5.94
6.62
5.86
2.88
6.11
18.90
17.05
12.34
13.25
15.47
1L62
U.99
.
18.90
17.05
12.34
13.25
16.86
8.54
9.86
11.85
9.11
9.93
8.11
7.30
9.49
1.18
1.46
0.01
1.06
0.63
1.33
0.60
0.42
1.50
1.74
7.28
6.05
3.80
3.39
3.62
14.84
15.65
10.91
12.50
17.04
11.57
11.84
10.67
10.07
14.33
3.28
3.82
0.24
2.43
2.71
12.82
16.06
15.74
16.13
15.25
9.78
12.49
11.81
12.25
8.60
7.00
6.27
8.06
10.38
6.77
1.09
2.12
0.76
0.69
0.76
1.69
4 04
Topeka, Kans
Springfield, Ohio. .
Allentown, Pa. ...
12.91
19.00
16.36
16.13
15.25
3.04
3.58
3.93
3.87
6.78
12.84
14.36
17.70
15.52
12.90
8.38
10.27
13.19
11.51
10.15
4.46
4.09
4.51
4.01
2.75
20.74
15.86
15.92
15.41
25.02
20.74
15.16
15.92
15.41
23.88
13.56
13.88
10.12
10.81
13.63
11.53
7.90
7.07
10.05
12.91
18.65
16.63
12.73
11.30
23.53
16.76
10.35
8.98
9.34
15.34
2.90
6.18
3.75
1.96
38.46
13.94
15.53
10.38
26.03
38.46
13.94
15.53
10.38
26.03
24.81
7.07
11.69
8.11
18.16
19.41
6.29
8.42
7.07
14.08
31.15
10.54
17.61
9.99
20.01
22.79
22.00
11.63
16.90
16.21
8.27
21.18
9.38
16.90
15.36
8.27
14.49
8.14
11.94
12.06
7.91
10.50
6.98
8.87
11.21
7.01
18.18
12.35
13.98
19.37
38.11
18.18
12.35
13.98
19.37
38.11
16.14
9.34
7.85
15.56
29.00
12.62
7.82
7.17
13.38
21.81
19.22
31.72
11.43
19.00
17.91
19.22
31.72
11.43
19.00
17.91
16.66
17.33
6.41
9.92
11.12
14
14.41
13.91
43.84
Lancaster, Fa.
.
Birmingham, Ala.
Bayonne, N.J
South Bend, Ind .
.
Butte,
Mont
Fawtucket, B.I...
McKeesport, Pa
Binghamton, N. Y.
Johnstown, Pa
Dubuque, Iowa
Sioux City, Iowa.
Augusta,
Ga
Mobile, Ala
East
St. Louis. HI..
WheeUng, W. Va..
Montgomery, Ala.
N.J.
Fassaic,
Davenport, Iowa. .
Atlantic City,
N.J.
Little Book, Ark.
Bay City, Mich
.
York, Fa
Maiden, Mass
Springfield,
III
Quincy, 111
Canton, Ohio
Superior, Wis
Chester, Pa
Mass
South Omaha, Nebr.
CJhelsea,
Newcastle, Pa
Salem, Mass
Newton, Mass
HaTerhill, Mass
Jacksonville, Fla.
Joplin,
Mo
.
.'.
Wichita, Kans
Bockford,Ill
Knoxville,
Elmira, N.
Galveston,
Tenn
Y
Tex
New Britain,
Conn.
Chattanooga, Tenn.
Kalamazoo, Mich. .
Woonsocicet, E. I..
Fitchburg, Mass
Bacine,
Wis
Auburn, N.
Macon, Ga
Y
Joliet.ni
Oklahoma City, Okla,
Oshkosh, Wis
West Hoboken, N.J.
Sacramento, Cal
Pueblo, Colo
Everett, Mass
Taunton, Mass
Newport, Ky
LaC&osse, Wis
Fort Worth, Tex
(»)
0.06
0.38
m
0.01
4.04
1.10
2.60
1.18
0.97
2.02
0.56
$1.39
0.09
2.93
0.62
1.95
0.76
0.65
7.18
1.28
5.80
4.60
10.25
3.03
0.42
1.69
1.05
3.03
13.66
6.87
3.84
2.26
7.87
0.04
1.47
1.11
2.05
0.85
0.87
6.70
1.23
4.96
3.30
0.36
0.63
2.86
0.08
1.13
0.54
0.59
1.05
6.53
2.04
3.01
6.13
3.81
9.11
17.95
11.64
11.99
22.04
36.44
14.04
9.67
5.41
8.14
8.97
0.68
5.33
0.69
0.04
1.33
1.94
2.33
0.83
2.55
14.40
5.02
9.09
6.79
19.24
22.25
10.74
12.37
14.73
7.71
10.45
10.71
10.62
11.08
0.12
0.21
1.51
0.77
0.04
2.17
1.19
4.30
2.47
1.97
4.41
2.0g
26.56
11.98
5.95
0.84
0.49
1.75
0.22
1.28
1.06
3.69
2.02
0.77
0.73
9.45
1.95
3.41
5.69
5.09
0.27
1.13
1.62
0.09
1.17
0.66
1.74
0.60
0.16
4.62
26.31
3.91
1.59
2.91
0.94
0.99
0.51
5.81
3.14
2.72
15.95
8.83
2.30
2.79
1.07
0.94
2.88
1.62
1.17
3.64
14.79
43.84
25.84
19.04
25.84
19.04
10.00
11.85
17.28
13.85
13.09
21.22
14.75
19.66
15.50
18.24
21.22
14. 76
19.66
15.50
18.24
11.78
12.80
16.25
9.82
13.15
9.38
8.61
12.46
8.82
10.55
11.40
16.30
38.97
14.43
8.59
16.26
38.97
13.62
8.75
11.64
12.67
9.71
7.29
9.84
9.30
9.02
11.75
34.84
33.60
18.40
11.75
34.84
33.60
18.40
9.03
18.89
24.77
16.11
8.04
16.79
16.05
12.03
21.04
11.45
21.04
10.35
17.11
17.11
17.40
9.07
11.72
11.72
6.39
9.61
(»)
(')
(»)
(»)
41
"o.'oi
(.')
0.76
0.06
0.04
0.29
"w"
0.81
2.33
0.07
1.59
O.'oi
1.04
0)
1.71
0.05
1.00
o.'oi
0.03
1.51
0.12
0.50
0.02
0.01
m
(»)
0.31
1.74
(')
1.28
6.39
(»)
0.70
'i.'i4
0.82
2.25
0.84
0.88
20.98
12.46
15.99
18.62
8.95
13.22
14.88
22.87
18.11
14.32
17.67
13.07
19.37
14.53
15.93
2.81
0.05
0.80
11.03
14.44
28.48
14.39
12.69
30.44
33.34
18.59
1.10
19.90
11.66
16.99
(")
P)
GOVERNMENTAL
revenues.
Total
ments
for
127.]
1907.
COSTS.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
348
CENT DISTRIBUTION, BY PRINCIPAL CLASSES, OP PAYMENTS AND RECEIPTS FOR MEETING
Table 33. -PER
GOVERNMENTAL
[For a
list of
the cities arranged alphabetically
by states,
COSTS:'
1907.
with the number assigned
PAYMENTS FOE MEETING GOVEKNMENTAl
to each, see page 127.]
EECEEPTS FOE MEETING GOVERNMENTAL COSTS.
COSTS.
From revenues.
For revenue expenditures.
Expenses and
Commercial.
interest.
City
num-
Expenses.
On ac-
ber.
count of
All
Out-
revenue
expend
itures.
All ex-
penses
"ind interest.
General
and
special
service
expenses.
Grand
66.0
total
Group I
Group II
Group III
Group IV
65.5
61.2
66.1
66.7
GROUP
New York, N.Y..
Chicago, 111
Philadelphia, Pa.
St. Louis, Mo
Boston, Mass
Baltimore, Md
Pittsburg, Pa
Cleveland, Ohio.
.
N.Y
Buffalo,
San Francisco, Cal
Detroit, Mich
Cinciimati, Ohio .
Milwaukee, Wis...
New Orleans, La.
Washington, D.C.
100.0
Expenses of
municipal
service
enter-
I.— CITIES
ses of
public
vested
funds.
service
enter-
On
All
revenues.
General.
Total.
est.
Revenues
from
In-
special terest,
services."
Revenues
from
ac-
count of
debt.
public
service
enterprises.
prises.
0.1
0.4
0.2
Expen- Inter-
ses of in-
prises.
52.1
52.9
49.2
52.3
51.7
Expen.
debt.
0.1
m
m
3.9
3.6
3.8
5.1
8.5
34.3
0.7
7.9
8.8
9.3
33.8
38.3
32.9
32.0
0.6
0.5
1.0
1.2
HAVING A POPULATION OF
300,000
1
79.3
87.7
87.9
85.4
OR OVER IN
61.
20.3
9.5
61.1
61.2
65.9
63.1
18.2
26.5
22.0
22.3
7.7
15.8
10.2
10.8
1907.
17.9
1.8
1.1
1.1
1.0
9.6
10.7
10.4
20.7
12.3
12.1
14.6
GENERAL TABLES.
Table 33.— PER
349
CENT DISTRIBUTION, BY PRINCIPAL CLASSES, OF PAYMENTS AND RECEIBTS FOR MEETING
GOVERNMENTAL COSTS
[For a
list of
the cities arranged alphabetically
:'
1907— Continued.
hy states, with the number assigned
GROUP in.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF
50,000
TO
to each, see page 127.]
100,000
IN
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
350
CENT DISTRIBUTION, BY PRINCIPAL CLASSES, OF PAYMENTS AND RECEIPTS FOR MEETING
Table 33.— PER
GOVERNMENTAL
[For a
the cities arranged alphabetically
list of
COSTS:' 1907—Continued.
by states, with the number assigned
GROUP IV.— CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF
PAYMENTS FOB MEETING GOVERNMENTAL
30,000
TO
to each, see page 127.]
60,000
IN
1907.
RECEIPTS FOR MEETING GOVERNMENTAL COSTS.
COSTS.
From revenues.
For revenue expenditures.
Expenses and
Commercial.
interest.
City
num-
Expenses.
count of
All
revenue
expend- All ex-
OutGeneral
itures.
and
interest.
and
special
service
expen-
Expenses of
municipal
service
enter-
Expenses of in-
Lincoln,
Altoona,
Nebr
Pa
Spokane,
Wash
Lancaster,
Fa
Birmingham, Ala...
Bayonne, N. J
South Bend, Ind.
97
. -
Mont
100
Butte,
101
Pawtuoket, R.
102
103
104
105
106
MoKeesport, Pa
Binghamton, N.
Johnstown, Pa
107
108
109
110
Augusta,
Mobile, Ala
Topeka, Kans
HI
Allentown,
112
113
114
115
116
East St. Louis,
117
118
119
120
121
Atlantic City, N. J..
122
Springfield,
123
Quincy,Ill
Canton, Ohio
I
Y
-
Dubuque, Iowa
Sioux City, Iowa...
Ga
Springfield, Ohio.
.
Pa
111
.
Wheeling, W.Va...
Montgomery, Ala...
Passaic, N. J
Davenport, Iowa
. .
Little Book, Ark
Bay City, Mich
. .
York, Pa
Maiden, Mass
124
125
126
III
Superior, Wis
Chester, Pa
Mass
South Omaha, Nebr.
127
128
129
130
131
Chelsea,
Newcastle, Pa
Salem, Mass
Newton, Mass
Haverhill, Mass
132
133
134
13S
136
JacksonvUle, Fla
Jqplin,
Mo
Wichita, Kans
Eockford, IlK
Knoxville, Tenn....
Ehnlra, N.Y
Galveston, Tex
137
138
139
140
141
New Britain, Conn.
Chattanooga, Tenn.
Kalamazoo, Mich
Woonsocket, R. I...
Fitchburg, Mass
142
143
144
145
146
48.4
55.9
52.7
70.7
57.1
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
91.8
61.6
70.4
69.2
74.4
70.3
48.2
58.2
65.7
55.1
56.3
99.3
84.6
96.2
100.0
100.0
75.7
65.8
72.2
76.0
55.7
54.2
33.0
49.3
64.4
44.4
100.0
95.6
100.0
100.0
95.4
65.4
87.6
63.6
70.2
64.6
55.6
49.8
44.4
65.2
61.6
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
64.5
60.7
75.3
78.2
69.8
50.5
45.1
54.2
68.1
64.1
96.3
80.7
100.0
94.8
100.0
66.8
70.1
70.7
74.4
95.7
47.7
60.1
62.6
69-2
84.7
100.0
lOO.O
100.0
100.0
100.0
88.8
76.6
56.1
80.3
76.1
69.4
63.4
61.3
69.1
67.2
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
86.7
64.6
66.1
62.2
62.1
73.1
30.5
47.3
42.8
50.1
69.4
63.5
70.6
24.4
41.1
58.2
100.0
94.1
100.0
100.0
100.0
80.1
39.4
53.6
68.8
64.0
60.4
23.9
62.5
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
76.9
64.2
73.7
87.5
68.4
48.2
47.8
65.4
Fort Worth, Tex
100-0
90.4
100.0
100.0
82.7
79.2
68.5
72.8
56.7
56.8
56.1
35.4
San Juan, P. R.
100.0
Sacramento, Cal
Pueblo, Colo
Everett, Mass
Taunton, Mass
Newport, Ky
La Crosse, Wis
1
62.7
84.6
64.2
76.6
80.2
76.7
71.4
32.5
67.3
Oklahoma City, Okla.,
Oshkosh, Wis
West Hoboken, N. J...
2
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
72.1
JoUet.IU
155
156
157
158
46.6
49.5
42.1
41.6
67.9
75.3
99. V
100.0
94.4
Racine, wis
Auburn, N. Y
Macon, Ga
151
152
153
1S4
57.5
67.2
52.0
53.6
80.1
44.2
68.4
63.4
56.9
67.8
. .
147
148
149
150
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
For aggregates, see T4ble 4.
Includmg receipts of municipal
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
-
65.5
86.8
82.6
63.3
Expen- Interses of
public
shown
General.
Total.
Revenues
from
In
Reve- count of
debt.
nues
from
public
special terest.
service
serventerices.!"
prises.
prises.
4.0
8.2
1.7
2.6
14.3
1.9
0.4
18.6
4.8
5.9
"o.'i'
6'. 2
8.6
0.1
8.0
3.7.
8.4
0.3
2.3
"m"
11.1
4.7
4.3
5.0
m
29.2
4.8
0.1
'«
87.7
72.5
99.3
83.5
96.1
62.6
46.6
65.0
68.3
68.5
25.2
26.9
34.4
15.2
27.6
23.2
6.6
23.7
16.2
1.7
0.3
0.2
0.1
1.6
0.3
20.0
10.4
7.0
3.5
3.4
11.3
10.3
38.5
29.6
30.8
26.6
21.5
87.7
86.2
92.9
98.9
100.0
68.4
65.1
90.9
79.7
84.1
19.4
21.0
2.0
19.3
15.9
8.2
5.3
1.8
9.0
6.9
1.7
9.5
14.9
0.1
10.2
10.0
13.1
21.3
15.9
7.3
6.3
23.6
100.0
100.0
100.0
85.6
88.6
65.3
71.6
74.6
63.6
69.6
34.7
28.5
25.5
22.1
18.9
9.0
6.5
13.7
9.3
9.7
3.5
12.3
4.9
92.3
100.0
80.6
77.8
14.3
1,00.0
77.9
62.6
66.9
64.4
65.2
S!.i
23.7
13.5
34.8
13.0
0.9
10.0
13.3
34.1
63.7
70.3
72.8
91.7
83.1
46.6
61.8
67.0
87.5
69.1
17.1
8.5
15.8
4.2
24.0
8.9
7.2
8.0
2.3
8.0
100.0
87.5
100.0
86.4
68.0
90.4
68.4
81.8
81.4
32.0
9.6
19.1
18.2
5.0
16.4
6.3
7.0
17.6
4.3
0.7
16.4
3.8
2.8
0.1
0.2
m
0.6
2.3
0.4
15.7
12.3
4.3
5.4
17.1
11.2
24.4
43.9
19.7
23.9
93.0
69.4
96.8
99.6
93.9
67.5
65.0
78.4
61.8
74.0
25.6
4.4
18.3
37.8
19.9
6.6
3.0
17.3
23.6
8.0
3.5
16.8
6.0
0.2
7.4
10.1
13.3
45.4
43.9
47.8
37.9
93.6
90.0
78.6
65.5
80.9
69.5
48.2
60.3
51.6
61.7
24.1
41.8
28.2
13.9
19.2
6.7
9.2
22.1
13.5
7.6
0.8
15.1
8.1
9.8
98.7
100.0
58.6
68.3
34.8
92.5
91.6
43.4
49.5
10.3
30.6
13.9
60.6
46.4
31.2
6.2
8.4
15.2
18.8
2.2
3.7
4.9
3.6
5.4
1.8
8.9
1.4
7.0
5.0
25.0
10.3
4.9
4.0
44.5
13.2
17.4
36.7
27.9
94.6
85.6
95.3
99.4
76.5
66.4
63.2
76.8
91.6
66.3
28.2
22.4
18.5
7.9
20.2
19.7
6.5
4.6
6.4
6.8
2.4
6.9
4.2
0.6
10.2
4.1
4.5
4.1
•1.4
100.0
100.0
71.7
100.0
91.2
81.4
19.1
89.8
8.8
18.6
52.6
10.2
4.9
11.4
46.4
9.2
8.4
94.5
76.8
98.2
97.6
78.6
55.3
62.8
72.3
15.9
21.5
35.4
25.3
15.5
10.6
15.6
7.0
0.4
0.2
0.9
95.6
100.0
96.5
98.6
65.2
75.2
73.2
75.7
30.4
24.7
23.2
6.5
3.4
85.6
63.4
22.2
3.5
7.4
2.7
9.1
4.6
9.5
28.3
67.5
27.1
4.6
8.7
5.1
1.5
17.3
17.1
23.1
46.8
26.3
12.5
13.3
9.3
6.5
20.1
13.7
14.1
6.8
13.6
17.3
11.2
31.5
27.2
7.2
1.6
32.9
2 of Table 13.
<
3.7
19.3
6.2
24.7
0.3
6.6
9.6
loo.o-
0.4
1.1
26.7
22.0
11.2
10.5
15.6
36.1
13.8
0.1
0.6
0.1
0.9
0.3
0.1
1.9
7.2
1.0
7.7
5.1
11.0
3.1
16.7
0.2
11.3
0.8
0.6
0.6
0.2
1.6
18.3
1.4
1.0
1.9
m
12.4
1.6
10.4
4.0
2.4
0.2
0.2
13.5
32.5
3.7
0.2
11.5
0.3
1.8
2.7
0.7
0.2
2.2
1.8
8.9
12.7
0.2
1.2
7.3
15.4
12.9
1.7
14.0
(»)
0.4
1.0
0.7
0.4
1.4
0.8
(»)
0.6
2.0
2.5
6.4
6.2
0.4
10.6
18.8
16.3
(')
21.5
18.1
9.3
20.2
2.2
18.8
6.6
12.3
2.7
7.2
14.3
13.3
14.7
24.0
1.3
30.4
10.6
29.3
20.4
4.3
7.8
0.4
af.4
column
18.8
24.0
24.0
44.3
0.8
6.7
9.6
12.1
6.3
10.6
0.8
10.2
3.9
0.1
37.3
15.4
35.8
23.6
19.8
35.6
49.3
24.7
21.8
30.2
1.4
3.4
3.0
0.2
(V)""
13.9
10.1
6.6
5.8
17.2
1.3
1.7
1.5
7.9
3.0
10.9
10.1
11.6
1.4
0.2
13.3
10.1
4.1
16.7
1.1
2.6
0.6
5.8
2.4
21.0
26.1
18.7
33.1
26.6
6.1
0.4
0.3
69.4
72.1
65.9
46.6
63.9
0.3
5.9
0.1
80.4
98.3
74.6
79.7
90.5
0.6
1.8
7.9
42.4
32.8
48.0
46.4
19.9
7.9
7.6
8.2
9.3
34.6
8.1
36.4
29.8
41.0
4.0
(?)
in
All
revenues.
est.
'
service enterprises,
debt.
vested service
funds. "enter-
prises.
Saginaw, Mich
On ac-
On ac-
ber.
1.7
Less than one-tenth of 1 per cent.
Excess of receipts from sales of real property over payments for outlays.
90196—10
23
352
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
Table 34.— PAYMENTS
FOR GENERAL AND SPECIAL SERVICE EXPENSES,
[For a
list
of the cities arranged alphabetically
by states.
GENERAL TABLES.
TOTAL AND PER CAPITA,
1907;
with the number assigned to each, see page
m.— HEALTH
CONSEBVATION AND SANI-
TATION— Continued
.
COMPARATIVE SUMMARY,
127.]
1902
TO
1907.
353
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
354
Table 34.— PAYMENTS
FOR GENERAL AND SPECIAL SERVICE EXPENSES,
[For a
GROUP
II.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION
TO
riP 100,000
300,000
II.— PROTECTION or LIFE
ALL OENEBAL AND
SEEVICE
SPECIAL
EXPENSES.
Per
Wash
Seattle,
Tenn
Omana, Nebr
Mempliis,
New Haven,
Scranton,
Conn.
Pa
Y
Syracuse, N.
St. Joseph, Mo
Paterson, N. J
Portland, Oreg
Atlanta, Ga
Richmond, Va
Fall River, Mass.
Nashville, Tenn
. .
Dayton, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich
$2,208,251
1,194,695
1,214,656
1,531,360
1,016,493
Reading, Pa
Trenton,N. J
Bridgeport, Conn.
Wilmington, Del
Camden, N.J
Des Moines, Iowa .
.
.
Kansas City, Kans .
Lynn, Mass
New Bedford,
Springfield,
Mass.
Mass
Troy,N.Y
Oakland, Cal
Lawrence, Mass
Mass
Savannah, Ga
Duluth, Minn
Somerville,
Norfolk,
Va
Hoboken, N. J
Peoria,
111
Yonkers, N.
Y
Utica,N.Y
Manchester, N. H. .
Schenectady, N. Y..
E vansviUe, Ind
San Antonio, Tex. .
Elizabeth, N. J
Waterbury, Conn
Salt
Lake
Erie,
Utah
Pa
City,
Wilkes-Barre,
Pa
Houston, Tex
Tacoma, Wash
Harrisburg, Pa
Charleston, S. C
Portland, Me
Youngstown, Ohio
Dallas,
Tex
Terre Haute, Ind
Fort Wayne, Ind
Akron, Ohio
Holyoke, Mass
Brockton, Mass
Covington,
Ky
.
.
$267,733
58,765
147,439
138, 444
79,036
Per
capita.
m
0.46
Total.
$222, 201
Per
capita.
()
Total.
216,389
114,804
222,736
271,831
162,071
1.79
0.95
1.95
2.41
1.51
127,599
144, 168
127,464
162,594
168,406
1.20
1.36
1.21
1.67
1.65
$233,903
164,459
159,036
195,305
85,541
175, 173
84,656
168,605
147,405
213,075
1.45
0.70
1.48
1.31
1.99
1.36
1.39
1.10
1.54
1.10
1,159,733
1,236,638
869,088
1,202,086
1,249,967
10.92
11.66
8.26
11.64
12.27
114,870
86,788
66,211
101,438
117,833
1.08
0.82
0.53
0.98
1.16
—CITIES HAVING A
144,321
147, 437
115,369
158, 821
111,943
POPULATION OF
50,000
«
1.28
Total.
$25,673
22,281
27,380
7,305
13,651
1.16
0.74
1.87
0.71
1.71
0.64
0.97
1.05
1.06
Per
capita.
TO
100,000
IN
1907.
Health conserva^
All other.
1.24
1.68
0.70
148,827
94,979
230,401
85,971
206,643
65,673
110,483
118,431
112,140
III.
ni.—HEALTH CONSEBVATION AND
AND PEOPEETY.
Fire department.
1.16
1.12
0.66
15.02
5.96
11.61
12.98
12.80
$1,542,892
1,209,640
1,480,844
1,324,489
718,656
Lowell, Mass
9.51
12.41
Total.
by states,
SANITATION.
1,811,302
718,484
1,313,288
1,463,489
1,372,994
GROUP
Cambridge, Mass
Albany,N. Y
Hartford, Conn
W
9.28
of the cities arranged alphabetically
I.— QENEBAL
GOVEENMENT.
Police department.
capita.
list
IN 1907— Continued.
tion.
Per
capita.
Total.
Per
capita.
0.17
0.21
0.06
0.11
$51,841
34,837
18,081
13,259
11,738
12,404
4,826
1,960
17,087
10,866
0.10
0.04
0.02
0.15
0.10
43,629
10,057
19,337
11,967
24,633
0.36
0.08
0.17
0.11
0.23
13,384
2,775
6,081
8,646
3,732
0.13
0.03
0.06
0.08
0.04
22,690
15,310
15,796
11,658
37,543
0.21
0.14
0.15
0.11
0.37
(')
{')
0.27
0.14
0.11
0.10
GENERAL TABLES.
TOTAL AND PER CAPITA,
1907:
with the number assigned to each, see page
GROUP
m.— HEALTH
CONSERVATION AND SANI-
TATION—continued.
COMPARATIVE SUMMARY,
1902
355
TO 1907— Continued,
127.]
II.-CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
100,000
TO
300,000
IN
1907-Continued.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
356
Table 34.— PAYMENTS
FOR GENERAL AND SPECIAL SERVICE EXPENSES,
[For a
GROUP
IV.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OF
;
),000
TO
n.— PBOTECTION or
ALL OENEBAL AND
SEEVICE
EXPENSES.
SPECIAL
City
Police department.
92
93
91
95
96
Saginaw, Mich
Lincoln, Nebr
Altoona, Pa
Spokane,
Wash
Lancaster,
Pa
97
98
99
100
Birmingham, Ala...
Bayoime, N. J
South Bend, Ind
101
Pawtucket, E.
102
103
104
105
106
McKeesport, Pa
Binghamton, N. Y.
Johnstown, Pa
107
108
109
110
111
Augusta, Ga
Mobile, Ala
Topeka, Kans
112
113
114
115
116
East St. Louis, 111
Wheeling, W. Va
Montgomery, Ala
117
118
119
120
121
Butte,
.
Mont
I
.
Dubuque, Iowa
Sioux City, Iowa
Spruigfield,
:.
Ohio
Per
1510,829
394, 497
388,113
960,423
314,354
$10. 26
Passaic,
N.J
Davenport, Iowa
AtlanticCity, N. J...
Little Rock, Ark
City, Mich
Bay
York, Pa
Maiden, Mass
Per
capita.
Total.
0.84
2.12
1.44
54,568
39,266
36,410
32,257
36,632
0.67
0.56
0.49
0.84
0.49
36,081
29,439
44, 700
39,904
33,248
19.41
6.69
9.04
7.07
14.20
(55,013
2.71
1.09
1.25
2.27
1.52
12,898
4,457
8,095
7,830
6,140
1.22
0.88
0.82
U.73
0.83
44,639
40,991
60,428
46,347
37,743
0.99
0.92
1.36
1.03
0.86
62,058
59,811
27,709
38,251
22,079
1.42
1.37
0.65
0.90
0.62
59,752
44,034
44,006
54,660
1.37
0.85
0.70
1.07
0.96
0.80
59,226
44,368
47,636
26,902
34,762
1.39
1.06
1.14
0.64
0.84
1.57
0.62
1.22
0.50
0.77
95,332
41,031
30, 407
11.28
6.99
8.89
11.21
7.02
42,322
15,236
26,991
36,767
12.30
11.57
8.53
13.28
13.56
55,540
48,624
25,314
56,637
60,239
1.18
1.06
0.55
1.24
1.34
76, 146
69,775
38,676
96,363
64,828
409,478
442,165
369,539
322,905
419,230
9.13
9.94
8.11
7.31
9.61
30,583
42,310
21,295
24,883
0.68
0.95
0.48
0.55
0.56
325,204
275,845
362, 642
444,920
7.44
6.32
8.47
10.42
6.80
24,338
20,782
36, 819
20,805
490,491
368,327
314,068
419, 786
537,286
11.63
8.78
7.61
10.05
12.91
805,515
276,661
366,686
283,162
564,941
446,956
125
126
Superior, Wis
Chester, Pa
127
128
129
Chelsea,
346,309
434,261
271,300
Per
capita.
127,805
50,347
67,310
103,269
68,631
579,300
533,218
392,293
604,143
610,818
276, 567
Total.
0.54
0.48
Quincy,Ill
Canton, Ohio
Per
capita.
$0.07
6.54
Springfield, 111
Total.
(')
$0.92
0.44
0.74
(.')
0.61
L62
1.61
conserva-
tion.
$3,306
99
6,188
7,401
1,326
$46,767
21,748
36,291
75,627
29,150
122
123
124
Per
capita.
Health
AH other.
Fire department.
$0.90
0.86
1.06
$D.9«
0.76
0.69
'
m. —HEALTH CONSERVATIOir AND
AND PROPERTY.
$46,032
42,782
52,047
111,266
25,984
$47,837
37,083
33,631
106,751
23,293
7.96
7.94
AJlpntown, Pa
. .
Total.
by states,
1907.
SANITATION.
ber.
capita.
LIPE
of tbe cities arranged alphabetically
IN
I.— GENERAL
eOVEBNMENT.
num-
Total.
list
50,000
Total.
Per
capita.
$0.13
0.08
0.07
0.03
$6,535
4,139
3,576
32,518
1,901
0.27
0.10
0.18
0.17
0.14
9,624
5,218
5,847
10,558
1,778
0.20
0.11
0.13
0.23
0.04
0.01
0.07
6,594
6,369
7,276
1,768
0.12
0.14
0.16
0.04
0.09
(')
0.13
(»)
m
0.04
3,445
0.02
0.08
32, 137
1.03
1.28
0.76
9,498
7,714
1,140
2,872
902
0.22
0.18
0.03
0.07
0.02
17,729
11,637
6,837
4,357
1,821
0.41
0.26
0.14
0.10
0.04
69,565
61,666
47,736
32,630
69,505
1.40
1.47
1.14
0.78
1.67
2,706
268
1,350
1,655
3,655
0.06
0.01
0.03
0.04
0.09
6,607
4,162
13,060
8,736
3,944
0.13
0.10
0.31
0.21
0.09
160,082
36,046
46,040
22,707
60,978
3.62
0.87
1.14
0.57
1.28
11,744
0.28
23,523
46,033
2.30
1.00
0.75
0.59
1.16
1,903
1,362
17,553
0.05
0.03
0.44
8,876
2,601
2,683
2,906
15,987
0.21
0.06
0.07
0.07
0.40
60,023
23,943
32,772
30,732
26,741
1.26
0.60
0.84
0.79
0.69
68,905
49, 648
44,216
79,154
25,592
L74
3,028
0.08
0.38
0.69
0.96
0.70
1.25
1.13
2.04
0.66
3,879
1,450
964
0.10
0.04
0.02
9,145
1,061
5,626
11,310
2,550
0.23
0.03
0.14
0.29
0.07
37,426
19,870
32,002
73,353
0.89
0.97
0.52
0.84
1.92
61,276
19,109
21,848
46,781
76,863
1.33
0.50
0.67
1.22
2.02
45,795
38,214
30,792
41,618
66,742
1.19
0.99
0.80
1.09
1.49
10,499
3,140
1,173
30, 141
22, 347
0.27
0.08
0.03
0.79
0.59
8,736
3,307
2,101
9,376
11,098
0.23
0.09
0.06
0.24
0.29
L02
1.16
0.65
0.69
0.77
38,740
75,702
21,268
21,418
26,069
1.02
1.99
0.57
0.68
0.68
58,500
76,803
24,367
46,814
47,625
1.54
2.02
0.66
1.27
1.30
9,708
3,391
864
195
363
0.26
0.09
0.02
0.01
0.01
4,789
17,336
3,540
3,998
2,954
0.13
0.46
0.09
0.11
0.08
35,365
34,761
43,477
30,737
58, 727
0.97
0.97
1.23
0.89
53,307
60,896
59,243
40,902
79,682
1.46
1.70
1.68
1.18
2.32
2,398
300
1,044
2,830
3,296
0.07
0.01
0.03
0.08
0.10
4,272
5,724
13,689
2,658
6,075
0.12
0.16
0.39
0.08
0.18
33,640
49,678
41,949
44, 892
0.99
1.47
1.26
1.34
0.02
0.08
0.04
68, 611
L75
804
2,550
1,498
7
2,831
0.08
6,547
1,070
5,706
800
4,819
0.16
0.03
0.17
0.02
0.14
0.17
0.26
0.17
0.01
3,702
8,160
1,382
0.20
0.11
0.26
0.04
1,721
6,467
10,472
3,317
0.05
0.21
0.34
0.11
3,166
1,026
1,514
5,921
0.10
0.03
0.05
24, 113
26,606
49,478
19,843
30,663
L07
LOl
4
Mass
South Omaha, Nebr.
130
Newcastle, Pa
Salem, Mass
131
Newton, Mass
132
133
134
135
136
Haverhill, Mass
Jacksonville, Fla
Joplin, Mo
137
138
139
140
141
Knoxville, Tenn
Ehnira, N.Y
Galveston, Tex
142
143
144
145
146
Kalamazoo, Mich
Woonsocket, R. I
Fitchburg, Mass
147
148
149
150
Macon, Ga
151
West Hoboken, N.
152
163
154
Sacramento, Cal
Pueblo, Colo
155
156
157
168
Taunton, Mass
Newport, Ky
Wichita, Kans
KockJord, 111
New
Conn.
.
Chattanooga, Tenn.
.
Britain,
Racine,
N.Y
,
Joliet, 111
Oklahoma City,
Oshkosh, Wis
Okla.
Everett, Mass
22.08
J..
535, 761
14 06
11.58
5.44
8.21
8.97
38,676
44,027
20,520
21,942
28,228
7.71
10.46
11.47
10.62
11.15
20,370
46,720
26,313
41,000
27,645
0.56
374,029
404,166
368,046
383,686
26,811
25,390
28,096
22,197
31,667
0.79
0.75
0.84
0.66
0.95
23, 407
314,968
419,008
296,824
386,207
9.94
9.32
12.46
8.84
11.66
32,864
37,637
16,100
31,603
0.69
0.97
1.12
0.48
0.96
246,477
321,987
306, 174
284, 156
7.62
9.86
9.43
9.02
23,757
24,257
26,411
19,577
0.73
0.74
0.81
0.62
53,241
34, 154
23,679
15,678
1.62
1.06
0.73
0.49
67,888
36,861
27,774
40,047
2.07
1.13
0.86
L27
6,419
8,519
5,386
296
253,046
530,716
538,877
375,324
8.04
16.95
17.28
12.10
20,290
69,282
52,343
30, 186
0.64
1.89
1.68
0.97
42,171
38,906
51,253
30,049
1.34
18,229
69,662
78,858
28,460
.0.58
2.22
2.53
0.92
3,486
5,351
3,384
0.11
0.17
0.11
366, 162
11.83
6.39
9.61
30,371
23,718
28,099
39,013
0.98
0.77
0.96
40,941
12,263
43,837
58, 967
1.32
0.40
m
42,761
30,624
20,899
38,846
3,510
360
1,150
3,614
0.11
0.01
0.04
37,422
1.05
247
0.01
La Crosse, Wis
196,844
280,046
Fort Worth, Tex
262, 567
San Juan, P.
R
34, 166
440,454
202,902
303,097
329,108
336, 111
Wis
Auburn,
12.85
7.86
7.17
13.38
495,668
302,880
276,830
612,361
841,720
195, 187
m
L28
0.75
1.18
0.80
Less than 1 cent.
1.71
L24
1.64
0.97
1.38
1.00
0.72
m
1.-60
m
(')
(')
«
GENERAL TABLES.
TOTAL AND PER CAPITA,
irlfh the
1907:
nuniber assigned to each, see page
COMPARATIVE SUMMARY,
VATION AND SANITATION —continued.
Sanitation.
Total.
S22,076
19,954
14,036
48,023
18,414
Per
capita.
44
0.40
0.29
JO.
m
0.38
1.31
61,896
34,470
26, 177
48,837
41,200
0.75
0.57
1.07
0.91
16,707
9,011
25,070
33,909
0.82
0.38
0.20
0.57
0.77
16, 892
30,254
13,219
34,503
21,331
73,465
38,462
29,970
32,331
51,054
28,015
0.39
0.69
0.31
0.81
0.50
TO 1907—Continued.
127.]
GROUP
m.—HEALTH CONSER-
1902
357
IV.—CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION 07
30,000
TO
50,000
IN
1907.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
358
Table
34.—PAYMENTS FOR GENERAL AND SPECIAL SERVICE EXPENSES,
COMPARATIVE SUMMARY FOR
148 CITIES,
QROtJPED
m.— HEALTH
-PROTECTION OP LIFE AND PROPERTY.
ALL GENERAL AND
SERVICE
SPECIAL
EXPENSES.
SANITATION.
I.— GENERAL
GOVERNMENT.
Police department.
Total.
Grand
1903...
1902...
.
Per
Total.
capita.
Total.
Per
capita.
Total.
conserva-
tion.
Per
capita.
Per
Total.
capita.
1.51
6, 029,
5, 962,
28, 100, 475
27, 044, 428
1.46
1.42
1.34
1.33
908
610, 432
450, 436
624, 686
$0.30
0.27
0.27
0.26
0.26
0.18
$6,819,325
5,212,831
4, 900, 715
4,708,696
4, 760, 056
4, 399, 624
$0.29
0.23
0.22
0.22
0.23
0.22
22,144,211
20,304,090
18,973,533
18, 006, 031
1.69
1.69
1.62
1.48
1.38
0.43
0.39
0.41
0.39
0.40
0.25
4,784,704
3,657,239
3,292,921
16, 792, 761
15, 980, 016
053
643
902
4, 785, 979
4, 704, 167
2,900,037
0.37
0.29
0.26
0.26
0.26
0.26
1.60
1.38
1.37
1.32
1.27
1.24
7,265,201
6,614,132
6,230,957
5, 948, 613
6,356,866
6,662,604
1.60
1.49
1.46
1.43
1.33
1.42
538,276
450,554
434, 993
379, 168
338, 825
0.12
0.12
0.11
0.10
0.09
0.09
980,645
739,317
761,828
4,242,155
3,921,654
3, 677, 460
3,579,439
3,426,311
3, 228, 734
1.29
1.22
1.18
1.18
1.16
1.12
425
4,462,851
4,297,897
4, 036, 122
3,682,346
3, 430, 661
1.48
1.39
1.38
1.33
1.25
1.19
395,317
321,351
287,895
254,589
221, 984
258, 046
0.12
0.10
0.09
0.08
0.08
0.09
506,750
500,656
638, 900
630,781
2,366,614
2,217,076
2,073,208
1.05
1.01
0.97
0.97
0.93
0.89
3,046,561
2, 811, 887
2,620,783
2,614,839
2,268,512
2, 071, 148
1.35
1.28
1.22
1.20
1.11
1.04
250. 116
191, 912
0.11
0.09
0.08
0.06
0.07
0.06
316, 124
339,216
356, 096
342,312
336,877
$2.11
2.01
1.97
1.96
1.92
1.90
$37,323,398
34,092,960
32, 123, 170
30,503,605
2.71
$368,392,175
329,549,299
305, 685, 798
295,225,352
278,780,179
272,616,313
J15.91
14.60
13.89
13.75
13.34
13.36
$43,362,430
34,089,572
30,596,532
29,021,986
31, 942, 746
33,546,656
$1.87
1.61
1.39
1.35
1.63
1.64
$48,870,881
46,319,353
43, 148, 400
42,094,710
40,137,200
38,667,664
248, 638, 781
219,500,009
201, 092, 060
195, 451, 442
185,262,208
183,"597, 462
19.03
17.18
16.13
16.04
15.69
15.82
32,927,849
24, 469, 907
21,832,172
20, 767, 173
22,860,626
24,296,665
2.62
1.91
1.76
1.70
1.92
2.09
35,463,083
33, 127, 120
423
066
429
413
2.59
2.53
2.54
2.50
2.48
57,857,719
52,583,787
49, 882, 623
47, 129, 886
43, 618, 005
41,168,018
12.75
12.02
11.68
11.32
10.81
10.48
6, 163,
926
4,763,398
4,243,622
4,027,158
4, 401, 115
4,276,217
1.14
1.09
0.99
0.97
1.09
6,800,029
6,053,603
5,848,319
6,506,905
5,140,245
4, 864, 904
38,540,612
35,339,479
33, 684, 383
32, 843, 960
30,967,536
.30,137,442
11.72
11.01
10.78
10.84
10.61
10.48
3,311,865
3,072,711
2, 831, 468
2, 672, 066
2, 822, 129
3,196,670
0.96
0.91
0.88
0.96
23,355,063
22, 126, 024
21,026,732
19, 800, 064
18, 932, 430
17,713,391
10.36
10.04
9.80
9.49
9.29
8.92
1,958,791
1,783,556
1, 689, 270
1,556,690
1, 858, 977
1,777,303
0.87
0.81
0.79
0.76
0.91
0.89
$1.61
$6,839,761
6,
5,
3,
621
31,
30,
29,
28,
549,
993,
684,
809,
1.41
5, 656,
4, 996,
6, 061,
3, 171, 094
614
2,974,203
3, 084,
II:
1907....
1906....
1905....
1904,...
1903
1902....
Group
519, 715
680, 761
794,229
557, 763
0.22
0.17
0.18
0.16
0.20
0.14
III:
1907..^..
1906
1905
1904
1903
1902
Group IV:
1.01
1.11
4, 867,
689,225
0.21
600, 151
0.16
0.16
0.17
0.18
0.18
i
1907
1906
1905
1904
1903
1902
1
Per
capita.
Healtli
All other.
I:
1907. .
1906...
1905. .
1904...
Group
Total.
Fire department.
total:
1907
1906
1905
1904
1903
1902
Group
Per
capita.
CON-
SERVATION AND
Not including Bay
Colo.; Everett, Mass.;
City, Mich.; Wichita, Kans.;
New
Newport, Ky.; or Fort Worth, Tex.
Britain, Conn.;
301
1,886,216
1, 764, 613
2, 015,
162,657
134,871
146. 117
127, 778
364, 761
Kalamazoo, Mich.; Macon, Ga.; Oklahoma City, Okla.; West Hoboken, N.
J.;
0.16
0.14
0.16
0.17
0.17
0.17
Pueblo,
GENERAL TABLES.
TOTAL AND PER CAPITA,
1907:
ACCORDING TO POPULATION IN
1907: 1902
COMPARATIVE SUMMARY,
TO
1902
359
TO 1907— Continued.
1907.
m.— HEALTH CONSERVATION AND SANITATION—continued.
VI.— EDUCATION.
IV.
—HIGHWAYS,
Per
capita.
Total.
-MISCELLANEOUS.
ies,
Per
capita.
and museums.
Total.
Per
capita.
Total.
Per
capita.
Total.
Per
capita.
1103,594,271
96,914,062
87,875,661
86,641,382
80,967,430
75,224,638
$4.48
4.25
3.99
4.04
3.87
3.69
$0.22
0.20
0.19
0.19
0.19
0.16
30.52
0.60
0.47
0.39
0.35
0.60
$5,360,028
6,658,668
6,408,973
6,019,410
3,437,806
3,401,472
$0.23
0.30
0.26
0.23
0.16
0.17
28,181,616
22,494,084
20,386,272
19,885,971
18,048,190
20,128,345
62,678,848
59,193,520
53,379,629
54,223,388
50,669,787
47,153,561
4.80
4.63
4.28
4.46
4.26
4.06
0.25
0.23
0.22
0.24
0.24
0.19
0.68
0.66
0.63
0.51
0.45
0.91
3,941,863
6,128,903
3,674,323
3,142,959
2,608,398
2,587,063
0.30
0.40
0.29
0.26
0.21
0.22
622,288
711, 175
774,527
823, 108
100,048
60,788
0.14
0.16
0.18
0.20
0.02
0.02
466,315
390,869
413,876
$30,278,246
26,780,176
24,968,052
23,483,783
20,995,319
18,577,678
21,204,788
18,878,011
17,783,164
17,066,003
15,190,156
13,169,789
Total.
—RECEEATION.
Libraries, art galler-
Schools.
Sanitation.
Total.
VII.
4,414,369
3,766,879
3,409,039
3,049,961
2,739,366
», 454, 122
0.97
0.86
0.80
0.73
0.68
0.62
7,418,996
7,645,554
7,695,544
7,654,761
7,201,136
6,828,064
19,645,492
17,259,701
16,080,288
14,921,617
13,716,906
12,754,533
4.33
3.94
3.76
3.58
3.40
3.25
836,822
719,887
648, 406
596,602
600,623
621,046
0.18
0.16
0.15
0.14
0.16
0.13
1,646,606
1,479,946
1,394,719
1,243,931
1,063,637
991, 101
0.36
0.34
0.33
0.30
0.26
0.25
3,032,880
2,695,891
2,522,703
2,287,372
2,129,773
2,050,461
0.92
0.84
0.81
0.75
0.72
0.71
5,288,325
5,172,460
5,112,215
5,381,867
4,963,378
4,972,723
12,998,046
11,742,047
11,127,838
10,646,719
10,064,037
9,325,290
3.95
3.66
3.66
3.51
3.41
522,826
480,093
461,082
437,379
414,386
369,921
0.16
0.16
0.15
0.14
0.14
0.13
1,002,808
879, 185
784,271
718,928
607, 669
639,349
0.30
0.27
0.25
0.24
0.21
0.19
.452,920
439,870
0.14
0.12
0.13
0.19
0.15
0.15
1,626,209
1,439,395
1,253,146
1,080,447
936,024
903,306
0.72
0.65
0.58
0.52
0.46
0.45
3,442,704
3,677,656
3,605,818
3,470,667
3,306,141
3,122,646
8,271,886
7,718,794
7,287,906
6,850,668
6,626,700
5,901,264
3.67
3.60
3.40
3.28
3.20
3.02
323,489
287,962
297,451
258,593
246,753
208,536
0.14
0.13
0.14
0.12
0.12
0.10
460,340
380,359
308, 185
282,705
193,043
181,386
0.20
0.17
0.14
0.14
0.09
0.09
329,562
427,621
546,247
464,749
376, 439
313,751
0.16
0.19
0.25
0.22
0.18
0.16
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
360
Table 35.— PER
CENT DISTRIBUTION OF PAYMENTS FOR GENERAL AND SPECIAL SERVICE EXPENSES:'
[For a
list of
the
cities
arranged alphabetically by ptates, with the
-PROTECTION OF UFE AND
PKOPERTT.
number
ber.
ment.
Grand
rv.—
Police
depart-
Fire
depart-
ment.
ment.
13.2
total
Group I
Groupll
Group III
Group IV
14.3
11.8
11.0
10.2
GROUP
GROUP
VI.— EDUCATION.
SANITATION.
General
govern-
num-
assigned to each, see page 127.]
in.—HEALTH CONSEKVATION AND
I.—
City
Health
All other. oonservar
tlon.
Highways.
Sanita-
Charities
and
corrections.
Schools.
10.2
12.6
12.6
13.0
v.—
tion.
2.3
1.9
8.6
0.9
1.0
1.0
1.7
1.8
1.5
76
7.9
6.7
6.6
28.2
1.4
78
25.2
34.0
33.7
35.5
1.3
4.4
4.5
3.9
300,000
OR OVER IN
II.— CITIES
HAVING A POPULATION OP
100,000
TO
34.
300,000
IN
1907.
1907.
VII.—
vni.—
Recrea-
Miscellaneous.
tion.
leries, and
museums.
11.3
12.8
13.7
14.8
HAVING A POPULATION OF
For aggregates, see Table
Libraries,
art gal-
12,1
I.— CITIES
1
1907.
3.3
GENERAL TABLES.
Table 35
—PER CENT DISTRIBUTION
361
OP PAYMENTS FOR GENERAL AND SPECIAL SERVICE EXPENSES:'
1907— Continued.
[For a
list of
the
cities
arranged alphabetically by states, with the number assigned to each, see page
GROUP m.—CITIES HAVING A POPULATION OF
City-
50,000
TO
100,000
IN
1907.
127.]
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
362
Table 35.— PER
CENT DISTRIBUTION OF PAYMENTS FOR GENERAL AND SPECIAL SERVICE EXPENSES:*
1907—Continued.
[For a
list of
the cities arranged alphabetically
GROUP
City
IV.—CITIES
by states, with the ntimber assigned
HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
TO
to each, see
50,000
IN
page
1907.
127.]
GENERAL TABLES.
Table 36.—PAYMENTS
[For a
City
list
FOR OUTLAYS, TOTAL AND PER CAPITA:
of the cities arranged alphabetically
by
states,
363
1907.
with the number assigned to each, see page
127.]
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
364
Table 36.—PAYMENTS
[For a
list
GROUP
City
FOR OUTLAYS, TOTAL AND PER CAPITA:
of the cities arranged alphabetically
II.— CITIES
by states, with the number assigned
HAVING A POPULATION OF
100,000
TO
300,000
1907— Continued.
to each, see page 127.]
IN 1907— Continued.
GENERAL TABLES.
Table 36.—PAYMENTS
[For a
list of
FOR OUTLAYS, TOTAL AND PER CAPITA:
the cities arranged alphabetically
GROUP
IV.— CITIES
by
states,
1907— Contintied.
with the number assigned to each, see page
HAVING A POPULATION OF
HEALTH CONSEBVATION AND SANI-
ALL OUTLAYS.
365
30,000
TO
EDUCATION.
50,000
IN
EECBEATION.
TATION.
City
127.]
1907.
PUBLIC SERVICE
ENTEEPKISES.
ALL OTHEK.
number.
Total.
$474, 582
Saginaw, Mich...
Lincoln, Nebr .
Altoona, Pa
Birmingham, Ala..
Bayonne, N. J
South Bend, Ind..
Mont
100
101
Butte,
102
103
104
105
106
McEIeesport,
107
108
109
110
111
Augusta,
112
East St. Louis, HI..
Wheeling, W. Va...
113
114
115
116
I...
Pa
Binghamton, N.
Y
Johnstown, Pa
Dubuque, Iowa
Sioux City, Iowa.
.
Ga
Mobile, Ala
Topeka, Kans
Springfield, Ohio.
Allentown, Fa
Montgomery, Ala...
Passaic, N. J
Darenport, Iowa.
.
117
118
119
Atlantic City, N. J
120
121
York, Pa
Maiden, Mass
122
123
124
125
126
Springfield,
127
128
129
130
131
Chelsea,
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
Little Rock, Ark.
Bay City, Mich
.
.
m..
Quincy, ni
Canton, Ohio...
Superior, Wis..
Chester,
Pa
Mass
South Omaha, Nebr.
Newcastle, Pa
Salem, Mass
Newton, Mass
Haverhill, Mass..
Jacksonville, Fla.
Jqplin,
Mo
Wichita, Kans...
Rockford, lU
Knoxville,
Elmira, N.
Galveston,
Tenn
Y
Tex
New Britain, Conn.
Chattanooga, Term.
Kalamazoo, Mich.
Woonsooket, R. I.
Fitchburg, Mass. .
Racine,
Wis
Aubum,N. Y
Total.
$39,224
44,980
33,007
217,588
Per
capita.
0.07
$53,860
40,927
161,622
197,722
16,069
2,787
24,350
3,780
280
9,578
0.06
0.53
206
19,433
0.08
46,711
0.01
0.21
88,097
0.68
0.97
0.16
0.97
0.76
0.48
351,845
53,697
140,390
124, 178
61,218
_
7.47
1.17
3.05
2.73
1.14
16,553
40,704
16,566
27,842
45,499
0.35
0.88
0.36
0.61
1.01
2.02
1.49
2.04
0.96
67,641
54,862
77,628
27,413
4S,217
1.51
1.23
1.75
0.62
1.09
18,717
8,924
7,133
31,700
(')
4.59(')
(')
1.12
(')
7.28
6.05
3.80
3.39
3.62
28,354
43,721
2,027
15,583
15,957
0.63
0.98
0.06
0.35
0.36
90,541
100,388
66,030
89,999
42,230
136,480
170,502
168,355
165,303
288,018
3.12
3.91
3.93
3.87
6.76
17,349
0.40
2,267
41,163
17,021
0.05
0.96
0.40
61,629
169,502
94,003
53,712
96,049
1.41
3.88
2.20
1.26
2.23
34,694
1,957
48,038
0.81
0.05
1.13
306,658
53,618
243,236
191,924
428,410
7.21
1.28
6.81
4.60
10.29
679
6,108
33,315
16,612
25,170
0.02
0.15
0.80
0.40
0.60
164,734
24,027
150,969
39,524
363,641
3.64
0.57
3.61
0.95
8.60
20,983
1,450
6,792
119,347
18,941
0.49
0.03
0.16
2.86
0.46
566,659
294,695
159,629
90,750
313,327
13.66
7.15
3.93
2.26
7.88
6,034
18,268
32,277
32,775
16,767
0.16
0.44
0.80
0.82
0.42
392,018
76,316
43,785
15,520
20,362
9.46
1.86
1.08
0.39
0.61
64,317
107,112
42,086
38,315
228,073
1.55
2.60
1.04
0.96
5.73
50,812
1.22
3,644
0.09
265,356
48,857
193,303
131,049
13,817
6.70
1.23
4.96
3.38
0.36
9,594
134,095
23,902
88,937
106,332
8,184
12,229
0.93
0.05
0.80
0.32
30,848
5,317
21,761
796
5,633
0.24
0.41
0.56
0.02
0.16
0.78
0.13
0.17
0.07
99,100
116,092
235,906
154,518
349,366
2.57
3.01
6.13
4.03
9.16
11,431
8,652
39,653
74,515
79,442
0.30
0.22
1.03
1.95
2.08
145, 566
44,576
97,325
0.48
1.15
3.78
1.16
2.56
54,252
23,618
40,015
17,402
131,296
1.41
0.61
1.04
0.45
3.44
106,882
548, 017
187,097
336,800
249, 982
2.81
14.40
5.02
9.13
6.81
5,640
104, 311
0.15
2.74
0.89
3.64
0.21
769
185,570
90,006
146, 000
43,268
0.41
4.88
2.41
3.96
1.18
55,432
2,184
69, 743
18,762
103,898
1.46
0.06
1.60
0.61
2.83
175,671
73,678
948,470
415,218
207,844
4.80
2.06
26.93
11.99
6.04
28,489
14,828
38,844
48,706
110,928
0.78
0.41
1.10
2.67
1.22
24.48
0.86
1.80
41,658
800
1.13
0.02
3.22
97,668
43,587
862,306
29,615
61, 913
114,254
2,677
9.63
2.06
3.42
5.69
5.35
67,128
10,325
30,393
23,978
23,748
1.99
0.31
0.90
0.71
0.71
138,234
32, 514
56, 174
134,428
76,420
4.09
0.96
35, 169
1.67
4.01
2.29
0.13
4.62
26.35
0.12
0.63
6.32
0.06
200
3.91
4,028
20,710
204, 966
20, 699
2.72
16.43
8.83
2.30
44,793
140,252
17, 927
8,794
3.64
1.30
5.39
24,927
325,811
69,370
114, 952
191,070
178, 628
85, 507
Sacramento, Cal...
Pueblo, Colo
514, 509
1S5
156
167
158
Taunton, Mass
Newport, Ky
La Crosse, Wis...
Fort Worth, Tex.
39,839
157, 216
201,218
San Juan, P. R.
127, 160
4,228
150,907
854,948
123, 131
275,402
71, 197
112, 601
'
(')
3.
56
16,330
33, 141-
134,468
7,729
18,604
44,437
2.26
0.60
2.28
2.75
0.21
1,868
31,294
Total.
$0.14
0.12
0.02
$6.09
1.72
$1.34
0.84
0.56
Per
capita.
$6,793
5,814
872
10,733
3,616
$303,292
85,215
224, 496
491,309
63,939
$66,728
41,884
27,335
132,816
32,595
$0.79
0.91
0.68
Total.
326,725
224,706
168, »12
149,791
159,490
West Hoboken, N.
1
Per
capita.
6.80
4.48
4.80
152
153
154
Everett, Mass
Total.
45,599
7,213
44,781
34,674
21,406
151
Okla..
Per
capita.
8.94
3.19
Macon, Ga
Jollet.Ill
0)
2.25
Total.
421,282
l46, 884
266, 732
203,607
216,329
147
148
149
ISO
Oklahoma City,
Oshkosh, Wis
$9.53
4.90
9.09
242,957
444,295
1,075,049
108,308
-
Spokane, Wash..
Lancaster, Pa...
Pawtucket, R.
Per
capita.
18,140
6,612.
2,890
0.21
0.17
0.74
Per
$L08
$4,686
0.83
3.10
24, 137
(')
0.42
0.99
99,668
19,736
2.21
0.44
11,076
34,369
0.25
0.78
11,205
1,000
27,841
47,904
76,408
0.26
0.02
0.66
1.12
1.79
15,586
41,806
0.37
1.00
.%570
1,277
35,438
0.09
0.03
0.87
13,620
0.34
38,033
0.96
'i8,'268
0.47
0.02
14,913
0.39
0.07
0.31
1.00
0.01
0.03
535
72, 602
892
0.01
1.91
0.02
20,268
170, 995
846
0.53
4.49
0.02
4,305
0.12
3.30
0.08
6,032
47,320
30,628
627
0.17
1.34
0.88
0.02
3,223
16,564
19,890
13,352
1.04
0.10
0.46
0.59
0.40
1,071
2,936
7,949
0.03
0.09
0.24
37,916
21,424
9,885
2,375
57, 047
1.12
0.63
0.29
0.07
1.71
66, 660
0.01
1.17
15.27
2.09
66,394
12,980
35,546
1.70
0.40
1.13
1,124
3,378
654
0.03
0.10
0.02
36, 618
131,772
572
1.09
4.06
0.02
1.42
4.48
0.57
0.28
37,549
152,450
196,436
30, 140
1.19
4.87
6.30
0.97
346
116,719
32,798
30,563
0.01
3.73
1.05
0.99
6,891
0.22
64,824
20,242
1,700
2.07
0.65
0.05
0.81
12,681
38,456
0.41
1.26
2.38
6,703
0.22
65, 266
"66,'ii4
1.72
2.11
0.05
0.99
8,728
16,807
0.30
21,852
0.61
38, 161
495, 649
m
1,383
28,779
122,700
(>)
21,802
0.61
47,637
6,888
1.34
Per capita average not computed, because no reliable estimate ol population could be made.
(')
1
Less than
1 cent.
Per
capita.
$0.09
0.49
0.14
(1)
0.06
4,292
1,487
15, 604
16, 633
631
0.09
0.03
0.34
0.37
0.01
40,631
6,000
22,627
6,720
0.91
0.13
0.51
0.13
46,297
1.06
13,434
19,802
0.01
0.31
0.46
130,262
6,447
10,364
16,441
12,618
0.44
400
1,097
1.41
7,063
24,881
2,200
0.33
2,756
11,972
38,229
15,
Total.
capita.
49,908
91,722
2,500
4,140
34,515
3.06
0.15
0.25
0.39
0.30
1.20
2.23
0.06
0.10
0.87
15,890
1,440
26,431
7,922
0.40
0.04
0.68
39,385
7,916
5,663
1,977
1.02
9,258
12,455
2,470
37,580
26,560
0.24
0.33
0.07
1.02
0.72
7,966
8,431
0.22
0.24
192, 116
5. .55
31,799
0.92
47,364
813
1.40
0.02
2,460
8,061
0.07
0.24
0.20
0.21
0.15
0.05
0.19
2,820
33,373
7,999
0.09
3,000
0.10
161
34, 189
0.01
29, 981
0.
L07
0.26
i
84
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
366
Table 37.—RECEIPTS
FROM GENERAL REVENUES, TOTAL AND PER
TO
[Eor a
list of
CAPITA,
COMPARATIVE SUMMARY,
1907;
1902
1907.
number assigned
the cities arranged alphabetically by states, with the
to each, see page 127.]
UCENSES AND FEBHITS.
ALL OTHEB
ALL GENERAL
KEVENUES.
City
General property
num-
taxes.
GENERAL
Special property
and business
taxes.
Liquor
Poll taxes.
and
licenses
taxes.
All other licenses
and permits.!
REVENUES.
Irer.
Total.
Grand
Per
capita.
$434,786,268 $18. 49
total
Group I
Group II
Group III
Group IV
279,652,232
73,635,060
47,968,707
33,530,259
GROUP
NewYorlc, N.Y..
21.40
16.22
14.59
12.81
Per
capita
Total.
$341,924,646 $14. 54 $13,032,861
221,857,109
57,410,035
37,203,649
25,453,853
I.— CITIES
$103, 567,226 $24. 51
Chicago, 111
City corporation and in-
Total.
16.98
12.65
11.31
9.73
9,642,054
1,052,049
1,788,152
650, 606
Per
capita.
Total.
$1.61
$8,841,677
$0.38
$31,772,213
$1.35
1.91
1.45
1.11
1.07
4,540,995
1,925,185
998,216
1,377,281
0.35
0.42
0.30
0.53
18,621,864
6,383,111
3,854,479
3,012,759
1.42
1.41
1.17
1.15
$929,303
906,021
$0.22
0.43
$3,066,100
1,218,798
$0.73
0.58
OR OVER IN
300,000
$1.21
0.09
$1.46
3.47
7,305,517
1,285
3,47
1,218,798
0.58
1.31
1.78
1.87
473,056
362,688
79,842
0.32
0.55
0.13
2,657,984
448,107
216,131
0.68
0.35
1.87
79,386
456
0.13
112,416
103,715
0.18
0.17
22,942,851
3,281,658
10.89
1.56
197,562
0.09
16.55
19.74
36.22
19,110,212
9,888,362
18,237,936
13.03
14.94
29.94
39,313
1,183,612
1,624,811
0.03
1.79
2.67
368,445
$0.05
158,600
0.26
1,926,000
1,178,112
1,138,267
,351,416
104, 171
35.05
0.17
18,237,936
29.94
1,624,811
2.67
158,600
0.26
1,138,267
1,416,057
,586,384
15.00
21.80
6,714,249
9,587,463
11.97
18.04
571,557
20,520
1.02
0.04
divisions..
1,880,285
18.59
3.21
8,423,796
1,163,668
15.85
2.19
20,520
0.04
,706,099
Cleveland, Ohio
City corporation and independent divisions.
1,013,379
18.94
7,364,421
15.48
4.62
,852,341
,161,038
16.50
2.44
6,228,526
1,135,895
13.09
2.39
4.62
7,485,256
19.36
6,713,068
17.36
163,175
594
982,662
16.81
5,768,695
944,373
14.92
2.44
152,421
10,754
dependent divisions.
County
Baltimore, Md
Pittsburg, Pa
City corporation and in-
dependent
County
County
Buffalo,
N.Y
1907.
$6,158,457
7,306,802
15.45
1.56
Boston, Mass
City corporation and in-
Per
capita.
24,918,704
6,591,549
3,653,782
2,799,117
275,010
13i 060,881
455,587
21,
24,
Total.
$37,963,162
282,943
3,
Pa
Per
capita.
0.02
0.06
0.14
0.09
32, 570, 749
dependent divisions.
County
Total.
$0.05
17.01
Philadelphia,
St. Louis, Mo
capita.
271,506
273,131
470,429
236,643
0.73
0.23
0.64
0.25
853,692
35,
Per
Total.
$0.55 $1,251,709
HAVING A POPULATION OF
$88,292,443 $20. 89 $5,120,923
26,224,509 12.44
197, 562
Per
capita.
(')
(.')
1.81
449,587
805,036
0.80
1.51
147,002
167,521
0.26
0.32
533,662
1,005,844
0.95
1.89
1.00
0.89
737,714
67,322
1.39
0.13
167,306
215
0.31
530,950
474,894
1,277,290
2.68
35,173
0.0Y
336,033
0.71
1,277,290
2.68
31,243
3,930
0.07
0.01
315,282
20,751
0.66
0.04
0.42
269,456
0.70
110,111
0.28
229,446
0.59
0.39
0.03
269,456
0.70
110,111
0.28
201,911
27,535
0.52
0.07
m
City corporation and in-
dependent
divisions..
6, 502,
County
San Francisco, Cal
Betroit, Mich
2.54
m
«
m
m
,242,990
19.71
6,207,811
5,342,932
14.54
1,187,375
789,342
2.15
371,085
56,933
0.15
661, 694
1,053,783
divisions..
,505,116
737,874
17.70
2.01
5,005,813
337,119
13.62
0.92
398,321
391,021
1.08
1.06
64,609
2,324
0.15
0.01
1,046,373
7,410
Cincinnati, Ohio
City corporation and in-
1,898,636
19.87
5,363,322
1,064,288
3.07
150,056
0.43
329, 867
0.95
267, 786
3,781,716
1,571,606
10.89
4.63
1,103
1,025,817
38,471
2.96
0.11
145,143
4,913
0.42
0.01
315,110
14,757
0.91
0.04
1,427,965
{>)
2.87
City corporation and in-
dependent
County
dependent divisions.
County
Milwaukee, Wis
City corporation and independent divisions.
,630,850
i,
286, 502
16.39
4,107,916
12.74
41,760
0.13
468,030
1.46
284,986
0.88
383,820
L19
:,
549, 834
14.11
2.28
3,446,516
661,400
10.69
2.05
36,732
5,018
0.11
0.02
468,030
1.45
278,531
6,455
0.86
0.02
320,025
63,795
0.99
0.20
i,
959, 410
18.70
35.59
4,612,630
4,099,835
14.48
13.12
577,266
430,214
470, 448
1.35
1.51
0.97
0.51
563,386
5,817,209
1.77
18.61
736,668
Washington, D. C
,123,257
GROUP
Newark, N.
$5,049,802
4,130,935
3,099,647
3,751,567
2,930,415
J
Minneapolis, Minn
Jersey City, N. J
Louisville,
Ky
Indianapolis, Inc)
St. Paul,
Minn
Providence, R.I
Rochester, N.
Y
Kansas
City,
Mo
Toledo, Ohio
Denver, Colo
City corporation and in-
dependent divisions.
County
Columbus, Ohio
Los Angeles, Cal
Worcester, Mass
Seattle,
Wash
Memphis, Tenn
Omaha, Nebr
New Haven, Conn
Scranton,
Pa
Y
Syracuse, N.
St. Joseph, Mo
Paterson, N.J
Portland, Oreg
Atlanta, Ga
Richmond, Va
Fall River, Mass
Nashville, Term
Dayton, OhiO;
Grand Rapids, Mich
.'.
{')
15.18
4.70
i,
County
New Orleans, La
1,103
2.85
0.02
II.— CITIES
44,461
HAVING A POPULATION OF
100,000
0.14
TO
300,000
IN
1907.
'
GENERAL TABLES.
Table 37.— RECEIPTS
FROM GENERAL REVENUES, TOTAL AND PER
367
CAPITA,
COMPARATIVE SUMMARY,
1907;
1902
TO 1907—Continued.
[For
list of
El
the cities arranged alphabetically
GROUP
III.— CITIES
by
states,
with the number assigned
HAVING A POPULATION OF
50,000
TO
to each, see
100,000
IN
page
127.]
1907.
LICENSES
AND PERMITS.
ALL OTHER
ALL GENERAL
BEVENUES.
City
General property
num-
taxes.
ber.
Total.
Cambridge, Mass
Albany, N.
$1,905,910 $19. 13
1,359,108 13.69
2,022,307
20.53
15.93
1,516,743
898,978
9.65
Y
Hartford, Conn
Lowell, Mass
Beading, Pa
Trenton, N.J
Bridgeport, Conn
Camden, N.J
Des Moines, Iowa
Kansas City, Kans.
Lynn, Mass
New Bedford, Mass
Springfield, Mass
ftoy, N. Y
Oakland, Cal
Lawrence, Mass. .
Somervllle, Mass
Savannah, Ga
Suluth, Minn
.
•
Va
Hoboken, N.J
Peoria,
111
Yonkers,N.
Y
Utioa,N.Y
H
Manchester, N.
Schenectady, N.
Y
. .
Evansville, Ind
San Antonio, Tex
Elizabeth,
N.J
Waterbury, Conn
SalfLake City, Utah
Wilkes-Barre,
Erie,
Pa
Pa
Houston, Tex
Tacoma, Wash
Harrisburg, Pa
Charleston, S. C
Portland, Me
Youngstown, Ohio.
.
Tex
Dallas,
Terre Haute, Ind
Fort Wayne, Ind
Akron, Ohio
Holyoke, Mass
,
Mich
Lincoln,'Nebr
Altoona, Pa
Spokane, Wash
Lancaster, Pa
97
Birmingham, Ala.
Bayonne, N.J
South Bend, Ind.
Mont
100
Butte,
101
Pawtucket, R.
102
103
McKeesport, Pa...,
Binghamton, N. Y
Johnstown, Pa
104
105
106
I
.
Dubuque, Iowa
Sioux City, Iowa.
Ga
107
108
109
110
Augusta,
HI
Allentown,
112
EastSt. Lonis.Ill.,
Wheeling, W. Va.
113
114
Mobile, Ala
Topeka, Kans
Springfield, Ohio...
Pa
Montgomery, Ala.
N.J
115
Passaic,
116
Davenport, Iowa.
90196—10
24
0.01
0.37
0.28
0.11
0.22
0.01
0.06
18,000
5,379
0.20
0.06
603,202
1,000,876
978,038
1,092,658
1,001,124
7.49
12.44
12.36
13.98
13.04
5,930
76,883
122,466
177, 103
34,771
0.07
0.96
1.55
2.27
0.45
2,054,171
928,980
1,000,718
788,087
1,068,331
12.72
13.84
11.28
15.32
1,308,042
720,697
881, 946
692,276
794, 507
9.87
12.19
8.48
11.39
35,659
71,895
0.49
0.99
4,919
0.07
1,113,864
810,819
879,719
1,196,555
1,257,403
16.25
11.98
12.99
17.91
18.89
9.48
7.46
10.41
15.88
15.83
110, 182
1.61
33,227
7,278
4,379
60,247
0.49
0.11
0.07
0.91
736,855
775, 112
732, 916
996,350
700, 156
11.17
11.81
11.23
15.50
10.96
7.68
9.34
8.27
13.18
7.10
137,836
13,661
2.09
0.21
539,826
847,354
453, 165
21,946
0.34
841,614
1,488,464
607,368
607,023
1,012,507
13.21
23.92
9.87
9.92
16.89
686,759
1,020,423
474,017
492,971
872,189
10.78
16.40
7.70
8.06
14.65
7,221
0.11
3,174
0.06
1,701
0.-03
1,176,617
696,341
782,367
1,126,496
(»)
12.29
13.87
20.11
865,603
600,284
639,825
984,772
741,937
1,057,087
665,687
564,515
13.64
19.45
12.39
10.81
925,334
396,818
434,724
10.64
17.03
7.39
8.33
853, 492
16.39
15.15
14.02
9.62
739,196
619,897
616, 930
370,873
14.20
12.01
12.12
7.34
$731,446
93
94
95
96
$0.39
1,103
35,250
25,712
8.45
704,969
1,060,662
1,053,572
606,506
613, 161
573, 196
IV.—CITIES
Per
capita.
$39,096
15.31
18.78
18.38
15.50
649, 944
606, 105
Total.
$1.63
0.67
3.02
0.99
0.02
680,202
232, 000
486, 203
1,436,435
1,189,989
m
GENERAL
Poll taxes.
$162,917
57,026
297,732
94,573
1,882
9,846
19,060
933
4,062
GROUP
92.
Per
capita.
5.75
12.01
8.17
6.69
13.95
782,303
713,621
485,588
Brockton, Mass
Covington, Ky
$1,687,740 $16. 94
11.11
1, 103, 138
14.92
1,469,407
12.99
1,236,315
7.74
720,894
Total.
508,904
1,038,697
705,712
491, 188
1', 130, 233
1,
.
capita.
9.73
14.80
8.81
9.02
16.12
1,
.
Per
Total.
861,217
280, 104
761, 544
778,831
1,306,173
1,
Wilmington, Del
Norfolk,
Per
capita.
Special property
and business
taxes.
6,383
and
taxes.
Per
Total.
capita.
17,000
39,000
0.60
0.21
0.60
20,895
35,348
0.29
0.49
1,823
781
0.03
0.01
21,046
0.32
5,400
7,533
12,000
0.08
0.12
0.19
6,431
10,494
20,850
0.10
0.17
0.34
6,087
0.10
1,837
24,607
68,479
0.03
0.44
1.04
10,069
0.18
24,454
0.44
72, 919
51, 902
1.41
1.02
16,458
27,686
HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000
0.05
0.27
0.30
0.64
TO
Total.
Per
capita.
0.20
0.14
0.07
0.12
0.18
193, 496
1.48
1.17
17,272
11,694
6,130
10,777
14,381
67,634
48,769
138,683
66,468
2.19
0.78
0.56
1.61
0.82
1.16
1.00
1.18
1.42
46,028
6,386
3,662
22,627
6,020
0.56
0.07
0.05
0.29
0.07
26,042
16,260
286,672
12,807
40,371
0.32
0.19
3.61
0.16
0.53
m
0.02
0.02
1.77
0.22
484,675
9,494
m0.13.
2.62
106,414
1,584
1,432
123,828
16,237
127,860
134,934
86,848
105, 972
1.67
1.89
1.99
1.30
1.59
199,161
8,667
13, 162
9,498
1,120
2.91
0.13
0.19
0.14
0.02
55, 921
100,091
76, 118
23,936
82,678
0.85
1.53
1.17
0.37
1.29
7,067
764
16,895
12, 747
5,949
d.u
8,479
0.16
0.26
0.20
0.09
37, 565
94,677
104, 780
124,418
80,480
1.26
2.57
0.92
0.92
0.65
6,618
70,974
11,718
10,473
10,437
0.10
1.14
0.19
0.17
0.17
54,005
226,873
40,809
46,478
84,704
113, 700
137,640
93, 595
79,465
92,240
108, 703
165,040
140,651
26
52,425
183,000
114, 131
169, 700
56,800
56,400
39,090
12,600
$1.39
0.70
1.41
0.86
1.28
1.59
m
m
0.75
1.93
m
0.22
10,
13,928
17, 760
96,551
1,224
m
0.31
52, 573
176, 612
11,915
65,406
10,071
19,558
70,668
136, 189
19,376
36, 178
36, 492
1.71
0.02
188,161
53,801
121,384
57,567
$0.13
0.53
1.79
0.13
0.70
0.14
0.28
1.01
0.66
2.00
0.29
0.53
0.55
0.13
0.57
1.45
1.63
1.96
0.85
3.66
0.66
0.74
1.41
0.95
2.15
1.03
2.37
0.61
1.27
0.62
4,935
5,662
7,766
13,183
0.09
0.10
0.14
0.25
34,748
93,008
189,861
75,100
0.64
33,093
68,409
27,200
71,524
61,861
1.37
1.20
21, 130
0.42
1,340
2,014
3,163
13,794
0.03
0.04
0.06
0.27
41,432
10, 154
13,940
79, 791
0.80
0.20
0.27
1.58
129, 058
2,843
14,308
Per
capita,
$12, 733
118, 935
(').
Total.
REVENUES.
$0.03
0.09
0.08
0.05
0.07
95, 101
40, 000
All other licenses
and permits.'
$3,380
8,461
8,347
4,862
6,284
$44
137,911
69, 106
133,828
78,800
127,738
(')
10.69
9.57
17.68
Liquor licenses
50,000
IN
1907.
1.71
3.54
L44
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
368
Table 37.—RECEIPTS
FROM GENERAL REVENUES, TOTAL AND PER
CAPITA,
1907;
COMPARATIVE SUMMARY,
TO 1907—Continued.
[For a
list
of the cities arranged alphabetically
GROUP
IV.—CITIES
by states, with the number assigned
HAVING A POPULATION OF
30,000~TO 50,000
to each, see page 127.]
IN
1907— Continued.
LICENSES
ALL GENESAL
General property
BEVENUES.
City
num-
taxes.
ber.
Total.
117
118
119
120
121
AtlantlcCity, N. J...
Little Rock, Ark
Bay City, Mich
York, Pa
Maiden, Mass
Per
capita
S945,764 $22. 79
9.27
381,818
13.75
667,614
9.54
382, 155
14.23
565,968
Total.
Per
capita.
Special property
and business
taxes.
Per
Total.
capita
J696, 577
114. 35
212,225
319,468
471,061
5.15
8.71
7.97
11.84
1,097
70,918
0.03
1.78
2,529
0.06
19,852
353, 165
83,003
$0.07
665,068
446,738
487,423
589,816
326,091
14.26
11.26
12.61
16.23
8.43
439,678
357,095
387,583
467,488
266,422
11.09
9.02
9.95
11.81
6.89
502,147
424,303
373,904
524,383
1,112,152
13.02
11.00
9.72
13.69
29.17
466,486
291,472
324,923
427,401
887,156
11.83
7.56
8.45
11.16
23.27
545,781
453,781
266,654
369,906
412,039
14.33
11.93
6.88
9.75
11.23
420,691
319,181
176,411
328,010
319,852
11.04
8.39
4.73
'8.89
8.72
464,252
488,682
596,590
455,273
462,255
12.40
13.67
16.94
13.14
13.43
308,842
407,494
426,337
386,770
307,039
8.43
11.40
12.10
11.17
12,008
0.34
"8,'i25'
"6.'23
419,822
326,660
524,816
449,468
391,922
12.41
9.66
15.61
13.39
11.73
314,594
284,075
446,840
331,701
345,204
8.41
13.29
9.88
10.34
45,659
4,006
7,777
1.36
0.12
0.23
331,756
383,914
246,288
407,466
10.13
11.76
7.59
12.94
213,357
277,149
189,188
346,783
6.51
8.49
5.83
11.01
5,170
1,920
0.16
0.06
154
Sacramento, Cal
Pueblo, Colo
Everett, Mass..:
329,604
687,162
667,957
427,412
10.47
21.95
21.42
13.78
232,907
478,785
505,252
378,773
7.40
15.29
16.20
12.21
155
156
157
158
Taunton, Mass
Newport, Ky
Lacrosse, Wis
Fort Worth, Tex
422,820
269,143
376,115
614,133
13.67
8.78
12.90
297,146
216,785
301,422
650,535
9.60
7.07
10.34
274,866
7.70
122
123
124
125
126
Springfield,
127
128
129
130
Chelsea,
131
Newton, Mass
Haverhill, Mass
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
161
152
153
111
Quincy,Ill
Canton, Ohio
Superior, Wis
Chester, Pa
Mass
South Omaha, Nebr.
Newcastle, Pa
Salem, Mass..;
Jacksonville, Fla
Jqplln,
Mo
Wichita, Kans
Rookford, lU
Tenn
Elmira,N.Y
Galveston, Tex
Knoxville,
New
Conn.
Chattanooga, Tenn.
Kalamazoo, Mich
Woonsocket, R.I
Fitchburg, Mass
Britain,
Racine,
.
.
Wis
Auburn, N. Y.,
Macon. Ga
JoUet,
111
Oklahoma City, Okla
Oshkosh, Wis
WestHoboken, N. J.
San Juan, P.
R
(')
226,151
«
6.34
5,795
757
900
61,483
197,994
0.16
0.02
Liquor licenses
Poll
Total.
$162
6,460
and
Per
capita.
m
$112, ISO
58,618
41,780
14,000
Per
capita
3,200
0.08
17,456
0.45
103,024
70,354
74,628
85,130
18,258
8
83,100
7,200
96
17
20,190
18,000
0.53
0.47
46,183
1.21
21,000
0.65
5,681
2,631
2,833
0.15
0.07
0.08
2.60
1.78
1.91
2.20
0.47
7,429
3,850
3,040
8,504
9,578
m
4,030
2.16
0.19
1.26
1.38
0.70
1.53
6,719
40,618
18,250
23,589
33,396
0.18
1.14
0.62
0.68
0.97
0.05
14,404
26,847
0.43
0.79
0.61
19
0.10
.4,317
1,533
0.12
0.04
1,608
17,000
0.06
.
3,6
450
0.01
29,326
0.96
14,131
0.46
59,965
1.94
17,984
0.58
2,756
0.09
20,849
0.58
w
Total.
$91,062
37,446
3,046
14,498
852
56,218
3,800
1,894
47,587
62,650
26,012
All other licenses
and pennlts.i
$2.70
1.42
1.03
0.35
0.44
0.02
m
taxes.
Total.
$0.16
1.61
5.19
1
AND PERMITS.
m
70,190
13,757
2.09
0.41
46,500
93,242
8,000
27,710
1.42
2.86
0.25
0.88
50,075
65,610
84,935
1.59
2.10
2.72
41,514
11,795
32,200
30,587
1.34
0.38
1.10
m
1902
GENERAL TABLES.
Table 38.— COSTS
[For a
list
369
AND RECEIPTS FOR SCHOOLS, TOTAL AND PER
of the cities arranged alphabetically
by
states,
CAPITA:
with the number assigned to each, see page
1907.
127.]
COST OP MAINTENANCE.
Payments
for
Interest on
of school
Aggregate.
For
salaries of
teachers.
Total.
Grand
total
Group I
Group II
Group III
Group IV
Per
Per
capita.
capita.
New York, N.Y..
Chicago, 111
Philadelphia, Pa.
St. Louis, Mo
Boston, Mass
Baltimore,
Md
Pittsbinrg,
Pa
Cleveland, Ohio...
Buftalo.N.Y
San Francisco, Gal
Detroit, Mich
Cincinnati, Ohio.
Milwaukee, Wis. .
Orleans, La.
Washington, D. C.
New
Total.
Per
capita.
$5.21
$76,765,151
$3.30
$28,123,221
$1.21
5.50
4.98
4.79
4.67
46,346,721
14,530,542
9,158,050
6, 719, 838
3.55
3.20
2.86
2.73
16.332,127
5,114,950
3,839,995
2,836,149
1.25
1.13
1.19
1.15
$29,362,399
I.— CITIES
LAYS.
RECEIPTS FROM SUBVENTIONS, GRANTS,
TUITION, ETC.
and
equipment.
340
22,618,500
15, 412, 105
11, 488, 942
GROUP
value
build-
ings, grounds,
All other.
$121,331,887
71, 812,
PAYMENTS FOB OUT-
expenses.
HAVING A POPULATION OF
Per
Total.
.
capita.
$16,453,515
$0.71
$32,680,352
492
0.70
0.66
0.75
0.79
21,334,186
5,203,092
3, 498, 594
2,544,480
9, 133,
2,973,008
2,414,060
1,932,955
300,000
OR OVER
IN
Per
capita.
1907.
\
Total.
Per
capita.
$1.40
$17,952,446
$0.77
1.63
1.15
1.09
1.04
7,340,621
5,298,534
3,030,819
2,282,572
0.66
1.17
0.94
0.93
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
370
AND RECEIPTS FOR SCHOOLS, TOTAL AND PER
Table 38.—COSTS
[For a
list of
the cities arranged alphabetically
GROUP
III.—CITIES
by
states,
CAPITA: 1907— Continued.
with the number assigned to each, see page
HAVING A POPULATION OF
TO
50,000
100,000
IN
127.]
1907,
COST OF MAINTENANCE.
Payments
tor
expenses.
Interest on
of school
City
num-
For
ber.
teachers.
Per
Total.
45
47
48
salaries of
!
Cambridge, Mass.
Albany, N.Y
Hartford, Conn...
Lowell, Mass
Beading, Pa
Trenton, N.J
Bridgeport, Coim.
Wilmington, Del.
Camden, N. J
Des Moines, Iowa.
Kansas City, Kans.
Lynn, Mass
New
Bedford, Mass.
Mass
Springfield,
N.Y
Troy,
Oakland, Cal
Lawrence, Mass..
SomerviUe, Mass
Savannah, Ga
Duluth, Minn
Va
Norfolk,
Hoboken, N.J.
Peoria,
111
Yonkers, N.
Utica,
Y.
N.Y....
Manchester, N. H..
Soheneotadjf, N. Y.'
E vansville, Ind
San Antonio, Tex.
Elizabeth, N. J
capita.
J611, 955
413,230
649,821
500,014
336,382
$6.14
4.16
6.60
5.25
3.61
Total.
Per
capita.
ings,
Per
capita.
Total.
$13, 134
Per
capita.
111,121
70,384
13,747
145,248
19,916
0,81
0.16
1.68
0.25
187,837
49,685
38,666
137,379
49,631
0.61
97,871
54,177
56,821
102, 073
34,246
1.22
0.67
0.72
226,753
55,240
122,516
142, 754
9,864
2.82
0.69
1.55
1.83
0.13
21,893
4,803
8,896
18,888
34,655
0.27
0.06
0.11
0.24
0.46
131,602
51,002
66,403
(2)
0.70
0.92
438,659
10,000
31,132
0)
1,27
433,673
1,942
4,737
1.03
0.07
103, 362
L17
322,932
270,665
429,592
607, 590
84,827
63,732
124,868
128,616
0.98
0.74
323,373
367, 824
381,126
563,484
321,295
4.02
4.67
4.82
7.21
4.19
164, 404
217, 129
2.04
2.70
2.60
0.76
2.63
61,098
96, 518
118,288
138,203
92, 496
(')
426,917
188,306
267,607
2.68
3.70
107,474
83,260
91,651
6.89
capita.
0.38
0,65
0,44
0.54
0.80
1.53
0.88
2.37
2,11
1,95
2.99
3.87
442
Per
Total.
33,400
55,803
L76
530
303
737
326
313,854
425, 661
Per
capita.
0.84
0,73
$1,42
1,00
209,
182,
168,
268,
322,568
Total.
$47,388
4,618
44,729
384
8,684
$141,878
99,426
172,393
146,021
82,084
414
TUITION, ETC.
grounds, and
$0.87
0.59
$3.84
2.57
3,56
2.88
2.00
206,017
323,208
194,553
RECEIPTS FROM SUBVENTIONS, GRANTS,
$87,052
68,894
127,378
79,646
68,027
$383,025
264,910
360,050
274,348
186,271
3.91
3.73
3.13
4 98
6.21
346, 292
LAYS.
equipment.
All other.
Total.
PAYMENTS FOB OUTvalue
build-
1-.45
L59
L20
L49
1.77
1.21
m
1.14
38, 196
46,398
65,120
L29
1.31
0.45
$0.48
0.06
0,46
43,036
59,996
10,641
66,669
(')
0.09
L26
0.14
0,43
$0.13
0.43
0.61
0.11
0.70
2.12
0.57
0.45
L59
196,247
2.81
104,851
1.60
93,870
L35
89,672
1.29
47,672
0.68
163,803
368,051
312,859
439,594
283,250
2.39
6.44
97, 928
239, 287
L43
21, 375
0.42
41,840
46,656
L59
LOS
L71
L07
73, 472
LIO
28,030
0.42
45,834
107,885
84,919
181,839
18,369
28,634
134,104
195,346
251,871
184,263
0.31
0.62
0.69
0.67
3.53
2.89
3.77
2.77
0.65
1.28
462
44,600
86, 924
70,857
114,251
70,967
1.26
2,72
0,28
18,171
31,415
33,606
0.27
0.47
0.50
183,690
258,703
254,093
207,399
197, 420
2.78
3.94
3.89
3.23
3.09
105, 409
158, 840
1.60
2.42
39, 112
53, 160
0.62
0.60
0.61
0.38
0.29
0.03
2.03
0.28
0.69
0.85
6,614
23,065
88,916
69,231
L97
34,361
39,545
39, 799
24,312
18,484
0.09
0.35
'2.60
2.24
0.67
0.92
0.68
0,61
0.83
1,699
169,695
143,975
125, 776
43,920
60,318
44,599
122, 691
L92
4 70
178,941
326,679
136,282
139, 774
149,161
2.81
5.25
2.22
2.28
2.49
79,274
153,676
63,719
57,877
37,971
1.24
2.47
1.04
0.95
0.63
40,972
69, 793
-30,996
42,063
39,407
0,64
41,382
211,901
38,648
44,066
70,683
0.65
3.41
0.63
0.72
243,863
153,086
66,094
161,892
(»)
146,630
172,126
162,961
123,801
149,227
147,633
173,919
97, 849
394,968
6.58
4 26
133, 121
16, 797
44,198
64,088
L98
L36
1.08
t
Waterbury Conn
Salt Lake City, Utah.
,
Pa
Wilkes-Barre,
Erie,
Pa
Houston, Tex
Tacoma, Wash
.
HarrisbuTg, Pa..
Charleston, S. C.
Portland, Me
Youngstown, Ohio.
Dallas,
87
Tex
Terre Haute, Ind...
Fort Wayne, Ind...
Akron, Ohio
Holyoke, Mass..
Brockton, Mass.
Covington, Ky..
1
299, 187
560, 148
230,997
239,714
226,639
8.84
3.76
3.92
3.78
410,681
278,229
102, 470
277, 525
(»)
282,929
255,395
282,641
210,689
6,20
269, 102
267,691
273,643
141,098
4 98
4 91
1.82
4 96
4%
5.26
4 03
5,18
6.38
2.79
78,173
82,963
P)
1.12
0.50
0,69
0.66
68,324
104,706
27, 747
15, 559
60, 711
L07
L68
0.46
0.26
1.01
88,645
42,180
13,593
37,382
(^)
0.74
0.24
0.67
67,679
1.02
20,811
0.37
167, 418
32,783'
1.46
0.58
78,251
L40
2.70
3.17
3.03
2.37
85,832
48,373
77,630
60,450
1.58
0.89
1.45
0.97
50,467
34,896
42,050
0.93
0.64
0,78
0,70
61,389
176,312
180,402
52,906
0.94
3.24
3.36
2.87
2.86
3.42
1,94
62,876
83,670
67,654
29, 179
L21
L62
46,999
93, 361
37, 175
L79
1.33
0.58
32,070
14,070
0.90
0.70
0.63
0.28
2.70
0.99
2.89
Per capita average not computed, because no reliable estimate of population could be made.
68,012
34,626
a
174,620
43,131
64,629
48,644
(2)
1.01
0.72
1.34
0.69
Less than
1 cent.
L18
(?)
0.76
L15,
0.87
31,916
83,338
190,721
74,306
0.59
1.53
3.55
37,946
2,689
5,693
78,840
0.73
0.05
0.11
1.66
L42
GENERAL TABLES.
Table 38.—COSTS
[For a
371
AND RECEIPTS FOR SCHOOLS, TOTAL AND PER CAPITA:
list of
the cities arranged alphabetically
GROUP
IV.—CITIES
by states, with the number
HAVING A POPULATION OF
1907-^ontiiiued.
assigned to each, see page 127.]
30,000
TO
50,000
IN
1907.
COST OP MAINTENANCE.
Payments
Interest on
of school
Aggregate.
For
salaries of
teachers.
Total.
Saginaw, Hich..
Lincoln, Nebr..
Altoona, Pa
Spokane, Wash.
Lancaster, Pa.
.
Birmingham, Ala.
Bayonne, N.J
South Bend, Ind
.
Butte,
Mont
Pawtucket, R.
I
Total.
1.65
t74,491
58,061
58,513
109,685
47,780
96,328
184,739
108,542
101,358
134,799
2.05
4 01
2.36
2.23
2.99
5.76
111,844
113,642
111,724
81,730
133,216
230,188
192,688
167, loa
5.38
4 51
a 92
146,157
105,791
89,187
226,143
161,933
89,403
226,234
229,828
5.29
a 86
2.14
5.39
5.52
204,698
142,041
181, 333
174,940
263, 140
4 93
a 45
186,606
145,668
176,649
208,026
130,968
468
a 68
4 53
216,720
174,487
150,733
167,351
337,748
5.62
4 53
3.92
174,219
276,650
184,683
182,724
a 70
6.00
4.01
«
a 23
402
5.29
Dubuque, Iowa
Sioux City, Iowa...
Per
capita.
}a02
{5.30
4.68
4.77
237, 114
Y
Total.
168,884
196,761
137,656
254,139
5.29
3.80
4 44
an
value
LAYS.
and
equipment.
Per
capita.
60
1.17
1,20
Total.
Per
capita.
Total.
78
0.54
0.88
«
0.59
$37,659
40,597
33,007
212,729
0.99
26,880
43, 178
85,385
28,190
39,814
58,781
44,817
38,126
72,997
0.85
1.28
0.97
0.84
1.62
38,077
33,130
31,324
43,240
30, 493
0.81
0.72
0.68
0.95
0.68
16,653
39,777
13,909
17,715
43,549
2.49
2.66
2.52
1.85
a 02
71,270
36,913
51,837
31,542
69,793
1.59
0.83
1.17
0.71
1.58
54,000
18, 329
33,200
24,284
61,130
1.20
0.41
0.75
0.55
1.16
66,508
62,284
77,628
26,865
46,945
a42
2.48
2.09
46,805
45,497
44,209
1.07
1.07
1.04
38,226
41,400
33,707
0.89
0.97
0.79
129,127
97,632
52,266
137,577
138,266
a 04
2.33
1.25
a 29
a 32
53,366
30,821
14,887
64,871
57,720
1.25
0.74
0.36
1.65
1.39
42,660
33,680
22,250
22,786
1.00
0.80
0.53
0.56
0.81
5,650
116,500
15,610
105,099
78,064
108,449
88,442
153,783
2.53
1.89
2.67
2.21
66, 499
a 87
64,137
1.58
0.71
1.09
1.21
1.61
34,100
34,637
28,800
37,947
45,220
0.82
0.84
0.71
0.95
1.14
61,775
90,935
38,281
37,726
228,073
116,013
81,263
102,321
126,468
78,519
2.93
2.06
2.63
a 26
2.03
34,066
41,583
48,368
53,058
40,911
0.86
1.05
1.24
1.37
1.06
35,527
22,722
25,960
28,500
11,638
0.90
0.57
0.67
0.74
0.30
31,762
127,594
90,624
91,667
104,962
195, 597
1.41
2.35
2.38
2.74
5.13
40,052
84,486
1.28
0.94
1.06
2.22
34,871
34,656
22,909
22,347
67,665
0.90
0.90
0.60
0.68
1.61
40,015
15,213
129,229
57,636
1.61
26,230
0.69
55,432
2.97
2.69
(')
SI.
(0
$38,9.39
JO.
Augusta, Ga
Mobile, Ala
Topeka, Kans
Springfield, Ohio.
AUentown, Pa
East St: Louis, lU.
Wheeling, W. Va.
Montgomery, Ala..
Passaic, N. J
Davenport, Iowa.
Atlantic City, N. J.
Little Rock, Ark..
Bay City, Mich
York, Pa
Maiden, Mass
Springfield, 111.
Quincy, 111
Canton, Ohio..
Superior, Wis..
Chester,
Pa
Chelsea,
Mass
South Omaha, Nebr..
Newcastle,
Pa
Newton, Mass
4 47
4 36
6.61
5.37
a 39
437
a 31
Haverhill, Mass..
Jacksonville, Fla.
212,568
5.58
128, 702
Mo
115,168
149,661
169,929
a 09
67,798
93,436
96,410
1.82
2.63
2.63
80,246
148,064
107,461
163,314
98,019
2.19
53,828
92,400
63,642
75,980
60,021
1.47
2.89
1.81
2.19
1.74
156,308
110,985
159,283
155, 416
135,482
462
109,206
63,255
90,984
101, 449
84,681
a 23
1.87
2.71
a 02
2.53
Jqplin,
Wichita, Kans...
Rookford, 111
Knoxville,
Tenn
Y
Ehmra, N.
Galveston, Tex
Britain, Conn..
Chattanooga, Term.,
New
Kalamazoo, Mich.
Woonsocket, R. I .
Fitohburg, Mass..
Racine,
Wis
Auburn, N.
Y
Macon, Ga
Joliet,IU
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Oshkosh, Wis
West Hoboken, N.
Sacramento, Cal
Pueblo, Colo
Everett, Mass
Taunton, Mass
Newport, Ky
La
Crosse,
Wis
Fort Worth, Tex..
San Juan,
P.
R
J.
75
147,616
176,771
131,266
406
463
414
a 06
4 71
2.86
a 28
4 74
463
406
29,340
44,084
48,6.51
54,255
49,207
36, 157
RECEIPTS FROM SUBVENTIONS, GRANTS,
TUITION, ETC.
build-
ings, grounds,
All other.
1150,557
147,102
131,316
319,298
79,403
1263,987
232,043
233,007
514,368
155,373
.
McKeespprt, Pa
Binghamton, N.
Johnstown, Pa
Per
capita.
PAYMENTS FOR OUT-
for expenses.
34,099
"48,'638'
19,366
29,231
10,475
54,252
22, 100
Per
capita.
Total.
Per
capita.
STATISTICS OF CITIES.
372
Table 39.— STATISTICS
[Cities
City
Year
num-
built.
ber.
Year
Length
of
acquired main pipes
in miles.
by city.
Million
gallons
supplied
not owning water-supply systems are omitted from
Present
value of
system.
Net cost
of system.
to pipes.
tills
table.
OF WATERFor a
debt.
Collections
for services
to public.
Grand
total.
GROUP
Boston, Mass
Baltimore, Md
Pittsburg, Pa
Cleveland, Ohio...
Y
Buflalo, N.
Detroit, Mich
Cincinnati, Ohio .
Milwaukee, Wis .
New Orleans, La.
Washington, D. C
Newark, N.J
Ky
Paul, Minn
Providence, R.I
Rochester, N.
St.
Y
Kansas
City,
Mo
Toledo, Ohio
27
Denver, Colo."
Columbus, Ohio
Los Angeles, Cal
Worcester, Mass
Seattle,
Wash
Memphis, Tenn
Syracuse,N. Y
Portland, Oreg
Atlanta,
Ga
Richmond, Va
Fall River, Mass
Nashville, Tenn
Dayton, Ohio
Grand Rapids, Mich
$647,334,495
$281,940,329
$62,141,787
$52,831,096
$9,310,691
420,686,287
117,235,616
79,189,885
49,386,226
381,170,632
128,971,222
156,381,752
67,166,380
35,418,447
22,973,750
36,488,830
12,163,392
7,824,160
5,666,415
30,906,104
10,498,987
6,654,086
4,771,919
5,882,726
1,664,405
1,170,064
HAVING A POPULATION OF
684.0
631.0
689.9
528.9
731.2
26, 180
«
509. S
17,582
12,312
(10)
i»169.6
1854
(')
1866
1848
1874
418.4
1872
476.2
1854
1889
Louisville,
Indianapolis, Ind.'i..
$666,498,014
721,274
140,825
103,098
76,981
179, 018
GROUP
Minneapolis, Minn.
Jersey City, N.J
1,042,178
2,315.0
2,153.0
1,568.2
843.1
748.3
1808
mated).
12,446.3
5,930.5
3,65S.8
3,403.5
6
1840
1801
1835
1848
Value of
services to
city (esti-
25,439.1
I.—CITIES
New York, N.Y..
Chicago, 111
Philadelphia, Pa.
St. Louis, Mo
the
Outstanding
Total.
Group I
Group II-.
Group III.
Group IV.
list of
II.— CITIES
166,080
110,389
28,048
35,194
40,430
21,491
48,451
26,857
(10)
8,342
83, 122, 461
54, 070, 180
300,000
OR OVER IN
1907.
$147,196,000
45,999,084
70,033,874
25,873,900
17,074,859
$128,325,606
38,871,166
65,000,000
25,8731900
16,500,000
$73,616,963
5,306,292
26,732,
@FedFRASER