By Mr. ELKUS:

Q. You mean as new laws are going into effect or being enforced for the first time? A. Absolutely.

Q. And was the same thing true in the tenement house department? A. I think much more so.

Q. The same number of complaints about duplications? A. Of course I was not in at the beginning, Mr. Elkus. Mr. Veiller would know about that.

Q. You can ascertain the facts in relation to that? A. Yes, sir. By Commissioner GOMPERS:

Q. Before you leave section one of this questionnaire I would like to ask a question I do not want to interfere with Counsel's

questioning

Mr. ELKUS: Go right ahead, Commissioner Gompers?

Q. I thought I understood you to say you favored a separate department of labor for the city of New York and another for the State? A. No sir, I said I did not see any reason why there should be two departments.

Commissioner GOMPERS: I might say that while it is true that in the city of New York there is a larger proportion and number of industries than in the rest of the State, yet there are factories and workshops and mercantile establishments in the remainder of the State, and the separation of the departments or the establishment of two departments each of which might follow a certain policy, certain sympathy, certain antipathy that would establish two distinct features of the administration of a general law, which would apply to the State, and operate to the advantage of one and the disadvantage of another, and create general confusion. By Mr. ELKUS:

Q. Now will you proceed, Commissioner, answering the second question? A. I believe that the system of having each department charged with the enforcement of specific laws, having its own inspection force, is the only way in which laws can be adequately enforced. I believe, however, that every Commissioner endeavors to find out whether there is conflict between his department and other departments. I know that the first action that I took myself

after coming into the Tenement House Department was to have a conference with the building superintendents of all the boroughs for the purpose of finding out if there were any points at which we were in conflict and since that time there has been no friction between those officials and the work of the Tenement House Department.

Q. Would you say, Commissioner, then, that if there were these conferences between these departments of the city that have to do with buildings that a great deal of these complaints such as there are now would be done away with? A. I think they could be absolutely.

Q. Absolutely done away with? A. Yes, sir.

Q. Without any legislation at all? A. Without any legislation. Q. If the city departments would co-operate and then would confer with the State Department of Labor, it could all be smoothed out and done away with? A. I think so.

Q. Now about the third question. I think you have answered that in your first one? A. Yes.

Q. Now have you any other suggestions to make in this matter from your experience and knowledge of the subject? A. Certain ideas came into my mind in listening to the examinations this morning in regard to the question of a general bureau of inspection. It seems to me that that runs counter to all modern developinent in industry. We are in an age of specialization. Every factory divides up its work. It seems to me that the city must do the same thing because it could not get inspectors who were competent to inspect buildings for all the laws passed in regard to them without paying very much higher prices than inspectors now command. Although about 150 out of the 250 inspectors in the Tenement House Department are men who were mechanics before they came into the department we can not let them out alone to make inspections for at least three months after their appointment, and a man is not thoroughly qualified to be an inspector, independently, much under six to nine months, and I take it it would be a very long and tedious process to prepare inspectors for general inspection work if it takes that length of time to prepare them for the enforcement of the provisions of one law, so that I feel that it is only by this specialization that we can get fairly intelligent inspection work.

Q. Now take in your own department, do you have to have specialists to do different kinds of inspecting? A. No, we have a new building bureau and an old building bureau. The inspectors are chosen at the same examination and we select the men after they come in the department because of special individual qualifications for the work that they are called upon to do, but one man is trained to inspect a whole house which he visits for all the provisions of the tenement house law.

Q. Now is there anything further, Commissioner, that you would like to tell us? A. I do not think of anything else. I shall be glad to send you a memorandum on those points.

Mr. ELKUS: We would be very glad to have that because of your broad experience in this subject of inspections. Any questions Mr. Chairman?

Mr. GEORGE W. OLVANY: I represent the Real Estate Board of New York and I should like to ask one question of the Commissioner.

By Mr. OLVANY:

Q. If the building is occupied as a factory and also by three separate families would your department or the Labor Department have jurisdiction? A. The Tenement House Department has jurisdiction over all buildings or parts of buildings occupied by three families or more living independently of each other and doing their own cooking on the premises. Therefore that whole building would be under the jurisdiction of the Tenement House Department. On the other hand if a part of that building should be used as a factory and special requirements were made for factory purposes, and those requirements did not conflict in any way with the requirements of the Tenement House Law, I should not think we would have any right to object to their being enforced.

Q. Suppose they did conflict? A. If they did we would endeavor to sustain the Tenement House Law.

Q. For instance, the Tenement House Law, does not require the fireproofing of windows on fire escapes? A. No.

Q. And the factory law does? A. But the Tenement House Law does not prohibit the fireproofing of windows on fire escapes.

Mr. ELKUS: There is no conflict.

The WITNESS: No conflict.

Q. Now, if the fire prevention bureau issued an order to fireproof the windows on all floors where there are fire escapes you would not have to fireproof the windows on the dwelling part? A. I should think you would.

Q. You would not be in favor of that? A. As the Tenement House Law does not prohibit putting wire glass in windows fronting on a fire escape I do not think we would have any right to prohibit them. There is not the slightest doubt that such protection would tend to make the fire escapes better means of escape because danger dces arise where a fire breaks out on lower floors in buildings and put the fire escape perhaps not out of use but still makes its use very hazardous.

Q. Don't you think it would be a great hardship on tenants to compel them to look through wire glass all the time when looking on the street? A. Inasmuch as those windows are only on fire escapes I am not so sure that the hardship would be so great, but not having given that consideration before to-day I would not like to express an opinion upen it.

Q. Does the Tenement House Commissioner require ladders to be used on fire escapes? A. Yes sir, drop ladders.

Q. Do you know that the Labor Department requires stairways? A. I don't know.

Q. Do you know whether the rules of the Labor Department are the same as the Tenement House Department in reference to stairways? A. I think they are not. We merely are considering buildings for ordinary occupancy.

Q. So therefore there might be a serious conflict between your Department and the Labor Department if the laws of the both departments are not uniform? A. It is quite possible.

Mr. SHUMWAY: (American Real Estate Company) I would like to ask if in the Commissioner's opinion a fireproof apartment house I mean fireproof in the general sense of the term, fireproof floors, fireproof ceilings, floor arches, terra cotta tile partitions, in which there was located on the first floor a store 20 feet. front and 30 feet deep, occupied by a dealer in ladies' clothes who finds it necessary to have a cutter and a fitter in the rear part of

his store for alteration purposes, whether or not the Tenement House Law, does not sufficiently protect life without applying the Labor Law to that first story condition.

Mr. MURPHY: I do not consider myself qualified to answer. That is something which has been taken up by people who have been looking into the matter of factory legislation and I try as far as possible to limit my expression to things that I know about.

Mr. ELKUS: Please take that up when we have a hearing on the codification of the Labor Law. That is where that will come in.

By Mr. OLVANY:

Q. Commissioner, I would like to ask you if you believe in the fireproofing of stairways in tenement houses?

Mr. ELKUS: We are not discussing those subjects. We are limiting this to one subject and we will have a hearing on that subject.

Mr. OLVANY: This is the only question.

A. We absolutely require it in all new buildings.

Q. Fireproofed but not enclosed?

A. They are absolutely

enclosed in fireproof walls with self-closing fireproof doors and metal stairs with stone or metal treads.

Mr. LAWRENCE VEILLER addressed the Commission:

By Mr. ELKUS:

Q. Mr. Veiller, what is your present profession and occupation? A. I am what is known as a Social Worker, Mr. Elkus.

Q. Were you formerly connected with the Tenement House Department? A. Yes, I was First Deputy Commissioner of the Tenement House Department at its inception.

Q. For how many years? A. Two years.

Q. And you were secretary of the Tenement House Commission? A. Yes, appointed by the Governor.

Q. Which investigated conditions and then the statute was passed? A. Yes.