gross rentals since they changed their white tenants for colored ones. Still another gave the following case of a front and rear tenement that had formerly been occupied by tenants of a "low European type," who had been turned out on account of filthy habits and poor pay. The negroes proved cleaner, better, and steadier tenants. Instead, however, of having their rents reduced in consequence, the comparison stood as follows:
 | A table should appear at this position in the text. See Help:Table for formatting instructions. |
Rents under White Tenants.
Per month.
Front— 1st floor (store, etc.) $21
2d floor“ 13
3d floor“ 13
4th floor“ (and rear) 21
Rear— 2d floor“ 12
3d floor“ 12
4th floor“ (see front) —
Rear house— 1st floor“ 8
2d floor“ 10
3d floor“ 9
4th floor“ 8
Total $127
Rents under Colored Tenants.
Per month.
Front— 1st floor (store, etc.) $21
2d floor“ 14
3d floor“ 14
4th floor“ 14
Rear— 2d floor“ 12
3d floor“ 13
4th floor“ 13
Rear house— 1st floor“ 10
2d floor“ 12
3d floor“ 11
4th floor“ 10
Total $144
An increased rental of $17 per month, or $204 a year, and an advance of nearly thirteen and one-half per cent. on the gross rental "in favor" of the colored tenant. Profitable, surely!
I have quoted these cases at length in order to let in light on the quality of this landlord despotism that has purposely confused the public mind, and for its own selfish ends is propping up a waning prejudice. It will be cause for congratulation if indeed its time has come at last. Within a year, I am told by one of the most intelligent and best informed of our colored citizens, there has been evidence, simultaneous with the colored hegira from the low downtown tenements, of a movement toward less exorbitant rents. I cannot pass from this subject without adding a leaf from my own experience that deserves a place in this
