PERCENT OF INCREASE OF ITEMS ENTERING INTO

20%

The CHAIRMAN. That figure of 34 per cent is included here?
Mr. MCKEEVER. This is taken from the figures of the depart-

ment.

Senator JONES of Washington. Where did you get the figures for the other cities?

Mr. MCKEEVER. They are also from the Department of Labor. These figures are from reports of the United States Department of Labor and show all cities which they publish where living costs are based on 1914. These figures are the latest published and represent the increase as of September 30, 1924, as compared with the year

1914.

Chart No. 3, entitled "Rent increase is low in Washington compared with other cities in the United States," is based on statistics published by an accredited Government bureau-the Bureau of Labor-as I have said. They do not represent opinions or sob stories. They represent facts. Study this chart. Some interesting facts are represented. Baltimore, about 40 miles away, enjoying the reputation of "a cheap place to live," has increased their rents twice as much as Washington, yet there is no hysteria in Baltimore. Perhaps the workers there are paid a living wage. If rent has increased so moderately in the District, and in spite of this there is a condition demanding legislation, why not look elsewhere to discover the thing to be legislated?

In only three cities

The CHAIRMAN (interposing). Before you proceed further let me ask this question. If it is true that the average rent has increased so little in the District of Columbia as relates to the average person, then if we had rent control the average person would not be interfered with at all. Yet you know, as well as I do, that there are certain apartments here which have increased their rents not only 40 per cent, but 120 per cent and some as high as 150 per cent. Ought we not to have some control to prevent that profiteering?

Laws are not made to prevent fair and just returns from property nor to punish people who never commit crimes, but they are intended for those who are not willing to treat their neighbors as they would be treated themselves. That is the intent of the law.

Mr. MCKEEVER. A law that makes a man who is treating his tenants in a fair and just manner subject to the complaints and almost the control of one disgruntled tenant in a large apartment house, who can take the owner into court or before a rent commistion and put him to an expense ranging from $3,500 to $10,000 to defend himself before the rent commission, is certainly not a law that is fair to the just landlord.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you not think there ought to be some control of the person who is increasing rents 140 or 150 per cent when the average increase in only 40 per cent, as you state it?

Mr. MCKEEVER. Competition of the day will very quickly control it, as I will show you a little bit later in my statement. During the war a tenant perhaps had to pay an increase for the simple reason that he could not move; there was no place else to go at that time. But if any landlord raises his rents to-day

The CHAIRMAN (interposing). The rents were not increased during the war because the Saulsbury Act prevented it.

(HOUSING SHOWN IN SOLID BLACK)

Mr. MCKEEVER. You perhaps lose sight of the point. The condition was that a tenant could not have moved if he wanted to, and that is the reason why you had to protect them; but to-day if any landlord raises his rent or the tenant is dissatisfied, the tenant can go elsewhere and get just as reasonable quarters.

The CHAIRMAN. If they can do that, then we need no law; but all the evidence we are receiving is to the effect that they can not do that. Mr. MCKEEVER. Will you take one day and go around the city with me and see those places that are for rent, vacant and in habitable condition at this time?

The CHAIRMAN. I spent several days doing that.

Mr. MCKEEVER. With whom did you go?

The CHAIRMAN. I went by myself.

Mr. MCKEEVER. Did you know where to go?

The CHAIRMAN. Oh, yes; I simply went to those places which were advertised for rent.

Senator COPELAND. Senator Ball probably knew as well as the tenant would know where to go.

The CHAIRMAN. I went to those places that were advertised, and while I would find very fine apartments for rent I did not find any reasonably priced apartments for rent. By "reasonable" I mean apartments renting for $50 or less. I found plenty of them at $75 to $100 or more. That is why we claim there is not a sufficient amount of reasonable rental property.

Representative HAMMER. The trouble about your survey, which is a Government survey, is that it was conducted by your body that was not truly representative; that is, it is composed, on the figures furnished by you, of 119 out of 500 real estate people here, and it therefore can not be accurate. The Government did not make this investigation; they did not gather the facts upon which the percentage you are giving is based. It was not a Government investigation or survey. They did not gather the facts at all as you have admitted. They were gathered by you.

Mr. MCKEEVER. But I do not admit that.

Representative HAMMER. Your attorney did.

Mr. MCKEEVER. No. You led him into that the other night-
Representative HAMMER. We led him into nothing, sir.

Mr. MCKEEVER. But you put those words up and he did not know the situation. He is not a real-estate man. The Department of Labor got these figures from a certain number of houses that they were keeping track of. We do not know what those houses are.

Representative HAMMER. Did you not gather the facts during the last hearings before the House committee when we had exhaustive hearings over there and did you not come before the committee and place that chart in the record, saying that you had had the Labor Department prepare these schedules and these drawings for you? Did you not put them in our record and did we not have plates made of them and are they not explained as having been prepared by the Labor Department upon data furnished by you? Is not that true?

Mr. MCKEEVER. The only part of that statement that is true is that I did bring you some charts. I did not say that we had the Department of Labor prepare them. I did not say they had anything to do with them. I said they were prepared from figures furnished by the Department of Labor.

Representative HAMMER. But upon data that was furnished by you to the Department of Labor?

Mr. MCKEEVER. No, sir.

Representative HAMMER. You did not say that?

Mr. MCKEEVER. No, sir.

Mr. GORE. I represent Mr. McKeever and the group in behalf of which he is testifying. If Congressman Hammer is right it is a very important fact. I would suggest that before the hearings are over a representative of the Department of Labor be brought here and let him state the basis of the figures, because I want to know if the real estate men have furnished those figures.

The CHAIRMAN. The committee will verify the figures.
Mr. GORE. I hope that will be done.

The CHAIRMAN. Proceed, Mr. McKeever.

Mr. MCKEEVER. In only three cities, all relatively small as compared with Washington, has the increase in rent been less than in Washington. In 15 cities the increase in rent is greater than in Washington, and in Chicago and Detroit the increase in rent is about three times as great as in Washington. The Senators and Representatives from Texas, Florida, and Maine, where the increases have been even more moderate than in Washington, might justify their stand if in favor of District rent legislation, but those from Illinois, Michigan, California, Ohio, New York, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Washington, Virginia, Massachusetts, Georgia, Oregon, and Alabama should wait until their own houses are put in order before forcing this legislation on the voiceless and voteless District, where the leading newspaper, the Board of Trade, the Bankers' Association, the Bar Association, the Merchants and Manufacturers' Association, and other disinterested and substantial organizations are opposed to it.

Mr. MCKEEVER. Chart No. 4 is headed "Houses advertised for rent (furnished, unfurnished, and furnished and unfurnished), as shown by the lines of advertising in the classified columns of the Evening and Sunday Star from January, 1914, to December, 1924." Roger Babson, the well-known statistician, has stated that advertising is a dependable index of business conditions. You will note that from Chart No. 4 that the lines of advertising on "Houses for rent" are now about 50 per cent of what they were prior to our entry into the World War. No houses have been built for rental purposes since rental legislation went into effect six years ago, so naturally there are relatively few houses for rent at this time and the lighter advertising reflects this condition.

Houses represent investments of high intrinsic worth, but the smaller investor has been scared out of the market for rental houses. The result is that the shortage in this type of property will become more and more acute as the building of rental houses remains dormant and the population of Washington increases. Stop interfering with the natural laws of supply and demand, and a healthy growth of rental houses will occur as soon as these investors overcome their fright.

Senator COPELAND. You are making the argument that the advertising of rentals is an indication of the situation. Is that true? Mr. MCKEEVER. Yes, sir.

Senator COPELAND. If I read this chart correctly there is quite a material increase in advertising here, is there?