2.1. Formation of the housing law of the USA in second half XIX centuries - The XX-th century beginning.

Regulation of housing relations in the United States of America originates from second half ХІХ of century, during this period the first laws of states on premises have been passed.

A historical context of formation of the housing legislation were: growth of the population, an immigration wave, acceleration of rates of development of economy. Allocation of housing relations from relations on seizing meant a recognition of their social importance, since the habitation market (unlike the real estate market) represents social public institute for which are necessary support, care and the control from the party общества1. Research of historical conditions of occurrence of the first housing-legal certificates to the USA, their maintenance and legal grounds are the purpose of the given paragraph.

Till second half XIX century of the relation on real estate rent (in that


Number and rent of premises) were regulated by a general law. Rent was considered as real right transfer on the ground area. The lessor has not been obliged to carry out repair of a handed over premise and did not answer


For its suitability for residing.

Protection of a private home ownership competed to other tendency of development of the American right - maintenance of fire-prevention, building and sanitary-and-epidemiologic safety of inhabited and uninhabited buildings. In 1625 the Dutch Vest-Indsky company has approved rules about an admissible site and design features of apartment houses, vozvo - [266 [267] [268] [269] dimyh colonists in New Amsterdam (now New York) 1. In 1850 the city of New York has accepted the arch of building norms first in the country and rules (building code), and in 1862 the state legislature of the State of New York has founded


Department on building. The department was the first body of staff regulating a condition of premises. As after a fire of 1860 in Department of fire safety of the city of New York there is a post of the representative on a condition of buildings.

Second half XIX centuries was marked also by formation of bodies of public public health services. The first session of Council about public health services of the city of New York has taken place in 1805, in 1866 in New York the city department of public health services first in the country which became the sample for similar departments in other cities of the country [270 [271] [272] [273] [274] has been founded. The departments which are responsible for public health services, were intensively formed and at level of states: 1869 in the State of Massachusetts [275], 1877 in the State of North Carolina [276], 1913 in the State of Arkansas [277]. The aspiration of bodies of public health services to provide sanitarnoepidemiologicheskuju safety in premises has opened a legal collision between a duty of executive powers to support the general well-being and the rights of private owners to inviolability of the property.

Growth of economy of the USA in first half XIX centuries has caused inflow of immigrants from adverse regions of Europe, mainly from Ireland. Nine of ten arriving preferred to lodge in the north, especially in seaports of East coast as had no means for moving to others регионы1.

Between 1840 and 1850 population of New York considerably


Has grown, - with 312,710 to 515,547 and has reached 813,669 in 1860. The migration wave has coincided with a rise in prices for premises and increase in deficiency of habitation. The problem of availability of habitation was most strongly reflected in needy families of workers that became stimulus for building of inexpensive multiroom rent houses.

The first multiroom rent house has been constructed in New York in 1833. A year later after its building the City inspector of the Commission of public health services, Garrett Forbs, in the annual report has specified in record quantity of the death living conditions in apartment houses were which reason. In 1842 other City Inspector, doctor John H. G risk, to the formal report has added the brochure edition «the Short review of sanitary conditions in the city of New York» [278 [279] [280] [281]. Considerable inflow of immigrants and their material inconsistency have resulted, in its opinion, to deterioration of living conditions of a city. He suggests city legistrature to forbid use of cellars in the form of habitation, to oblige proprietors and tenants of premises to contain premises in conformity with certain sanitary norms. In 1853 the Association for improvement of conditions of the poor founds the select committee which should «investigate sanitary conditions of a life of working class and offer variants of increase of comfortableness of habitation» 1. In the committee report the conclusion has been drawn: «the working class Habitation in New York is not adapted for requirements of a human life, is not compatible to medical, moral and social requirements of tenants» [282 [283] [284].

Efforts of the public have led to acceptance in 1867 of the Law of the State of New York «About multiroom rent houses». The law entered standards to which there should correspond multiroom rent houses, in particular: presence of windows in each room; a handrail on ladders; one toilet on everyone twenty inhabitants; an interdiction for the maintenance of animals (except cats and dogs). Many positions of the law have been ignored, but as the participant of movement of reforming of available housing and publicist Lawrence Veller specified, the certificate became the precedent entering practice «state regulation of conditions in multiroom leased habitation» [285]. The law on multiroom rent houses actually was not executed in relation to already constructed habitation. Its value consisted in invalidating of some projects of already under construction buildings.

In 1887 the State of New York has passed the law according to which installation of systems of water supply in all apartment houses constructed after May, 14th, 1867 was required, and also creation of conditions at which the public health services Department could spend water in old apartment houses [286]. However by dispute consideration between Department of public health services and Church of the Trinity which was the proprietor of several rent houses, the judicial authority recognised the law unconstitutional. The court has come to conclusion, that this legal act established withdrawal of the property for private use (instead of for social needs) since «law positions operated exclusively in interests of tenants to which the respondent is forced to render services» 1. Besides, the court has declared: « There is no necessity for legislative pressure upon the proprietor for water granting... Because if tenants in it really require, the competition and own interests of lessors will force them to render such services »[287 [288] [289].

American author Feliche Batlan believes, that the decree has expressed rhetoric of representatives of liberal economy with fear inherent in them before the class legislation. From the legal point of view, the given decision was an example of "a legal formalism» [290].

The public health services department has appealed against the made decision in Appeal court of the State of New York, approving, that the court should not estimate «wisdom or nonsense of the law in a certain question». Instead the court, according to the applicant, whether should define the law on maintenance of public health [291] is directed. Value of such statement consists that staff could pass the law limiting a private property but thus directed on maintenance of public health having applied the inspection powers. The doctrine of the inspection powers which have appeared still in system of a general law of England, reproduces the cores «powers of the sovereign power on protection of the law and order, public morals and the general the condition blessing -» [292 [293]. As marks V.I.Lafitsky, actually admits only three forms of intervention of states in property relations: the taxation, compulsory withdrawal of the property for social needs (eminent do -


main) and inspection powers (police powers). In sphere of housing legal relations all three listed forms can be applied, but the most universal character last from them possesses.

The position of the proprietor consisted that the legislation has no validity if it cancels or belittles the property right of the citizen or interferes with its rights if it is not directed for the public good but only creates comfort for separate individuals or is directed to advantage of one класса1. The named position was based on the doctrine about appropriate legal procedure. According to the amendment of XIV Constitution of the USA «... Cannot deprive any staff any person of a life, freedom or the property without appropriate legal procedure.». Assigning to house owners additional expenses the legislator has dispossessed them. Thus it was possible to speak about infringement of appropriate legal procedure by the fact of an adoption of law, and also at its each case compulsory pravoprimenenija without realisation of public hearings or litigation.

Feliche Batlan considers, that the court of appeal instance has faced three difficult legal questions. First, what level of judicial respect for legislative decisions? Secondly, whether the regulation demanding not compensated expenditure of money resources, private property withdrawal in the contradiction with the Constitution is? Thirdly, whether use of inspection powers can benefit one group (in this case to tenants) at the expense of other group (lessors)? Batlan underlines, that the court could avoid these questions, having referred on norms of fire prevention rules since for its maintenance water supply was necessary. But, instead of it, the court purposefully undertook the decision of these


«Large-scale and complicated questions». In opinion of court it had powers to estimate communication between the purpose of the law and its actual positions -


mi. [294 [295] [296]

The court has come to conclusion, that «sometimes there are necessary expenses which inevitably increase because of use of our property and which we should bear voluntary, or under the pressure of the legislation» 1. Thus, the court recognised the law as the constitutional five voices against two. The maintenance considered after disputes on constitutionality of the housing legislation of states also consisted in a competition of doctrines of inspection powers and appropriate legal procedure.

In 1900 the governor of the State of New York has generated the Commission on apartment houses which should study level of public health services of inhabitants of apartment houses and develop offers on legislation change. In 1901 the commission has given the report where has specified in harm, so-called, «school sinks» - the extensions playing a role of toilets, without automatic system of clearing.

In 1901 the novel about the multiroom rent houses, establishing the requirement about replacement «school sinks» on lavatories has been accepted. The law had the retroactive effect and demanded carrying out of corresponding reconstruction in the buildings constructed before its acceptance. The historian, Keller Morton, has noticed, that the novel has served as model for set of other laws of states [297 [298] [299] [300]. However assigned to proprietors of rent houses the burden was so great, that some of them decided to take down a building simply.

The lessor, Katie Mojshen, has received in 1903 the requirement about law execution that has provoked proceeding [301]. Proceeding was financed by Association of landholders [302] that speaks about basic importance of this business for lessors.

Lawyers of the lessor approved, that the law is not constitutional since it deprives of landholders of a private property, demanding destruction «school sinks» and expenditures of means for building of other infrastructural objects. It was very serious argument. So, the historian, Michael Le Benedikt, wrote, that laws which cut down the property acquired right, caused the most negative reaction in судах1. Therefore, throughout all proceeding and the appeal, lawyers Mojshen constantly came back to the given argument. On the basis of that the law was applied only to certain cities in the State of New York, lawyers approved, that the law is unconstitutional, enters the special legislation, breaks a principle of legal equality of landholders. The given argument was based on XIV Amendment of the Constitution.

Business has been finished to Appeal court of the State of New York. The judge has come to conclusion, that the act should be considered reasonable, and that the burden of a refutation of its rationality lays on the respondent [303 [304] [305] [306]. As a result the court has given up to the lessor, having noticed, that the law is directed on health protection and consequently was appropriate realisation of inspection powers. It is possible to note a difference between times Churches of the Trinity and business Mojshen. If in the first business the court tried to appeal to balance between public interest and burden of separate persons in the last the court has specified in a priority of public interests.

In 1876 the Department of public health services of a city of Chicago has headed De Vulf. Not leaning against any legal grounds De Vulf initiated regular inspections of apartment houses and factory premises. For protection of the program of inspection of habitation the head of Department has generated the case of doctors-volunteers which should survey all multiroom rent houses of a city in 1879. Results of inspection have been presented in G orodskoj council where Vulf has declared insufficiency of only one survey of rent houses and necessity of acceptance of the housing ordinance. In a year the housing ordinance has been accepted, becoming the reason of numerous disputes. The ordinance has invested public health services Department with powers on inspection and regulation of sanitary conditions in apartment houses, proprietors have been obliged to provide houses with containers for dust. Initiatives Vulfa have got support of the public, businessmen and newspapers (in particular Chicago Tribjun). Meanwhile, builders and house owners have called into question an admissibility of regulation of a private property City council. Having declared to that the proprietor has unlimited jurisdiction over the property, house owners have urged council to cancel ордонанс1.

Because of that proprietors have refused to carry out the municipal ordinance, on May, 30th, 1881 the General Assembly of the State of Illinois had been accepted the Ordinance about apartment houses and factories. According to the ordinance, the condition of maintained and under construction apartment houses and rent houses with a rooming house got under supervision of Department of public health services of a city of Chicago. Change of rent contracts regarding execution by tenants of responsibility for a condition of premises was reaction of house owners. As a result tenants have undergone to numerous penalties and evictions. In 1887 to execute the ordinance the public health services Department has taken out 13 855 penalties and has submitted 235 claims which have been supported by vessels.

The housing legislation of the State of California had extreme character and has been connected with destroyed a considerable part of available housing earthquake of 1906. The Law accepted in 1909 on multiroom rent houses of the State of California, unlike the housing ordinance of the State of Illinois, made responsible for a technical and sanitary condition of [307 [308] [309] apartment houses its proprietors (sections 64 and 65 laws) 1. Originally the law established is minimum admissible height of a ceiling, the area of a premise and observance of rules of maintenance of apartment by heat. The Housing association of San Francisco formed in 1910 has initiated novel acceptances multiroom rent houses which has been signed per 1911.

The orientation of rent laws on maintenance of worthy living conditions, (instead of on sanitary safety), proves to be true the decision of Appeal court of the State of New York of 1885 on business about contest of the Law on an interdiction of manufacture of cigarettes in apartment houses. The law accepted in 1883 has been recognised by contradicting the Constitution of that its preamble incorrectly reflected a regulation subject. Accepting next year the novel, the staff State legislature has considered the committed errors, the law began to extend the action to cities with the population more than 500 000 persons [310 [311] [312] [313]. Both editions of the law limited the rights of tenants to realisation of labour activity since forbade them to make cigarettes in apartment houses. In two days after an adoption of law Peter Dzhejkobs has been arrested for manufacturing of cigars in leased by it and his family to apartment. Business about arrest Dzhejkobsa has reached Appeal court of the State of New York which has decided, that the law was not appropriate realisation of inspection powers since did not promote protection of health of tenants. The court recognised, that, leasing a premises, the tenant gets certain powers of the proprietor, and therefore cannot be deprived them without appropriate legal procedure [314]. Thus,

The court recognised, that the private rights of tenants of premises are protected on a level with the rights of proprietors.

In 10th years of the XX-th century states have extended practice of an establishment of the quality standards of multiroom rent houses to other kinds of premises. Powers on regulation of housing relations are transferred from bodies of public health services and building supervision in specialised housing bodies.

So the Commission on Habitation and immigration of staff Калифорния1 which became responsible body for execution of the Law on multiroom rent houses of 1909 on June, 12th, 1913 has been generated. Same year the Law on hotels and rent houses with a rooming house [315 [316] [317] has been passed. The Novel established requirements to light exposure, the areas, infrastructural equipment of the premises used as time habitation. The minimum quality standards of habitation were required and for working camps - settlements for residing of the workers occupied on seasonal works (farmers, builders, miners). In the same 1913 the Law on working camps has been passed (Labor Camp Act), responsibility for which execution, has been assigned to Council about public health services. However, some days prior to the introduction of the law into force, in one of working settlements of staff there were the pogroms which have led to death of representatives of the official power. It was entrusted to establish the reasons of excitements not to Council about public health services, and the body directly regulating housing relations, - the Commissions on Habitation and immigration which has presented the report on unsatisfactory living conditions of workers a log -


Yards. Recommendations of the Commission about increase in requirements to quality of habitation have been considered at novel acceptance about working camps [318]. In 1927 the Department on Department habitation on labour отношениям1 became the authorised body for law execution.

In the end 1910х years the Commission has come to conclusion about necessity of revision accepted before housing laws. For the purpose of preparation of novels the Commission began to collect so-called «housing institutes» (housing institute) - consulting councils of contractors, fire, physicians and tenants. Reform of the housing legislation 1917 [319 [320] [321] [322] - Law signing about became a fruit the co-ordinated Commission of work of housing institutes many -


Condominiums (State Dwelling House Act). Legal regulation of the State of California began to extend not only on rent houses and hotels, but also on other apartment houses. In 1923 the Law on multiroom rent houses, the Law on hotels and rent houses with a rooming house and the Law on apartment houses have been consolidated in Housing


The law.

From the end 10х years of the XX-th century states have started to solve and other housing problem - negative influence of a site of habitation on its suitability to residing [323]. As well as in a case with internal (sanitary and constructive) conditions of premises [324 [325], external living conditions (the site, the next buildings, the general accomplishment of area) were regulated within the limits of the general regulation of the city environment. Such practice began to be called as city planning. The first body which is engaged on a constant basis in city planning (the commission on planning), has appeared in 1907 in the city of Hartford of the State of Connecticut, by amendment entering in


The city charter. In 1909 the housing commission of the city of Filadelfija1 has been founded. Also in 1909 the law on planning of cities has been accepted in the State of Wisconsin, and in the city of Los Angeles the first ordinance about zoning - division of a city into zones of resolved use [326 [327] [328] has become effective.

Courts also have approved practice of city planning. So the Appeal court of the State of Maryland, considering case Kokran against Preston, has upheld the ordinance about a building interdiction in the city of Baltimore of buildings above 70 foots (except for churches), having specified, that an ordinance overall objective was


Fire-prevention safety. In 1909 the Supreme Court of the USA has considered case Uelch against Svasej and has supported division of buildings of a city of Boston into two categories: buildings of commercial appointment could have height to 125 foots, the buildings used as habitation, - to 100 foots [329].

In 1909 in Washington the first national conference on planning of cities has taken place. Participants of conference have noted staff experience Nju - York on regulation of conditions in multiroom rent houses and have discussed the questions connected with availability of habitation. The attention to questions of housing regulation has forced Andrew Right Crawford who held office the assistant to the legal adviser of the city of Philadelphia, to warn participants of conference: « G orodskoe planning and living conditions are connected with each other, but this communication is not indissoluble... If we are so a lot of time to give to housing questions that we will be forced to consider also questions of the water drain, illumination and tariffs »[330]. Meanwhile, zhilishchnopravovye questions even more often became a subject of planning of cities so in 1916 New York has accepted the resolution on the zoning, forbidding building of high-rise buildings in certain zones of a city. The resolution has been accepted because of discontent of tenants with a shade from many-storeyed buildings which worsened their housing условия1.

However, improving internal and external living conditions and accordingly assigning to proprietors of premises additional expenses, the authorities of states have caused a rise in prices in the habitation market. Inflation in housing sector also was caused by mobilisation of economy because of the introduction of the country into the First World War.

In the State of New York the decision of the named problem occurred against protests of dissatisfied tenants and, the so-called, first period of red threat - the anticommunistic measures caused by activity of five socialists, become by members of Assembly of the State of New York. In 1920 duly elected socialists have been excluded from Assembly by 140 voices against 6 of for their ideological position. One of constituting political platforms protection of tenants was their. The excluded socialists were the most radical supporters of prevention of a rise in prices for habitation and restrictions of possibility of eviction of tenants. It is remarkable, that in some hours after an exception of ideologically dangerous members of Assembly the first law on the rent control has been passed.

Laws on the rent control limited the right of lessors to rent increase. In states two models of restriction of a rise in prices for rent of premises have been realised. The first model has been presented, first of all, by the Law of district of Columbia of 1919. On the basis of the law the commission from three members has been generated, possessing powers under the complaint or under own initiative to define justice and a rationality of a rent, municipal expenses or other paid services [331 [332]. Refusal of the tenant to be ejected from premises on the basis of the accepted law has led to proceeding on business the Block against Hirsh. The Appeal court of district of Columbia has decided, that deprivation of the property without appropriate legal procedure owing to what the law has been recognised by unconstitutional has been admitted. However the Supreme Court five voices against four recognised, that the Congress actually declared state of emergency owing to what is admissible to use inspection powers on restriction of rent business for the sake of public интересов1.

The second model of restriction of a rise in prices has been realised in states Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York. Settlement of the size of a rent in the named states was assigned to courts which carried out it on the basis of a rationality principle (standard of «reasonableness»). Actually any increase in a rent in comparison with previous year was considered unreasonable if the lessor could not prove the return. On the developed practice the person, wishing to raise a rent, should hand in in court the Statement with the detailed description of circumstances of business (Bill of Particulars) in which all expenses and the gross revenue from a leased premise should be specified. As it has been specified in the report of the Time commission of staff on rent habitation of 1980, courts began to execute functions of executive organs.

The rule should be interpreted a rationality of increase in a rent by vessels with reference to each concrete case that has generated inconsistent judiciary practice. In particular, courts should establish: whether the sums as expenses and incomes, bad debts were honesty considered, whether the percent on the mortgage was correctly certain. However, the Supreme Court of the USA, considering cases «Edgara A. Levi's rent corporation against Ziegels» and "Society" street 8й West End »against Stern» recognised constitutionality of the Law of the State of New York about the rent control having specified, that the rule about rationality observance, is sufficiently accurate and certain [333 [334].

The rent control kept inflation in the market of rent of habitation, but did not promote overcoming of deficiency of premises that contradicted interest of citizens in accessible habitation. In 20х years of the XX-th century the share of free premises in the city of New York has decreased to 1 %. For stimulation of housing construction of the power of the city of New York have released till 1932 all premises constructed during the period with 1920 for 1926, from the tax to property. Laws on the rent control also did not extend on the buildings constructed after September, 27th, 1920. In 1928 the share of free premises has risen to 8 %, not looking on the strict rent legislation operating at this time. In 1926 premises have been released from the rent control, by cost of 20 dollars a month, in 1928 - 10 and more dollars a month. In June, 1929 has expired period of validity of laws on the control of a rent of the State of New York. For preservation of materials in 1998 the Congress of the USA has passed about the first housing reforms the Law on a national museum of rent houses Bottom Ist-Sajd. The national museum has been founded to the address of the remained rent house [335].

Thus, by 20th years of the XX-th century at level of states the first laws on habitation have been accepted and approved by vessels. The housing legislation of the given period established obligatory standards constructive and sanitarnoepidemiologicheskogo conditions of premises. Tenants have acquired the right to demand maintenance of the given standards, as in administrative, and judicially. The recognition of the right to residing in a premise, suitable for residing, has been caused by necessity of maintenance of sanitary well-being of cities. Questions of the neighbourhood of inhabited and uninhabited premises have got to legal regulation sphere, density of housing building, a shade from the many-storeyed buildings also, however the separate institute of housing zoning has not had time to be generated yet. Along with the individual rights of tenants, ideas about the right of all inhabitants of settlement (housing community) to favorable living conditions are formed.

The problem of quality of premises dared, first of all, by means of putting on of additional duties at lessors. At the same time, house owners could compensate growth of the expenses by rent increase. To avoid deficiency of habitation, states began to limit the right of house owners to increase in rent payments. Such approach could frighten off potential house owners from participation in rent relations. The legislation on stimulation of the housing market became alternative. However, as that, the right to accessible habitation has not been recognised yet.

<< | >>
A source: Kabluchkov ALEXEY JUREVICH. EVOLUTION of LEGAL REGULATION of HOUSING RELATIONS In the USA IN SECOND HALF XIX - XX centuries (ISTORIKO-LEGAL RESEARCH). The dissertation on competition of a scientific degree of the master of laws. Kursk - 2015. 2015

More on topic 2.1. Formation of the housing law of the USA in second half XIX centuries - The XX-th century beginning.:

  1. Chapter 2. Genesis of the housing law of the USA during the period since second half XIX century to second half of XX-th century.
  2. 2.2. Strengthening of a role of the federal authority and the housing law of the USA in the first To half of XX-th century.
  3. § 1. Formation of legal hermeneutics in the Russian jurisprudence in second half XIX – the XX-th century beginning
  4. Chapter 2. Development of work with police shots in second half XIX century - beginning HH century
  5. § 2. Legal bodies in trading (enterprise) activity in second half XIX century - the beginning of XX century
  6. §1. The Voronezh diocese in second half XIX - the XX-th century beginning
  7. HEELS ALEXEYS JUREVICH. EVOLUTION of LEGAL REGULATION of HOUSING RELATIONS In the USA IN SECOND HALF XIX - XX centuries (ISTORIKO-LEGAL RESEARCH). The dissertation on competition of a scientific degree of the master of laws. Kursk - 2015, 2015
  8. § 1. Formation and development of the international humanitarian law about the forbidden methods and weapons of war in XIX - the beginning of XX centuries
  9. Chapter 3. Regulation of housing relations in the USA in second half of XX-th century.
  10. the Chapter II. Suffrages of the German citizens In second half XIX - the beginning of the XX-th centuries.
  11. 2.3. The bourgeois approach to legal regulation of distribution of the earths in agrarian reforms (second half XIX - the beginning of XX centuries)
  12. 2.1. Legislative regulation zemelno-distributive otnosheyony in Russia (the beginning XVIII - first half XIX centuries).
  14. Chapter 1. Formation of system of work with police shots in XVTTT century - first half XIX century
  16. the Chapter III. The ethical concept of Russian statehood in second half XIX – the beginning of XX century
  17. factors of formation and development of conceptual bases soyoderzhanija gymnasia formation in Russia of second half XIX - the XX-th century beginnings