BY THE TURN OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY, Canadians had come to recognize the urban environment as an organic whole. The city had become, in the words of one contemporary, 'a spider's web pull one thread and you pull every thread. 'x In recognition of the mutual interdependence of city dwellers, an urban reform movement had developed, seeking to assure their health, happiness, and well-being, • One of the many concerns of reformers was that of housing; the unsanitary conditions of slum areas were seen as threats to the health and morals of all city residents. Searching for solutions, Canadian reformers turned to the British model of co-partnership housing, commonly referred to as 'philanthropy and five per cent.' With an emphasis upon the activity of private individuals, referred to by J. Tarn 3 as 'the only way that the newly fledged social conscience, brought up against a strictly laissez-faire background, was able to conceive its role,' the model provided that private investors and prospective tenants would buy shares in a company, using the combined revenue to build homes. The rent paid by tenants covered operating expenses, built equity in their homes, and returned to the non-tenant shareholder a dividend lirated by legislation to four or five per cent. As such dividends were lower than those available on speculative investment, support for the scheme was restricted to investors who were disposed to philanthropy hence the name 'five