population. In the rural districts the children and young persons of the
villages have frequently no other places for recreation than the dusty
road before their houses or the narrow and dirty lanes, and accidents
frequently take place from the playing of children on the public
highways. If they go into the fields they are trespassers, and injure
the farmer. The want of proper spaces as play-grounds for children is
detrimental to the morals as well as to the health in the towns, and it
probably is so generally. The very scanty spaces which the children,
both of the middle and the lower classes, the ill as well as the
respectably educated, can obtain, force all into one company to the
detriment of the better children, for it is the rude and boisterous who
obtain predominance. In the course of some investigations which I had
occasion to make into the causes of juvenile delinquency, there appeared
several cases of children of honest and industrious parents, who had
been entrapped by boys of bad character; I inquired how the more
respectable children became acquainted with the depraved; when it was
shown that in the present state of many crowded neighbourhoods all the
children of a court or of a street were forced to play, if they had any
play whatsoever, on such scraps of ground as they could get, and all
were brought into acquaintanceship, and the range of influence of the
depraved was extended. The condition of the children in large districts
where there are no squares, no gardens attached to the houses, and no
play-grounds even to their day-schools, and where they are of a
condition in life to be withheld from playing in the streets, is
pronounced to be a condition very injurious to their bodily development.
The progress of the evil in the rural districts has been, to some
extent, arrested by a beneficent standing order of the House of Commons,
that all Enclosure Bills shall include provision for a reserve of land
for the public use for recreation. For children, however, the most
important reservations would be those which could be made for
play-grounds in front of their homes, on plots where they may be under
the eye of their mothers or their neighbours. Where the cottages are
near a road, they should be some distance from it, with the gardens or
play-ground in front. The separate or distant play-grounds have many
inconveniences besides their being out of sight; and where they are far
distant, they are comparatively useless. I have great pleasure in being
enabled to testily that the instances are frequent where the regulated
resort to private pleasure-grounds, and parks has been indulgently given
for the recreation of the labouring population.
Amongst the instances of practical attention to the improvement of the
physical condition of labouring classes in the agricultural districts, I
may notice the following statement made to me by the late _Mr. Monck_ of
Coley House, Reading, who had bestowed much care upon the cottages on
his own estate. It comprehends the provision adverted to:—
“The care taken of these cottages and gardens,” said he, “afford an
excellent criterion of the character of the labourers. I have paid
especial attention to those labourers who have displayed cleanliness
and order; and I pay the most respect to those who have achieved a
situation of the greatest comfort, and keep themselves and their
houses cleanly, and their children tidy. Formerly the cottages were in
bad order, their pavements and windows were broken; I had them all
paved, and their windows glazed. I told the cottagers that I did not
like to see shabby, broken windows, with patches of paper and things
stuffed in, or broken pavements which they could not clean; and that I
disliked Irish filth and all Irish habits of living. I engaged, after
the cottages were thoroughly repaired, to pay 1_l._ a year for
repairing them. I undertook to make the repairs myself, and deduct the
expense from this 1_l._; but if no repairs were wanted, they were to
have the whole 1_l._ themselves. This course has, I find, formed
habits of care; and their cottages are now so well taken care of that
very little deduction is made annually from the 1_l._ Formerly they
used to chop wood carelessly on their pavements, and break them; now
they abstain from the practice, or do it in a careful manner, to avoid
losing the money. In the winter, I give them two score of fagots
towards their fuel. I have found that by this means I save my hedges
and fences, and am pecuniarily no loser, whilst pilfering habits are
repressed. Since the enclosures have been made, I think some place
should be provided for the exercise and recreation of the
working-classes, and especially for their children. I have set out
four acres at Oldworth as a play-ground for the children, or whoever
likes to play. They have now their cricket-matches, their
quoit-playing, and their revels there. Sheep and cows feed on it; so
that it is no great loss to me. I let it for 4_l._ a-year to a man, on
condition that he cuts the hedges and keeps it neat. I have surrounded
it with a double avenue of trees. The sheep and cows do good to the
ground, as they keep the grass under, which allows the ball to run. I
give prizes to the boys at the school, which is maintained by the
cottagers themselves, and to which I contribute nothing but the prizes
for reading, writing, and knitting.
“Many persons accuse the poor of ingratitude, but I find them the most
grateful people alive for these little attentions; and what do they
all cost me? why not more altogether than the keep of one fat
coach-horse.”
VII.—RECOGNISED PRINCIPLES OF LEGISLATION AND STATE OF THE EXISTING LAW
FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE PUBLIC HEALTH.
The evidence already given will, to some extent, have furnished answers
to the question—how far the physical evils by which the health, and
strength, and morals of the labouring classes are depressed may be
removed, or can reasonably be expected to be removed by private and
voluntary exertions. I now submit for consideration the facts which
serve to show how far the aid of the legislature, and of administrative
arrangements are requisite for the attainment of the objects in
question.
It will have been perceived, that the first great remedies, external
arrangements, _i. e._ efficient drainage, sewerage and cleansing of
towns, come within the acknowledged province of the legislature. Public
opinion has of late required legislative interference for the regulation
of some points of the internal economy of certain places of work, and
the appointment of special agents to protect young children engaged in
certain classes of manufactures from mental deterioration from the
privation of the advantages of education, and from permanent bodily
deterioration from an excess of labour beyond their strength. Claims are
now before Parliament for an extension of the like remedies to other
classes of children and to young persons, who are deemed to be in the
same need of protection. The legislature has interfered to put an end to
one description of employment which was deemed afflicting and degrading,
i. e. that of climbing-boys for sweeping chimneys, and to force a better
means of performing by machinery the same work. It will be seen that it
has been the policy of the legislature to interfere for the public
protection by regulating the structure of private dwellings to prevent
the extension of fires; and the common law has also interposed to
protect the public health by preventing overcrowding in private
tenements. The legislature has recently interfered to direct the poorer
description of tenements in the metropolis to be properly cleansed. On
considering the evidence before given with relation to the effects of
different, classes of buildings, the suggestion immediately arises as to
the extent to which it is practicable to protect the health of the
labouring classes by measures for the amendment of the existing
buildings, and for the regulation of new buildings in towns in the great
proportion of cases where neither private benevolence nor enlightened
views can be expected to prevail extensively.
It will have been perceived how much of the existing evils originate
from the defects of the external arrangements for drainage, and for
cleansing, and for obtaining supplies of water. Until these are
completed, therefore, the force of the evils arising from the
construction of the houses could scarcely be ascertained.
The experience of legislation available for England for the regulation
of buildings is chiefly confined to the Metropolitan Building Act. The
provisions of that Act were directed simply to the prevention of the
spread of fires by requiring that party-walls should be built so as to
prevent the spread of fires, by confining them to the houses where the
fires occur. In this object it is in most instances successful. Wherever
a fire spreads beyond the single dwelling in the metropolis, it is
usually found either that the provisions of the Act have been evaded,
the walls being of the required thickness but rotten in substance, or
that omissions have occurred from default of notice, or from neglect of
the district surveyor. Out of the jurisdiction of the Act, the instances
are frequent where fires spread from the want of party-walls. The
erection of party-walls is good economy as a matter of insurance, for
each house is thereby confined to its own risks, instead of having the
additional risks of each of the contiguous houses, and perhaps of two or
three houses beyond them. If there were any point on which _à priori_
legislative interference might be thought unnecessary it would be this,
on which the self-interest of the parties, for their own protection,
would ensure attention. Yet the immediate interest of the builder in
getting buildings erected at the lowest cost, or the want of foresight
on the part of the owner himself, has caused extensive masses of
buildings to be run up in the suburbs of the metropolis, and in
provincial towns, without any such protection. Whilst this Report was in
preparation I was informed of the destruction by fire of several
contiguous houses at Oxford that were without party-walls. But
party-walls are only one provision against fire; the omissions of other
necessary precautions are fearfully extensive, especially in warehouses
and buildings of a magnitude too great for the fire to be restrained by
party-walls, or to prevent fire catching the adjacent buildings whenever
it occurs.
One, however, I may advert to, as connected with the provisions
necessary for the improvement of the sanitary condition of a town
population. It has been shown that the cheapest mode of street cleansing
is by supplies of water, which it would be necessary to use from
standing pipes. By the Street Act, the parish officers are directed to
provide standing pipes for the supply of engines in case of fire. This
regulation is declared to be almost a dead letter. The only means to
obtain supplies of water in the case of fire are from the plugs provided
by the water companies themselves for cleansing the pipes by
occasionally allowing the water to flow into the streets. It has been
proved to be practicable without any considerable cost to keep up, at
all times, such a pressure of water as on putting on a hose on any
standing pipe connected with the service, to enable the water to be
thrown over the highest houses. The fronts of houses in London have, in
some instances, been washed by this means, and in one instance it was
immediately and successfully applied to extinguish a fire. A large
proportion of houses are destroyed or seriously injured before engines
can be brought to the spot or water obtained. During the last four years
the fires in London have been more than 600 per annum. If each fire on
the average incurred a loss of 500_l._, the total loss annually would
exceed the total cost of the supplies of water for the whole of the
metropolis to the inhabitants, which, according to returns made to
Parliament in the year 1834, amounted to 276,200_l._ The superintendent
of the police at Liverpool estimated the average loss by fires in that
town during eight years at a much greater amount before a better system
of prevention was established. The cost of keeping the water always on
in the mains is so inconsiderable that it was voluntarily proferred by a
competing company in the metropolis, as an advantageous arrangement to
save the expense of water-tanks in private houses. I have high practical
authority for stating that the arrangement for keeping the water on the
mains for street cleansing, for washing the footways as well as the
carriage-ways, and, when necessary, for washing the fronts of the
houses, would also serve, at an inconsiderable expense, as the most
efficient means of extinguishing fires. Instead of the general loss of a
considerable part of an hour’s time before intelligence can be
dispatched and the distant fire-engines be got to the spot, in a few
minutes, or as soon as the flexible pipe in daily use could be screwed
on the main, a supply of water as powerful as that from any engine might
be brought to bear upon the fire. An extensive saving of life and
property, and of well-grounded alarm, might thus be added to the train
of benefits derivable from systematised arrangements for the cleansing
of towns and the prevention of epidemics.
The provisions of the old Building Acts afford no sanitary securities,
but in connexion with the provisions respecting sewerage they afford
examples of what would be the effect of any measure which shall be
either unequally applied as to the jurisdiction, or unequally
administered.
The attention of the Board has several times been directed to the
sickness prevalent amongst the working classes in various parts of the
Kensington union. Having had occasion to inquire into the subject, I
found that nearly all the illness occurred in premises run up by
inferior speculating builders out of the jurisdiction of the commissions
of sewers, or of the district surveyors; that they were built on
undrained spots, with walls not more than one brick thick; and that the
immediate expenditure for protective or sanitary purposes had thus been
extensively evaded. On carrying the inquiry further, it became apparent
that the limits of the jurisdiction of the commissioners of sewers, and
the limits of the jurisdiction of the district surveyors around the
metropolis, mark the commencement of buildings of an inferior character,
built without drains, without the security from party-walls, and without
proper means of cleansing. (_Vide_ Appendix, the evidence of Mr. Gutch,
district surveyor.) Under the peculiar circumstances of the country,
towns may arise and the old evils may be implanted before any old
district would probably be taken to include them. For example, the town
of Old Kingston is tolerably well drained and healthy; on the completion
of the railway a new town was suddenly run up by building speculators,
called New Kingston, built out of the jurisdiction of Old Kingston, but
without any adequate under-drainage, on a soil retentive of moisture,
and with streets unpaved and covered with mud; it is reported as a
consequence that fever has been rife in New Kingston, whilst Old
Kingston is comparatively free from it.
If any one had to erect forty or fifty fourth-rate tenements near the
metropolis, by shifting them beyond the limits of the jurisdiction of
the district surveyor, he would nearly gain one house by the saving of
fees alone in the ordinary mode of remunerating such officers.
All the information as to the actual condition of the most crowded
districts is corroborative of the apprehensions entertained by witnesses
of practical experience, such as Mr. Thomas Cubitt and other builders,
who are favourable to measures for the improvement of the condition of
the labouring classes, that anything of the nature of a Building Act
that is not equally and skillfully administered will aggravate the evils
intended to be remedied. To whatever districts regulations are confined,
the effect proved to be likely to follow will be, that the builder of
tenements which stand most in need of regulation will be driven over the
boundary, and will run up his habitations before measures can be taken
to include them. The condition of the workman will be aggravated by the
increased fatigue and exposure to weather in traversing greater
distances to sleep in a badly-built, thin, and damp house. An increase
of distance from his place of work will have the more serious effect
upon his habits by rendering it impracticable to take his dinner with
his family, compelling him either to take it in some shed or at the beer
shop. It is also apprehended that anything that may be done to increase
unnecessarily or seriously the cost of new buildings, or discourage
their erection, will aggravate the horrors of the overcrowding of the
older tenements; at the same time, the certain effect of an immediate
and unprepared dislodgement of a cellar population, would be to
overcrowd the upper portions of the houses where they reside. It would
indeed often be practicable to make those cellars as habitable as are
the cellars inhabited by servants in the houses of the middle and higher
classes of society. The difficulties which beset such regulations do not
arise from the want of means to pay any necessary increase of rents for
increased accommodation, but in the very habits which afford evidence of
the existence of the sufficiency of the means of payment.
For practical legislation on the subject of increased charges on
tenements, the labourers must be considered to be in a state of penury,
and ready to shift from bad to worse for the avoidance of the slightest
charges, and therefore to be approached with the greatest caution.
But there are other elements which it is proper to note as increasing
the tendency to evade immediate charges even for benefits.
The increasing tendency to carry on manufacturing as well as commercial
operations for small profits on large outlays will probably occasion the
subject of the rents of labourers’ tenements in manufacturing districts
to be more closely considered as part of the cost of production than it
has hitherto been. The whole of the consequences cannot distinctly be
foreseen, further than that it will probably occasion a reduction of
high ground-rents, or the abandonment of particular districts which are
now the seats of some descriptions of manufacture. In the course of an
examination of the condition of the working population of Macclesfield,
which I was requested to aid, it was complained that much work was put
out to a rural district at a few miles distance from the town. On
inquiring as to the cause, it was answered, that the weavers in the
rural district were enabled to do the work at a reduced price, but at
the same real wages in consequence of reduced rents. The following
examination, however, displays the element indicated:—
_Mr. Shatwell_, relieving officer, examined—
“What is the common amount of rent paid by weavers in Macclesfield and
the adjacent districts?—A weaver cannot get, in Macclesfield, a proper
house for his loom, with due lights, for less than 10_l._ a-year. In
Hazel Grove and other places, he may get them for 2_l._ or 3_l._
less—for about 7_l._—with a small garden attached, worth at least
20_s._ a-year more.
“What difference in price do you think would induce a manufacturer to
send goods to Hazel Grove in preference to Macclesfield?—A farthing a
yard, as that difference might make the difference in his profit.
“How many yards will a weaver weave in the week?—They calculate that a
good weaver will weave 12 yards a-day, or an average of 60 yards
a-week.
“Since 1_s._ 3_d._ a-week, or a farthing a yard, will make the
difference in profit, will not the difference in rent enable the
weaver to make that difference in price and yet obtain the same net
amount of wages?—Precisely so.
“So that a manufacturer who employs 1000 hands at a low-rented place,
3_l._ or 4_l._ a-year cheaper, such as Hazel Grove, if he obtain the
difference of rent as profit, will obtain a profit of 3,000_l._ or
4,000_l._ per annum?—Certainly.
“The cost of building and building materials being nearly the same in
Macclesfield and such a place as Hazel Grove, does not the difference
in rent consist chiefly in the difference of ground-rent?—Yes.”
If in all instances, as in the last, better as well as cheaper
residences, with gardens attached, were likely to be the result of the
commercial operation to the workmen, the change were, of course, to be
desired. But it is to be feared that it may often be otherwise than a
competition of comforts, unless timely security be taken against its
being otherwise by appropriate legislative measures, which indeed were
necessary for the due protection of the ratepayers against the pecuniary
consequences of the disease and destitution undoubtedly occasioned by
such tenements as are thus described by _Mr. Mott_:—
“An immense number of the small houses occupied by the poorer classes
in the suburbs of Manchester are of the most superficial character;
they are built by the members of building clubs, and other
individuals, and new cottages are erected with a rapidity that
astonishes persons who are unacquainted with their flimsy structure.
They have certainly avoided the objectionable mode of forming
underground dwellings, but have run into the opposite extreme, having
neither cellar nor foundation. The walls are only half brick thick, or
what the bricklayers call ‘brick noggin,’ and the whole of the
materials are slight and unfit for the purpose. I have been told of a
man who had built a row of these houses; and on visiting them one
morning after a storm, found the whole of them levelled with the
ground; and in another part of Manchester, a place with houses even of
a better order has obtained the appellation of ‘Pickpocket-row,’ from
the known insecure and unsubstantial nature of the buildings. I
recollect a bricklayer near London complaining loudly of having to
risk his credit by building a house with nine-inch walls, and declared
it would be like ‘Jack Straw’s House,’ neither ‘wind nor water tight:’
his astonishment would have been great had he been told that thousands
of houses occupied by the labouring classes are erected with walls of
4½ inch thickness. The chief rents differ materially according to the
situation, but are in all cases high; and thus arises the inducement
to pack the houses so close. They are built back to back, without
ventilation or drainage; and, like a honeycomb, every particle of
space is occupied. Double rows of these houses form courts, with,
perhaps, a pump at one end and a privy at the other, common to the
occupants of about twenty houses.”
Whilst there is the new element of this extreme rapidity of construction
to accommodate demands for labour, the increasing rapidity of the
conveyance of goods and information is manifestly loosening the ties of
the manufacturer to particular neighbourhoods. Whilst looms have been
idle in Spitalfields on disputes on scale-prices, or from hesitation as
to comply with the requisite changes of modes of working, I am informed
that large quantities of work have been taken away, executed in the new
neighbourhoods, and returned at reduced prices to the London markets. In
the instance of Macclesfield, it is shown that neither foresight nor
considerations of the expediency of a reduction operates on the
speculating owners of tenements occupied by workmen in towns, or even on
the other ratepayers, (who bear the burdens of the sickness and
mortality, and pay extravagant rates, which are incident to them); nor
can the operation of a wise self-interest be relied upon to avert the
tendency to the dispersion of work, and the multiplication of
ill-conditioned and ultimately burdensome tenements. The following
evidence supplies additional illustration of this state of things:—
_John Wilson_, relieving officer.
Are you acquainted with the cottage property in Macclesfield?—Yes, I
am; as an assistant overseer, I see that the rates are collected.
Are there in Macclesfield many large owners of cottage tenements?—The
number of owners of property in Macclesfield is about 1000; of these
about 300 receive incomes from cottage property, some of those only
one, others only two. The chief owner owns about 200 cottages; the
next owns about two streets or 45 cottages. One man owns about 180.