the first endeavour of such a local authority were addressed to the
smaller matters that have been just alluded to, so that the public
mind might become gradually accustomed to change, and prepared for
greater innovations. Village drainage is notoriously defective.
Anyone who has walked through a village or hamlet must be perfectly
well aware that there is no drainage, from the unpleasant odours
that constantly assail the nostrils. It seems absurd, that with such
an expanse of open country around, and with such an exposure to the
fresh air, such foul substances should be permitted to contaminate
the atmosphere. Each cottager either throws the sewage right into
the road, and allows it to find its way as it can by the same
channel as the rain-water; or, at best, flings it into the ditch at
the back, which parts the garden from the agricultural land. Here it
accumulates and soaks into the soil till the first storm of rain,
which sweeps it away, but at the same time causes an abominable
smell. It is positively unbearable to pass some cottages after a
fresh shower.
Not unfrequently this ditch at the back of the garden runs down to
the stream from which the cottagers draw their water, and the
dipping-place may be close to the junction of the two. In places
where there is a fall--when the cottages are built upon a
slope--there can be little difficulty about drainage; but here steps
in the question of water-supply, for drains of this character
require flushing. The supply of water must, therefore, in such
places, precede the attempt at drainage. The disposal of the sewage,
when collected, offers no difficulty. Its value is well understood,
and it would be welcomed upon agricultural land. In the case of
villages where there is no natural fall, and small hamlets and
outlying cottages, the Moule system should be encouraged, especially
as it affords a valuable product that can be transported to the
allotment garden. A certain amount of most unreasonable prejudice
exists against the introduction of this useful contrivance, which
every means should be used to overcome. Now, most farm-houses stand
apart, and in their own grounds, where any system of sewer is almost
impossible. These are the very places where the Moule plan is
available; and if agriculturists were to employ it, the poor would
quickly learn its advantages. It would, perhaps, be even better than
a public sewer in large villages, for a sewer entails an amount of
supervision, repairs, and must have an outfall, and other
difficulties, such as flushing with water, and, if neglected, it
engenders sewer-gas, which is more dangerous than the sewage itself.
The plan to be pursued depends entirely upon the circumstances of
the place and the configuration of the ground. The subject of
drainage connects itself with that of nuisances. This is, perhaps,
the most difficult matter with which a local authority would have to
deal. Nuisances are comparative. One man may not consider that to be
a nuisance which may be an intolerable annoyance to his neighbour.
The keeping of pigs, for instance, is a troublesome affair. The
cottager cannot be requested to give up so reasonable a habit; but
there can be no doubt that the presence of a number of pigs in a
village, in their dirty sties, and with their accompanying heaps of
decaying garbage, is very offensive, and perhaps unhealthy. The pig
itself, though commonly called a dirty animal, is not anything near
so bad as has been represented. To convince oneself of that it is
only necessary to visit farm-buildings which are well looked after.
The pigsties have no more smell than the stables, because the manure
is removed, and no garbage is allowed to accumulate. It is the man
who keeps the pig that makes it filthy and repulsive, and not the
animal itself. Regular and _clean_ food has also much to do with it,
such as barley-meal. Cottagers cannot afford barley-meal, but they
certainly could keep their sties much cleaner. It does not seem
possible to attack the nuisance with any other means than that of
persuasion, unless some plan could be devised of keeping pigs in a
common building outside the village; or at any rate, of having the
manure taken outside at short intervals. Such nuisances as stagnant
ponds and mud-filled ditches are more easily dealt with, because
they are public, and interference with them would not touch upon any
man's liberty of action. Stagnant ponds are of no use to
anyone--even horses will not drink at them. The simple plan is to
remove the mud, and then fill them up level with the ground, laying
in drain-pipes to carry off the water which accumulated there. But
some of these ponds could be utilized for the benefit of passing
horses and cattle. They are fed with a running stream, but, being no
man's property, the pond becomes choked with mud and manure, and the
small inflow of pure water is not enough to overcome the noisome
exhalations. These should be cleaned out now and then, and, if
possible, the bottom laid down with gravel or small stones, making
the pond shallow at the edges, and for some distance in. Nothing is
more valuable upon a country road than ponds of this character, into
which a jaded horse can walk over his fetlock, and cool his feet at
the same time that he refreshes his thirst. They are most welcome to
cattle driven along the road.
The moral nuisances of drunkenness, gambling, and bad language at
the corners of the streets and cross-roads had best be left to the
law to deal with, though the influence of a local council in reproof
and caution would undoubtedly be considerable. But if a
bathing-place, an out-of-doors gymnasium, and such things, were
established, these evils would almost disappear, because the younger
inhabitants would have something to amuse themselves with; at
present they have nothing whatever.
A local authority of this kind would confer a great boon upon the
agricultural poor if they could renovate the old idea of a common.
Allotment grounds are most useful, but they do not meet every want.
The better class of cottagers, who have contrived to save a little
money, often try to keep a cow, and before the road surveyors grew
so strict, they had little difficulty in doing so. But now the roads
are so jealously and properly preserved purely for traffic, the
cottager has no opportunity of grazing a cow or a donkey. It would
not be possible in places where land is chiefly arable, nor in
others where the meadow-land is let at a high rent, but still there
are places where a common could be provided. It need not be the best
land. The poorest would do. Those who graze should pay a small
fee--so much per head per week. Such a field would be a great
benefit, and an encouragement to those who were inclined to save.
In almost every parish there are a number of public charities. Many
of these are unfortunately expressly devised for certain purposes,
from which they cannot be diverted without much trouble and
resorting to high authorities. But there are others left in a loose
manner for the good of the poor, and the very origin of which is
doubtful. Such are many of the pieces of land scattered about the
country, the rent of which is paid to the churchwardens for the time
being, in trust for the poor. At present these charities are
dissipated in petty almsgiving, such as so much bread and a
fourpenny-piece on a certain day of the year, a blanket or cloak at
Christmas, and so on, the utility of which is more than doubtful.
Stories are currently believed of such four penny-pieces purchasing
quarts of ale, and of such blankets being immediately sold to raise
money for the same end. A village council would be able to suggest
many ways in which the income of these charities could be far better
employed. The giving of coal has already been substituted in some
places for the fourpenny-piece and blanket, which is certainly a
sensible change; but if possible it would be better to avoid
so-called charity altogether. Why should not the income of half a
dozen villages lying adjacent to each other be concentrated upon a
cottage hospital, or upon a hospital for lying-in women, which is
one of the great desiderata in country places. Such institutions
afford charity of the highest and best character, without any
degradation to the recipient. At the present moment the woman who
has lost her reputation, and is confined with an illegitimate child,
simply proceeds to the workhouse, where she meets with every
attention skilled nurses and science can afford. The labourer's wife
is left to languish in a close overcrowded room, and permitted to
resume her household labours before she has properly recovered.
There is nothing more wretched than the confinement of an
agricultural labourer's wife.
The health of villagers, notwithstanding the pure air, is often
prejudiced by the overcrowding of cottages. This overcrowding may
not be sufficiently great to render an appeal to the legal
authorities desirable, and yet may be productive of very bad
effects, both moral and physical. It is particularly the case where
the cottages are the property of the labourer himself, and are held
at a low quit-rent. The labourer cannot afford to rebuild the
cottage, which has descended to him from his father, or possibly
grandfather, and which was originally designed for one small family,
but, in the course of years, three or four members of that family
have acquired a right of residence in it. Of this right they are
extremely tenacious, though it may be positively injurious to them.
As many as two married men, with wives and children, may crowd
themselves into this dirty hovel, with a result of quarrelling and
immorality that cannot be surpassed; in fact, some things that have
happened in such places are not to be mentioned. Under the best
circumstances it often happens that there are not sufficient
cottages in a parish for the accommodation of the necessary workmen.
Complaints are continually arising, from no one so much as from the
agriculturists, who can never depend upon their men remaining
because of the deficiency of lodging. It is not often that the
entire parish belongs to one landlord; frequently, there are four or
five landlords, and a large number of freehold properties let to
tenants. Nor even where parishes are more or less the property of
one person, is it always practicable for the estate to bear the
burden of additional cottage building. The cost of a cottage varies
more, perhaps, than any other estimate, according to the size, the
materials to be employed, and their abundance in the neighbourhood.
But it may be safely believed that the estimates given to landowners
and others desirous of erecting cottages, very much exceed the sum
at which they can be built. Deduct the hauling of materials--a
considerable item--which could be done by the farmers themselves at
odd times.
In some places the materials may be found upon an adjacent farm, and
for such purposes might be had for a nominal sum. Altogether, a very
fair cottage might be built for L100 to L150, according to the
circumstances. These, of course, would not be ornamental houses with
Gothic porches and elaborate gables; but plain cottages, and quite
as comfortable. In round figures, four such places might be erected
for L500.[3] For a large parish will contain as many as twenty
farmers, and some more than that: L500 distributed between twenty is
but L25 apiece, and this sum could be still further reduced if the
landlords, the clergy, and the principal inhabitants are calculated
to take an interest in the matter. Let it be taken at L20 each, and
the product four cottages. As there are supposed to be twenty farms,
it may be reckoned that eight or ten new cottages would be welcome.
This would vary with circumstances. In some places five would be
sufficient. Ten would be the very highest number; and may be
considered quite exceptional. Now for the repayment of the
investment of L20. Four cottages at 2s. per week equals L20 per
annum. At this rate in five-and-twenty years, each subscriber would
be paid back his principal; say, after the manner of bonds, one
redeemable every year, and drawn for by lot. An agriculturist who
invests L100 or L150 in a cottage expects some interest upon his
money; but he can afford to sink L20 for a few years in view of
future benefit. But there are means by which the repayment could be
much accelerated; _i.e._, by inducing the tenant of a cottage to pay
a higher rent, and so become, after a time, the possessor of the
tenement, in the same way as with building societies.
[3] This, of course, is upon the supposition that the materials
are obtained at a nominal cost, and the hauling not charged for.
It may, however, be considered preferable that the cottages should
remain the property of the village council--each member receiving
back his original payment. This is thrown out merely as a
suggestion; but this much is clear, that were there an organization
of this kind there would be no material difficulty in the way of
increasing the cottage accommodation. A number of gentlemen working
together would overcome the want with ease. At all events, if they
did not go so far as to erect new cottages, they might effect a
great deal of improvement in repairing dilapidated places, and
enlarging existing premises.
In thus rapidly sketching out the various ways in which a local
village authority might encourage the growth and improvement of the
place, it has been endeavoured to indicate, in a suggestive manner,
the way in which such an authority might be established. It is not
for one moment proposed that an application should be made to the
Legislature for a special enactment enabling such councils to act
with legal force. To such a course there would certainly arise the
most vigorous opposition on the part of all classes of the
agricultural community, from landlord, tenant, and labourer alike.
There exists an irresistible dislike to any form of 'imperial'
interference, as is amply proved by the resistance offered to the
School Board system, and by the comparative impotence of the rural
sanitary authorities. People would rather suffer annoyance than call
in an outside power. The species of local authority here indicated
must be founded entirely upon the will of the inhabitants
themselves; and its power be derived rather from acquiescence than
from inherent force. In fact, the major part of its duties would not
require any legal power. The allotment-garden, the cottage repair,
the common, the bathing-place, reading-room, etc., would require no
legal authority to render them useful and attractive. Neither is it
probable that any serious opposition would be made to a system of
drainage, and certainly none whatever to an improved water supply.
No force would be necessary, and the whole moral influence of
landlord, and tenant, and clergy, would sway in the proposed
direction. It has often been remarked that the agricultural
class--the tenant farmer--is the one least capable of combination,
and there is a great deal of truth in the assertion of the lack of
all cohesion, and united action. It must, however, be remembered
that until very lately no kind of combination has been proposed, no
attempt made to organize action. That, at least in local matters,
agriculturists are capable of combination and united action has
been proved by the strenuous exertions made to retain the voluntary
school system, and also by the endeavours made for the restoration
of village churches. If the total of the sums obtained for schools
and for village church restoration could be ascertained, it would be
found to amount to something very great; and in the case of the
schools, at any rate, and to some degree in the case of
restorations, the administration of the funds has rested upon the
leading farmers assembled in committees. When once a number of
agriculturists have formed a combination with an understood object,
they are less liable to be thrown into disorder by factious
differences amongst themselves than any other class of men. They are
willing to agree to anything reasonable, and do not persist in
amendments just in order that a favourite crotchet may be gratified.
In other words, they are amenable to common sense and practical
arguments.
There would be very little doubt of harmonious action if once such a
combination was formed. It could be started in many ways--by the
clergyman asking the tenants of the parish to meet him in the
village school-room, and there giving a rapid sketch of the proposed
organization; and if any landlord, or magistrate, or leading
gentleman was present, the thing would be set on its legs on the
spot. In most parishes there are one or more large tenant farmers
who naturally take the lead in their own class, and they would
speedily obtain adherents to the movement. It would be as well,
perhaps, if the attempt were made, for the promoters to draw up a
species of circular for distribution in every house and cottage in
the parish, explaining the objects of the association, and inviting
co-operation on the part of rich and poor alike. Once a meeting was
called together, and a committee appointed, the principal difficulty
would be got over.
The next matter--in fact, the first matter for the consideration of
such a committee--would be the method of raising funds. All
legally-established bodies have powers of obtaining money, as by
rates; but the example of the independent schools and church
restorations has amply proved that money will be forthcoming for
proper purposes without resort to compulsion. The abolition of
Church-rates has not in any way tended to the degradation of the
Church; perhaps, on the contrary, more has been done towards Church
extension since that date than before. A voluntary rate is still
collected in many places, and produces a considerable sum, the
calculation being made upon the basis of the poor-rate assessment.
The objects of such a village association being eminently
practical, devoid of any sectarian bearing and thoroughly local in
application, there would probably be little difficulty in
collecting a small voluntary rate for its support, even amongst the
poorest of the population. The cottager would not grudge a few
pence for objects in which he has an obvious interest, and which
are close at home; but in the formation of the association it
would, perhaps, be practicable to begin with a subscription of one
guinea each from every member, the subscription of one guinea per
annum endowing the giver with voting power at the meetings. If
there were five-and-twenty farmers in a parish, there would be
five-and-twenty guineas (it is not probable that any farmer would
stand out from such a society), and five-and-twenty guineas would
be quite sufficient to start the thing. Suppose the society
commence with supplying additional allotment-grounds. They rent,
say, eight acres at L2 10s. per acre, equalling L20 per annum; but
they only expend L10 on rent for one half-year, because the other
half will be paid by incoming tenants. The labour to be expended on
the plot in making it tenable can hardly be reckoned, because, in
all probability, it would be done by their own men at odd times.
Many places would not require draining at all, and it need not be
done at starting, and the generality of fields are already drained.
So that about L15 would suffice to start the allotment-grounds,
leaving L10 in hand to make a bathing-place with, or to erect a
pump, or purchase hose or tank for water-supply. Here we have a
considerable progress arrived at with one year's subscription only,
not counting on any subscription from the landlord, or clergy, or
resident gentlemen. The funds required are, in fact, not nearly so
large as might be imagined. Most of these improvements, when once
started, would last for some years without further outlay; the
allotments would probably return a small income. It is not so
necessary to do everything in one year. Add the sums collected on
the low rate to the yearly subscription of the members, and there
would probably be sufficient for every purpose, except that of
cottage repairs or the erection of new cottages. Such more
expensive matters would require shareholders investing larger sums;
but the income already mentioned would probably enable all ordinary
improvements to be carried out, even draining; and, after a year or
two, a small reserve fund would even accumulate. It would, however,
be important to bring the poorer class to feel that these matters,
in a manner, depended upon their own exertions. There might be a
subscription of twopence a month for certain given objects, as the
bathing-place, the water-tank, or other things in hand at the time;
and it would probably be well responded to. They should also be
invited to give their labour free of charge after farm work. In the
case of important alterations affecting the whole village, such as
drainage, they might be asked to meet the society in the
school-room, and then let the matter be put to the vote. After a
few months, there can be no doubt the labouring population would
come to take a very animated interest in such proceedings. There is
a great deal of common sense in the labourer, and once let him see
the practical as opposed to the theoretical benefit, and his
co-operation is certain.
The members of the society would have no trouble in electing a
committee. There might be more than one committee to attend to
different matters, as the allotment and the water-supply, because
it would happen that one gentleman would have more practical
knowledge of gardening, and another would have more acquaintance
with the means of dealing with water, from the experience gained in
his own water meadows. There should be a president of the society, a
treasurer, and secretary; and a general meeting might take place
once every two months, the committee meeting as circumstances
dictated. Any member having a scheme to propose could draw up a
short outline of his plan in writing, and submit it to the general
meeting, when, if it met with favour, it could be handed over to a
committee for execution.
Such an association might call itself the village Local Society. It
would be distinct from all party politics; it would have nothing to
do with individual disputes or grievances between landlord and
tenant; it would most carefully disclaim all sectarian objects. It
would meet in a friendly genial manner, and if a few bottles of
sherry could be placed on the table the better. A formal, hard,
entirely business-like meeting is undesirable and to be avoided. The
affairs in progress should be discussed in a free, open manner, and
without any attempt at set speeches, though to prevent mistakes
propositions would have to be moved and seconded, and entered in a
minute-book. Such a society would be the means of bringing gentlemen
together from distant parts of the parish, and would lead to a more
intimate social connection. It would have other uses than those for
which it was formally instituted. In the event of a serious
outbreak of fever in the village, or any infectious disease, it
might be of the very greatest utility in affording assistance to the
poor, and in making arrangements for preventing the spread of
infection by the plan of isolation. It might set apart a cottage for
the reception of patients, and engage additional medical assistance.
The influence it would exercise in the village and parish would be
very great, and might produce a decided improvement in the moral
tone of the place. In the event of disaffection and agitation
arising among the labouring classes, it might be enabled to
establish a reasonable compromise, and, in time, a good many little
petty disputes among the poor would be referred to the society for
arbitration.