Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-wg55d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-01T08:27:26.178Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Slum Question: The London County Council and Decent Dwellings for the Working Classes, 1880–1914

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 July 2014

R. Vladimir Steffel
Get access

Extract

The middle classes, seduced by the gospels of growth and of laissezfaire, abandoned the older areas of London to the artisans and laborers, to the thousands of migrants from rural England, Scotland, and Ireland, and to Jewish immigrants from Russia. By 1880 the middle classes in the suburbs were isolated from the working classes and ignorant of their poverty. Then “The Bitter Cry of Outcast London” by Andrew Mearns, the Pall Mall Gazette edited by W. T. Stead, and the writings of others exposing the squalor of the laboring classes led to a rediscovery of poverty. Many observers thought that charity would solve the problem, ome went slumming or joined the settlement movement begun at Toynbee Hall. Others, like Octavia Hill, were determined to improve the lives of the poor through the proper management and gradual upgrading of their living quarters. The philanthropic and semi-philanthropic dwellings companies such as the Peabody Trust, Guinness Trust, Improved Industrial Dwellings. East End Dwellings, and Four Percent Industrial Dwellings constructed new housing suitable for the working classes. All these efforts were limited because of the attitudes of the affluent classes toward the poor. Many believed that improvidence, intemperance, and licentiousness caused poverty and failed to realize that crowded living conditions and underemployment encouraged these vices. Beatrice Webb, who recognized this problem, wrote in her diary: “The Drink demon…undermines the constitution of a family.…There are times when one loses all faith in laisser faire [and] would suppress this poison at all hazards, before it eats the life of the nation.”

Type
Research Article
Information
Albion , Volume 5 , Issue 4 , Winter 1973 , pp. 314 - 325
Copyright
Copyright © North American Conference on British Studies 1973

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Dyos, H. J., “The Slums of Victorian London,” Victorian Studies, XI (1967–1968): 5–40Google Scholar; Dyos, H. J. and Reeder, D. A., “Slums and Suburbs,” in, The Victorian City, Dyos, H. J. and Wolff, Michael, eds. (London, 1973), I, 359–86.Google Scholar

2 For an excellent discussion of changing attitudes see Wohl, Anthony, “The Bitter Cry of Outcast London,” International Review of Social History, XIII (1968): 189–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar; “The Housing of the Working Classes in London, 1815-1914,” in, A History of Working-Class Housing: A Symposium, Chapman, Stanley D., ed. (Newton Abbot, 1971), pp. 13–54.Google Scholar

3 For a discussion of Octavia Hill's philosophy and program see Wohl, Anthony, “Octavia Hill and The Homes of the London Poor,” Journal of British Studies, X (1971): 105–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

4 For detailed discussions of philanthropic and semi-philanthropic working class housing see Tarn, John Nelson, “The Peabody Donation Fund: The Rote of a Housing Society in the Nineteenth Century,” Victorian Studies, X (1966–1967): 7–38Google Scholar; “The Improved Industrial Dwellings Company,” Transactions of the London and Middlesex Archaeological Society, XXII pt. I (1968): 43–59Google Scholar; Working-class Housing in 19th-century Britain (London, 1971), chapters 3-5.Google Scholar

5 Webb, Beatrice, “Diaries of Beatrice Webb,” X (Nov. 1886), 69–70Google Scholar. (Unpublished typescript in the Passfield Papers at the British Library of Political and Economic Science.) Compare with Webb, Beatrice, My Apprenticeship (London, 1926), p. 278.Google Scholar

6 The foundations for improving the working class environment were the Nuisance Removal and Sanitary Acts, the Shaftesbury Acts, the Torrens Acts, and the Cross Acts. At first the Nuisance Removal and Sanitary Acts dealt with drainage, removal of wastes and garbage, offensive trades, and industrial air pollution; in 1855 premises injurious to health and in 1866 overcrowding were defined as nuisances. Specific housing legislation had been enacted in 1851 under Lord Shaftesbury's influence. The Laboring Classes Lodging Houses Act empowered local authorities to erect housing for the working classes, and the Common Lodging House Act provided for better management and inspection of common lodging houses. The Torrens Acts, 1868-82, were concerned with single or small groups of dwellings that were dangerous to health due to structural defects. Property owners could be required to alter structurally or demolish a dwelling which was dangerous to the health of its occupants. If owners refused to implement a magistrate's order then the local authority could do it at their expense. The Cross Acts, 1875-82, empowered local authorities to clear areas in need of rearrangement and reconstruction. The Torrens and Cross Acts were geared toward setting minimum structural standards and providing dwellings free from dampness and with sufficient natural light and ventiliation. Amendments empowered local authorities to erect working class housing.

7 Parliamentary Papers, C. 4402, XXX, 22 and 42Google Scholar, Royal Commission on the Housing of the Working Classes, 1884-85.

8 London County Council, The Housing Question in London, 1855-1900 (London, 1901), p. 19Google Scholar. (Hereafter the London County Council is cited as LCC.) Part I of the Housing of the Working Classes Act (1890) consolidated the Cross Acts (1875-82) and applied to large insanitary or slum areas; although reconstruction was mandatory it was assumed that private enterprise would purchase cleared sites. Part II consolidated the Torrens Acts (1868-82) and dealt with individual or small groups of insanitary or dangerous dwellings; reconstruction was at the discretion of local authorities. Part II incorporated the Shaftesbury Acts (1851-75) permitting the development of housing estates.

9 The Public Health (London) Act (1891) consolidated the sanitary and nuisance removal acts. When Parliament consolidated these acts for England in 1875 it had omitted London.

10 LCC, Housing Question in London, pp. 19, 32, and 43Google Scholar; LCC, Minutes of Proceedings, 5 Nov. 1889, p. 863Google Scholar; 13 Jan. 1891, pp. 6-8; 17 Feb. 1891, p. 183; 28 July 1891, p. 879; and 3 Nov. 1891, p. 1106. For a discussion of nineteenth-century medical officers' attitudes see Wohl, A. S., “Unfit for Human Habitation,” in, The Victorian City, (London, 1973), II, 603–24.Google Scholar

11 LCC, Housing of the Working Classes Committee, Minutes, I (31 March 1890): 471Google Scholar; (13 Oct. 1890): 594; LCC, Public Health and Housing Committee. Minutes, III (19 March 1894): 641Google Scholar; LCC, Public Health and Housing Committee, Papers, 1893–1894Google Scholar, Bundle E49, LCC, Murphy, 19 March 1894; Poplar clerk, 24 March 1894 and 17 May 1894; LCC, Housing of the Working Classes Committee, Papers, 1901-02, Case 67, Poplar, medical officer, 12 July 1901; LCC architect, valuer, medical officer, and housing manager, 22 Jan. 1902; Poplar clerk, 18 March 1902; LCC clerk, II July 1902; Poplar clerk, 22 Oct. 1902; Case 35, Proof of report of Housing of the Working Classes Committee for year ending 1902; 1905-06, Case 67, Poplar clerk, 20 Dec. 1904.

12 Under the Public Health (London) Act (1891) one-half of the salaries of sanitary inspectors was payable by the Council, which was reimbursed by the Exchequer. LCC, Minutes of Proceedings, 1 Aug. 1893, p. 890Google ScholarPubMed; Public Health (London) Act, 1891, 54 & 55 Vict., ch. 56, sec. 108.

13 LCC, London Statistics, V (1894): 593–94Google Scholar; XIV (1903-04); 178-85; XVIII (1907-08): 106; and XXII (1911-12): 130.

14 LCC, Housing of the Working Classes Committee, Papers, 1901–1902Google ScholarPubMed, Case 36a, LCC clerk, 1 3 March 1902; Case 39a, Stepney clerk, 3 June 1902; Case 39b, Poplar clerk, 23 April 1902.

15 LCC, Housing of the Working Classes Committee, Papers, 1901–1902Google Scholar, Case 39b, Charles Murdock, Home Office, 31 July 1902.

16 LCC, Housing of the Working Classes Committee, Minutes VII (3 Feb. 1904): 750.Google Scholar

17 Fourth Annual Report of the Poor Law Commissioners, PP, 1837–1838 [147] XX–VIII, App. AGoogle ScholarPubMed; Gavin, Hector, Sanitary Ramblings (London, 1848), p. 42Google Scholar; The Sanitary Condition of Bethnal Green. Verbatim Report of the Government Inquiry, 7 Nov. 1887. p. 75. (In the Tower Hamlets [London] Library.) LCC, Public Health and Housing Committee, Papers, 1889–1892Google Scholar, Bundle A3-I, Bethnal Green, Bate, 3 April 1890.

18 This contribution was not covered by the Exchequer. LCC, Public Health and Housing Committee, Papers, 1889–1892Google Scholar, Bundle E7, Memo on future policy, Beachcoft, 20 Oct. 1890; LCC, Minutes of Proceedings, 13 Jan. 1891, pp. 7–8.Google ScholarPubMed

19 For King John's Court: LCC, Public Health and Housing Committee, Papers, 1889–1892Google ScholarPubMed. Bundle A10-I, Limehouse District Board clerk, 14 Jan. 1891, 3 June 1891; LCC draft, 13 June 1891, 2 Dec. 1891; LDB clerk, 7 Dec. 1891; LCC arch., 10 Dec. 1891; Bundle A10-II, LCC arch., 21 Mar. 1892; LDB clerk, 4 July 1892; LCC arch., 18 July 1892; LDB clerk, 12 Oct. 1892; 1893-94, Bundle A10, LCC valuer, 12 July 1893; LCC, 8 May 1894; LCC, Minutes of Proceedings, 28 April 1896, pp. 442–43Google Scholar. For Queen Catherine's Court: LCC, Public Health and Housing Committee, Papers, 1889–1892Google Scholar, Bundle A10-II, LDB clerk, 18 Dec. 1891; LCC draft, 19 Jan. 1892; LDB clerk, 26 April and 10 June 1892; LCC, 6 Dec. 1892. For London Terrace: LCC, Public Health and Housing Committee, Papers, 1889–1892Google Scholar, Bundle A15-I, St. George in the East medical officer, copy, 20 May 1889; LCC, Murphy, 26 Feb. 1890; St. George clerk, 15 Nov. 1890; LCC, Murphy, 22 Jan. 1891; St. Geo. clerk, 5 Feb. 1891; LCC draft, 11 Mar. 1891; St. Geo. clerk, 13 July 1891; LCC Northeast Subcommittee, Minutes, 30 April 1891, p. 126Google Scholar; LCC, Public Health and Housing Committee, Papers, 1889–1892Google Scholar, Bundle A15-II, St. Geo. clerk, 5 Feb. 1892; LCC, Blaxland, 22 Feb. 1892; LCC, 27 Feb. 1892; LCC arch., 21 Mar. 1892; LCC, 6 Dec. 1892; LCC, Minutes of Proceedings, 5 June 1894, p. 612, and 21 Nov. 1905. p. 1711.Google Scholar

20 LCC, Public Health and Housing Committee, Papers, 1889–1892Google Scholar. Bundle A13-I, LCC, 1 Feb. 1892; Poplar clerk, 11 Mar. 1892; LCC, Murphy, 9 May 1892; 1893-94. Bundle A13, LCC, 12 May 1893; Home Office, 23 June, 1894.

21 Public Record Office, HO 45/10198/B31375. pp. 45-47; LCC, The Housing Question in London, pp. 177–79.Google Scholar

22 East End Dwellings Co., Minutes, II (1 June 1891), 179Google Scholar; II (29 June 1891), 187; II (20 July 1891), 193; II (4 Aug. 1891), 198; LCC, Public Health and Housing Committee, Papers, 1889–1892Google ScholarPubMed, Bundle A8-I, LCC arch., 16 July 1891; LCC Corporate Property Committee, 20 July 1891; A9-I, Guinness Trust, 30 April 18 I; LCC valuer, 11 May 1891; LCC arch., 28 May 1891; LCC arch., 11 June 1891; LCC valuer, 22 June 1891; LCC draft letter, 25 June 1891; Guinness Trust, 24 June 1891; Guinness Trust, 30 Oct. 1891.

23 LCC, Minutes of Proceedings, 2 Feb. 1892, p. 69Google Scholar, and 29 Mar. 1892, p. 273; LCC, Housing of the Working Classes Committee, Minutes II (29 Feb. 1892): 368.Google Scholar

24 Public Record Office, HLG 1/17 file B1184A/47.

25 LCC, Housing Question in London, pp. 43, 47–48Google Scholar; Simon, John, English Sanitary Institutions (London, 1890), pp. 434 and 441Google Scholar; The Mansion House Council on the Dwellings of the Poor, The Present Position of the Housing Problem in and Around London (London, 1908), p. 25Google Scholar; Liberty and Property Defence League, Land (London, 1885), p. 48Google Scholar; The Times, 3 Aug. 1885; Fabian Tract 101, The House Famine and How to Relieve It (London, 1900), p. 18.Google Scholar

26 LCC, Housing Question in London, p. 47Google Scholar; LCC, Housing of the Working Classes in London, 1889-1912 (London, 1913), pp. 26–27.Google Scholar

27 LCC, Minutes of Proceedings, 22 April 1890, pp. 312–14Google Scholar; LCC, Public Health and Housing Committee, Minutes, III (31 Oct. 1892): 13Google Scholar; and III (14 Nov. 1892): 66; LCC. Minutes of Proceedings, 6 Dec. 1898. pp. 1457–59.Google Scholar

28 Housing of the Working Classes Act, 1900, 63 & 64 Vict., ch. 59, sec. 1.

29 For discussion of transportation and its impact on working class housing see Dyos, H. J. “Railways and Housing in Victorian London,” Journal of Transport History, II (1955): 11–21, 90–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar; “Workmen's Fares in South London, 1860-1914,” Journal of Transport History, I (1953): 3–19Google Scholar; Dyos, H. J. and Aldcroft, D. H., British Transport: An Economic Survey (Leicester, 1969), p. 222.Google Scholar

30 LCC, Housing Question in London, pp. 47–50, and 306–332Google Scholarpassim; LCC, Housing of the Working Classes, Minutes VI (12 Nov. 1902): 447–48Google Scholar; LCC, Public Health and Housing Committee, Papers, 1893–1994Google Scholar, Bundle E3, LCC arch., 10 Jan. 1893 and 20 Oct. 1893.

31 LCC, Housing of the Working Classes Committee, Papers, 1896–1997Google Scholar, Case 39, LCC arch., 29 Sept. 1897; LCC, Housing Question in London, pp. 48–51Google Scholar; LCC, Housing of the Working Classes Committee, Minutes, III (29 June 1899), 143Google Scholar; Public Record Office, HO 45/10198/B31375, pp. 316 and 398.

32 LCC, Minutes of Proceedings, 18 May 1909, pp. 1183–84, and 29 June 1909, p. 1609.Google ScholarPubMed

33 Harris, Percy A., London and its Government (London, 1933), p. 131Google Scholar; Gibbon, I. G. and Bell, R. W., History of the London County Council, 1889-1939 (London, 1939), pp. 105–107Google Scholar; Wohl, , “The Housing of the Working Classes in London, 1815-1914,” Chapman, , ed., in History of Working-Class Housing, p. 40.Google Scholar