Chapter XXIV: ARTIZANS AND LABOURERS’ DWELLINGS, &c

The Artizans and Labourers’ Dwellings Act 1868 (31 & 32 Vic. c. 130) was in effect incorporated in the Public Health Act 1875 so that “every urban authority shall within their district, . . . have, exercise and be subject to all the powers, rights, duties, capacities, liabilities, and obligations within such district exercisable or attaching by and to the local authority” (38 & 39 Vic. c. 55, s. 10).

The mode of procedure is as follows:

Where the “officer of health”[199] finds any premises in a condition or state dangerous to health so as to be unfit for human habitation, he shall report the same in writing to the clerk of the local authority. The local authority must then refer such report to a surveyor or engineer,[200] who shall thereupon consider the report so furnished to him, and report to the local authority what is the cause of the evil so reported on, and if such evil is occasioned by defects in any premises, whether the same can be remedied by structural alterations and improvements or otherwise, or whether such premises or any or what part thereof ought to be demolished (31 & 32 Vic. c. 130, s. 6).

Upon the receipt of this report from the surveyor the local authority sends copies to the owner of the premises, giving him opportunities of attending before them and of appealing against the report, and if his objections are overruled, a plan and specification of the works (if any) and an estimate of the cost of such works, must be prepared by the surveyor, and these in turn may be inspected by the owner and objected to by him in writing, and he may also attend before the local authority, and if he makes good his objections the local authority may direct the plan, specification and estimate to be amended, and the works would then be executed in accordance with the amended plans, &c. (31 & 32 Vic. c. 130, s. 8).

Persons who are aggrieved by any order of the local authority may appeal against it, but failing this, if the owner does not within two months diligently proceed with and complete the same in conformity with the specification to the satisfaction of the surveyor, the local authority may either order the premises to be shut up, or to be demolished, or may themselves execute the required works in conformity with the specification (31 & 32 Vic. c. 130, s. 18).

If the requirements of the order involve the total demolition and not the improvement of the premises, the owner shall within three months proceed to take down and remove them, and if he fail to do so, then the local authority may pull down and recoup the expenses by a sale of the old material (31 & 32 Vic. c. 130, s. 20).

The above Act was amended in 1879 by the “Artizans and Labourers’ Dwellings Act (1868) Amendment Act 1879” (42 & 43 Vic. c. 64), the most important clause affecting the action of the town surveyor being as follows:

“Notwithstanding anything in the Act of 1868, the owner of any premises specified in an order of the local authority made under that Act, and requiring him to execute any works or to demolish such premises, may within three months after service on him of the order, require the local authority in writing to purchase such premises” (42 & 43 Vic. c. 64, s. 5).

The amount of compensation to be paid to the owner is to be settled by arbitration if no agreement can be arrived at, such arbitration to be carried out in a manner provided for by certain clauses in this Amendment Act 1879.

Sec. 9 of the same Act also provides for the repayment (by sale of old materials, &c.) of the cost incurred by the local authority in executing any works under the Acts.

This Act has again been amended quite recently (August 1882) by “An Act to Amend the Artizans and Labourers’ Dwellings Acts” (45 & 46 Vic. c. 54), the most important clause affecting the working of this Act being as follows:

(1.) “If in any place to which the Artizans and Labourers’ Dwellings Act 1868 applies the officer of health finds that any building, although not in itself unfit for human habitation, is so situate that by reason of its proximity to or contact with any other building it causes one of the following effects, that is to say:

“(1.) It stops ventilation or otherwise makes or conduces to make such
other buildings to be in a condition unfit for human habitation; or

“(2.) It prevents proper measures from being carried into effect for
remedying the evils complained of in respect of such other buildings,

in any such case the officer of health shall make a report to the local authority in writing of the particulars relating to such first-mentioned building (in this Act referred to as ‘an obstructive building’) stating that in his opinion it is expedient that the obstructive building should be pulled down, and shall deliver the report to the clerk of the local authority.

“(2.) The local authority shall refer such report to a surveyor or engineer to report thereon, and to report as to the cost of acquiring the lands on which such obstructive building is erected, and of pulling down such building.”

The local authority then consider the reports of the officer of health and of the surveyor, and proceed to give copies to the owner of the lands in question, who has liberty of appeal, &c., as before given in the Act 1868. The lands may be acquired by the local authority by agreement or compulsorily under the Lands Clauses Consolidation Acts, and the obstructive building, “or such part thereof as may be obstructive,” may be pulled “down, and the whole site, or such part thereof as may be required to be kept open for the purpose of remedying the evils” kept as an open space.

The owner of the land may, by giving due notice, declare that “he desires to retain the site of the obstructive building, and undertake either to pull down or to permit the local authority to pull down, the obstructive building,” in which case he retains the site, and is compensated only for the building.

These recent amendments to the old Act of 1868 are of the greatest importance, for they aim at the easy improvement of courts and alleys, by opening them where houses have been erected across the entrance, in some cases depriving the courts and alleys of light and air, and leaving only a small covered archway through which the occupants can enter.

The Act has only too recently become law for me to give any particulars with regard to its working, but it appears to be a most valuable sanitary Act.

Prior to these amendments of the Act 1868, it was felt that it dealt only with isolated buildings, and consequently, in order to improve large areas, the “Act for Facilitating the Improvement of the Dwellings of the Working Classes in Large Towns” was passed in 1875 (38 & 39 Vic. c. 36), since which date, like the Act 1868, it has been twice amended, once in 1879 (42 & 43 Vic. c. 63), and again in 1882 (45 & 46 Vic. c. 54).

The object of the Act of 1875 was to facilitate the removal of portions of towns, especially of the courts and alleys in the poorer and more densely-populated parts.

The Act is to be put in force where an official representation is made by the medical officer of health to the local authority of an urban sanitary district (which must contain a population of at least 25,000) that “any houses, courts, or alleys within a certain area” are “unfit for human habitation, or that diseases indicating a generally low condition of health amongst the population have been from time to time prevalent in a certain area,” and that this is attributable to the bad arrangement or bad condition of the streets and houses, or “other sanitary defects,” which can only be remedied by “an improvement scheme for the rearrangement and reconstruction of the streets or houses” (38 & 39 Vic. c. 36, s. 3).

The improvement scheme to be prepared on receipt of this report by the local authority must be accompanied by “maps, particulars, and estimates” (no doubt these must be prepared by the surveyor, although no mention is made as to who shall prepare them), and this scheme may “provide for widening any existing approaches to the unhealthy area, or otherwise for opening out the same for the purposes of ventilation or health.” It must distinguish “the lands proposed to be taken compulsorily,” and by the Act 1875 it was necessary to “provide for the accommodation of at the least as many persons of the working class as may be displaced in the area with respect to which the scheme is proposed in suitable dwellings, which, unless there are any special reasons to the contrary, shall be situate within the limits of the same area or in the vicinity thereof” (sec. 5).

So much practical difficulty was experienced in carrying this latter part of the clause into effect, that in 1879 a short Act was passed (42 & 43 Vic. c. 63), which by the 4th section amended that part of the original clause as to the provision of accommodation for the working classes as follows:

“Where it is proved to the satisfaction of the confirming authority . . . . that equally convenient accommodation can be provided . . . . at some place other than within the area or the immediate vicinity . . . . and it is also proved to the satisfaction of such authority that the required accommodation has been or is about to be forthwith provided.” The confirming authority may be satisfied with such provision, and for this purpose the local authority may make use of any lands belonging to them, or purchase any that are suitable (42 & 43 Vic. c. 63, s. 4).

This part of the Act has again been amended in the year 1882 by 45 & 46 Vic. c. 54, which in section 3 enacts as follows:

“. . . . and where any such improvement scheme comprises an area situate elsewhere than in the metropolis or the City of London, it shall, if the confirming authority so require (but it shall not otherwise be obligatory on the local authority so to frame their scheme), provide for the accommodation of such number of those persons of the working class displaced in the area with respect to which the scheme is proposed in suitable dwellings to be erected in such place or places either within or without the limits of the same area as the said authority, on a report made by the officer conducting the local enquiry, may require . . . .”

Having thus far given the _modus operandi_ under which the Act has to be enforced, it is necessary to see what are some of the town surveyor’s duties in connection therewith.

First, there are the “maps, particulars, and estimates” which have to be prepared, and these involve--

(_a._) Accurate surveys of the area;

(_b._) A reference of all the properties included:

(_c._) A census of the population of the area;

(_d._) A valuation of all the properties;

(_e._) A plan of the proposed new streets, &c.

(_f._) An estimate of the cost of the whole work.

In addition to this it is necessary for the local authority to “impose suitable conditions and restrictions as to the elevation, size, and design of the houses and the extent of the accommodation to be afforded thereby, and to make due provision for the maintenance of proper sanitary arrangements,” and this naturally involves detailed drawings of the buildings to be erected.

In the same clause (38 & 39 Vic. c. 36, s. 9) it is stated that the local authority may engage with any society, &c., to carry the whole or any part of the scheme into effect, but “the local authority shall not themselves, without the express approval of the confirming authority, undertake the rebuilding of the houses or the execution of any part of the scheme, except that they may take down any or all of the buildings upon the area, and clear the whole or any part thereof, and may lay out, form, pave, sewer, and complete” all the necessary streets, &c., which shall thenceforth be public streets repairable by the inhabitants at large.

It is scarcely necessary to say that the enforcement of this Act involves a considerable expenditure of work and time in the office of the town surveyor.

The buildings which are erected on the sites dealt with under this Act are generally of the “high block” class, as it is found that the labouring man prefers to live near his work, and land is generally too expensive in such localities to admit of the erection of any other description of buildings.

As to whether this class of dwelling is as healthy as ordinary cottages or houses, the following death-rates for the year 1879 will be some guide:

The London Improved Industrial Dwellings 16·4 per 1000
The Peabody Trust Dwellings 17·2 „ „
The Metropolitan Association Dwellings 14·3 „ „
The Newcastle Improved Industrial Dwellings 12·0 „ „
The general death rate for the Metropolis at the
same date being 21·2 „ „

It is of course necessary that the sanitary arrangements of industrial dwellings of the block type should be very perfect, and as to the manner in which they should be erected the following words of Mr. John Price, who for twelve years had lived in one of them himself, can be here given with advantage:[201]

“Model dwellings are therefore most appreciated by working men when placed near the scene of their daily labour. The arrangements most preferred are those which bring the fewest families or persons in contact with one another on a flat or landing. As a rule the buildings should not exceed four stories in height; the staircases should be about four feet in width, and broken by short landings, lighted by large windows open to the external air; the window-sills should not be less than three feet from the floors for the safety of young children, and for the same reason well staircases should be avoided. The steps of the stairs should only have a 6-inch ‘rise,’ for the more easy accommodation of old people and young children; they should be fire-proof, and well lighted with gas on an evening. There should be a thick layer of deafening between the floors. The waterclosets should be placed in an offshoot from the main building, opening on to each landing, and well ventilated by open windows and air bricks. The watercloset apparatus should be as simple and effective as possible. Patents depending upon the proper working of valves and ball-cocks should be avoided, as the fruitful cause of trouble and expense; little reliance must be placed on their proper use by tenants where more than one family have access to them. I have seen excellent closets stopped up with cloths and all manner of earthenware and hardware, children of careless parents being the principal offenders; what is everybody’s duty is often most neglected. It will be found most economical in large buildings of this class to appoint a person whose duty it should be to attend to the proper flushing of waterclosets daily. I would suggest that there should be a large cistern under the roof (distinct from the cistern used for domestic purposes), a ³⁄₄-inch feed pipe should lead to each w.c., which should consist of a simple metal or earthenware pan, provided only with a tap, flushing rim, and plug, placed under the seat securely, and under the sole control of the attendant, who, by the necessary daily inspection, would detect any stoppage or injury to the fittings. The expense of such supervision would probably be soon saved in plumbers’ bills. Of course the soil-pipes should be well ventilated above the roof of the building, and all drains and sinks should be properly trapped. The attendant on his daily rounds would also be able to see that these are kept in proper order. The dust-shaft, extending to the full height of the building, should have proper hoppers connected with it to prevent the dust coming from the lower or upper landings; a nuisance sometimes complained of in block dwellings. The washhouses should be placed on the roof or in the yards, fitted with set pots and requisite conveniences. The soft water from the roofs should be stored in tanks for washing and domestic purposes--it will be much appreciated by sensible tenants, and save the water bill greatly.

“The great desiderata of these large blocks of buildings is ample playground for the children, without which they play upon the stairs, and are often the cause of strife amongst neighbours. I know those who have experience in the matter may say that it is more easy to state what is desirable than what is practical. The enhanced value of land in all our large towns precludes any liberal investment on what appears so financially unremunerative as playgrounds, yet they are essential adjuncts wherever there is an infantile population. Mr. Powell, on behalf of the London Trades’ Unions, enumerated before Sir Richard Cross’s Committee certain objections which the working classes of London entertained against the earliest erected blocks of dwellings, amongst which was their barrack-like and uninviting appearance, and also their want of playgrounds for children. Recently these defects have been greatly remedied.”

A few words are necessary upon the “Labouring Classes’ Lodging Houses Acts” (14 & 15 Vic. c. 34; 29 & 30 Vic. c. 28; 30 & 31 Vic. c. 28).

The object of these Acts was to empower urban authorities, under certain restrictions and after certain formalities, to appropriate any lands vested in them or at their disposal, or to purchase or rent the necessary lands for the purpose of erecting suitable buildings for lodging-houses for the working classes, or to convert any buildings into lodging-houses, and “repair and improve the same respectively with all requisite furniture, fittings, and conveniences”; and further powers are given in the Acts for the urban authority to contract with persons for different objects, &c.

I am unable to give any experiences of the working of these Acts, for I do not know of any urban authority which has carried them into effect, the Artizans and Labourers’ Dwellings Improvement Acts having virtually superseded them.

The following copy of the bye-laws as sanctioned by the Treasury in 1867 in connection with the Labouring Classes’ Lodging Houses Acts may, however, be of interest, as well as the table of sizes of rooms which follows:

Separate watercloset accommodation to be provided for each tenement, or else, where watercloset accommodation is to be used in common by the occupants of two or more tenements, separate accommodation must be provided for each sex. Such accommodation may be either watercloset, earthcloset, or privy.

Each tenement to have a dustbin or the use of a dustbin common to several buildings.

Each tenement to be well lighted by external windows made to open.

Each tenement to have ready access to water.

Where several tenements in one building, proper ventilation to be provided for the passages, staircases, &c.

The drains to be well constructed.

Parties to whom moneys to be advanced to enter into covenants with the Public Works Loan Commissioners, that where there are several tenements in one building they

(_a._) Will cause the passages, staircases, &c., to be kept clean;

(_b._) Will cause the waterclosets, &c., to be kept in good repair;

(_c._) Will cause the dustbins to be emptied at intervals of seven days;

(_d._) Will take precautions against any interruption in the supply of water;

(_e._) Will keep the windows in good order and repair, and the chimneys swept;

(_f._) Will keep the drains in proper order;

(_g._) Will allow inspection by Commissioner of Works to see that the above covenants are observed.

Number of cubic feet in each room of the several classes of tenements (none of less than two rooms) for which money has been authorised to be advanced:

------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------
| One | One | One | One | One
|Room of|Room of|Room of|Room of|Room of
| cubic | cubic | cubic | cubic | cubic
Class. | feet. | feet. | feet. | feet. | feet.
------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------
Class I. of two rooms | 715 | 1,219 | | |
Ditto | 816 | 994 | | |
Ditto | 995 | 1,020 | | |
Class II. of four rooms | 960 | 960 | 960 | 960 |
Class III. of five rooms| 372 | 675 | 1056 | 1056 | 1232
Ditto | 446 | 459 | 459 | 781 | 1468
------------------------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------

It may be information valuable to a town surveyor, if before closing this chapter I draw attention to the provisions of the Municipal Corporations Act 1882, sec. 3, which gives corporations power to convert any corporate land into sites for working men’s dwellings, although the corporation are not authorised to erect the dwellings thereon.

[199] The term “officer of health,” as respects any urban sanitary
district in England, means the medical officer of health appointed by
the urban sanitary authority under the Public Health Act 1875 (42 & 43
Vic. c. 64, s. 3).

[200] The town surveyor is usually employed for this work.

[201] _Vide_ ‘Industrial Dwellings from a Sanitary point of View,’ by
John Price, Resident Agent, Newcastle-on-Tyne Industrial Dwellings
Company, read September 28th, at the Congress of the Institute, held
at Newcastle-on-Tyne.