The Express.
London, England, 1867-01-10 00:00:00

OVERCROWDING OP DWELLINGS IN THE

METROPOLIS.

A deputation from the evicted Tenants' Aid
Association waited upon Lord Derby yesterday afternoon,
at his otbeial residence, Downing-street, on the subject of
metropolitan overcrowding. It included Mr. Liunmus
Banks, the secretary ; the Right Hon. G. J. Geechen,
M.P. ; the Marquis Toernshend ; Mr. Torten', M.P. ;
the Hon. Mr. Yinnaird, M.P. ; Mr. Ayrton, M.P. ; Mr.
G. Cruikshank, Mr. J. Ozenford, Mr. J. A. Heraud, Mr.
S. C. Hall, and considerable number of the clerical and
medical professions. Several other of the metropolitan
members had signified their intention of being present,
but were unavoidably prevented.
Lord DERBY (who was accompanied by Mr. Ward Hunt),
upon taking his seat, said the question the deputation
wished to bring before him was one of such great impor-
tante, that he had asked Mr. Hunt, who had taken much
interest in the question, to be present. The question they
had met to consider bad engaged his (Lord Derby's) at-
tention for several years, and he should be very glad if the
government could have the opportunity of securing
the co-operation and advice of the gentlemen of the depu-
tation with regard to any practical measure that might be
devised to remedy what was, without question, a serious
and growing evil.
_ _

The blanjuis Tommie:to said he had been requested
to introduce the deputation from the Evicted Tenants'
Aid Association, whose views had been embodied in a rue-
moriaL _ _

zjipitt. rad sad prionleCaosainielel,
Lord Dient.inftnired whet was the precise diameter of
Mr. Torreon' biU, to which reference was made in the
memorial?

Mr. Touae•s, M.P., said the object of his bill, so far
as it was adopted by the select committee, was con-
curred in by several members of the present government.
Mr. Walpole, the Duke of Buckingham, and Mr. Dierseli
had assured him individually that they approved of the
purport of the bill, and thought, if there had been time,
It would have received aid from the Treasury Bench. It
proposed to give power to the Metropolitan Board of
Works to constitute local authorities for the purposes of
the sot in the entire metropolis, with the exception of the
City of London, and upon these authorities would devolve
the duty of seeing that houses unlit for human habitation
should be closed until repaired or rebuilt. In default
these authorities would be empowered to take the houses
down, means being of course provided for judicious corn-
pensation to the owners. The select committee sat for
three months, and agreed generally in the measure, with
the exception of Mr. Henley, who felt some difficulty on
the question of compensation to owners of houses suffer-
ing from the operations of the ant. The majority, however,
of the committee came to the conclusion that if the Tree-
, sury could be induced to advance on moderate interest the
cost of rebuilding, the rent (which experience had shown
could be relied upon with certainty) and the sale of the
' buildings would in most cases enable the Metropolitan
Board to repay the Treasury in a certain term. He would
not trouble his lordship with the numerous details of the
bill, but would merely repeat what lie said in the House
of Commons at the close of last session on dwellings, that
his only object in introducing the measure was to urge
upon parliament the necessity of legislating upon what his
lordship had rightly described as a serious and growing
eviL Nothing would be more gratifying to the association
than to know that the government of the day intended to
take up the question, and to be able to render that govern.
ment every assistance in their power. Although he had
given notice to introduce his bill early in the session, he
should be only too happy to be relieved from that duty if
the deputation could obtain from the Premier any hope
that the government would take up the question.
Lord Deter said, if he understood the matter rightly,
; it was proposed that if house property were condemned as
I unit for human habitation, there should be a power pro-
vided for securing the property at a valuation from the
' owners, and building upon the site houses of a superior
character. Of course the object was to give more decent
accommodation in the same space. But how did that
meet the difficulty of evictions for purposes of public im-
provement, or any other requirement of a similar kind!
A landlord, for instance, might pull down a whole street.
' In what way did the proposed bill meet the ease! Did
I Mr. Tureens contend that, without overcrowding, a larger
number of persons might be accommodated upon the same
space before occupied by the same number of dwellings!
Assume for a moment that parliament had a right to
say, " This property is in such a condition that it is a public
nuisance, and you shall be compelled to part with it, if
mat part with it otherwise, ' where would be the
advantage!

Mr. Mtrox, M.P., said there were two questions
raised ; one was involved in Mr. Torrens' bill, and the
other was the question of evictions. His lordship would
see that the houses which, under Mr. Torrens' bill, would
be condemned were of a class not originally intended for
dwellings of the poorer classes. They were built for the
tesidenee of a single family, and in the course of time had
been misappropriated for lodging-houses, in which capacity
they accommodated, in the worst possible manner, a sinall
number of persons. If these houses were pulled down,
and six instead of three story buildings erected, with im•
proved rooms,twice the number of persons could be pro-
vided with superior accommodation.
Lord DERBY hoped the deputation would not imagine
be was trying to find objections. On the contrary, he was
only anxious to know bow the proposed remedy was prac-
ticable. Did it not follow that if a house was raised from
three to six stories, the necessities of ventilation would
require greater space? Would there not be loot horizontally
what was gained vertically?
Mr. Ainrox thought that it would not necessarily be
so. At present the houses were let to the worst advan-
tage. and being wholly unsuitable for the purposes for
which they were used, the inmates lived in a very disgust-
ing and discreditable manner.
Mr. Tonnes said his bill would deal with two descrip-
tions of property. In the older parts of London, the
houses were originally built three and four stories high ;
but the rooms were not lofty, and when they were occu-
pied by two or three families, the state of things was
really deplorable. The cubic space required for the basis
of the building would enable wholesome airy dwellings to
be rowed of five or six stories high. Then there we. an-
other description of property. New buildings had been
run up rapidly only two stories high, generally without an
underground story, and they were not lass deserving of
consideration than the others. These houses were
wretchedly built, were destitute of proper sewerage and
ventilation, and had small inconvenient rooms. The gain
would be clear if upon the space they occupied higher and
better houses could be built. The bill postponed from last
session did not deal with the question of evictions, but
merely with overcrowded, and pestilential dwellings.
Lord DERBY remarked as this was a deputation from
the Evicted Tenants' Aid Association, it would hardly do
to omit the question of evictions altogether.
Mr. AYerox pointed out the paragraph in the memorial
bearing upon that part of the subject.
Lord DERBY said if the proposal was to purchase pro-
perty at a valuation it really became a question of rent.
Was Mr. Torrens then of opinion that after the property
was purchased and the government had lent the money
on the proposed tams, the same classes of persons could
he accommodated at the same or lower rent, and the
• operation made remunerative to the persons concerned!
I Mr. Toinutire thought so.
Lord DERRY would like to be sure upon the point,
because, so far as lie could see, the whole thing turned
upon it. A national question f this kind should never
be looked upon as a mere philanthropic scheme—it must
be an affair that would pay.
j Mr. G. CRIRIERHANIC said that, having had great expe-
-1 Hence amongst the classes sought to be benefited by the
proposals under consideration, he begged to observe that
any step taken in the direction now talked of would
be the commencement of the rebuilding of a large
• portion of the metropolis. From plans he had
on his possession, he was satisfied that a much
larger number of persons might be accommodated upon
the same space, and be made to enjoy larger and better
ventil.tted rooms than under present circumstances. There
had been model lodging-houses built that were very well
so far as they went ; but it was a great mistake to build
blocks of houses of that kind. Entire streets should be
built, and it was of the utmost importance that every
contemplated erection should have a shop. According to
a plan he had in his possession, the shop and shop resi-
dence were distinct from the lodgers' portion. Acct.'s
was obtained by an open regular staircase. He was yogi-
; tive, if the experiment were made, it would be seen at
once that the accommodation was ample, and that it
would be satisfactory not only as a benevolent, but specu-
lative project. The fact was it was useless to think of
building places for the accommodation of the lowest grade
of society, because no decent persons could be got to live
near them. What ought to be provided was accommo.
, dation for the respectable and decent of the labouring
1 _

---
Lord DERRY-But what are you to do with those who
are not respectable and decent? (Hear, hear.)
Mr. CM:II(.O4aNIC said be was coining to that. As
soon as the respectable and decent moved out of the houses
in which they were living into the better ones that would
be built, the others could take their places. (No, no.)
Houses could never be built for the latter. They would
never pay the rent. (No, no.)
Mr. none sox gave instances where the financial part
of the question raised had been satisfactorily answere.l by
actual experiment; and Mr. Stedall, • medical officer,
spoke of the imperfect and expensive lodgings of the poor,
Lord Derby remarking in the course of the conversation
that government could not be expected to pay for poor
people's lodgings.
Mr. Ai irron said he saw no reason why dwellings for
the poor should not be provided in the some way as
increaaect accommodation for carriage drives. If streets