The Sun.
London, England, 1860-04-02 00:00:00

lies would have the least means of paying rent,
while the larger of the houses suggested by Mr.
Chesshyre would cost more than the others. They
would best meet the wants of the labouring classes
by having houses of various sizes, instead of each
being a repetition of the other. A man might then
choose his own house, and he could not be
compelled to take a large one if he wanted a small
one.

Mr. CHESSHYRE said the model on the table was
only brought here to give an idea of the thing
wanted, and which might be done ; there was no
intention of adopting that or any other particular
plan. It was not; however, possible for the share-
holders to decide these things at their general
meetings; the matter must be left in the hands of
the directors; and if Mr. Hatchard, who was a
practical man, would allow his name to be put down
as a director, he might render material assistance.
At present it was not proposed to enter upon an
extensive building scheme, and it would, there-
fore, be impossible to erect a great variety of cot-
tages. The principalthing was to present a model
for a good cottage. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. HATCHARD said he was willing to act as a
director, if his services were of any use.
Mr. DIMSDALE said he had received a letter from
a shareholder, proposing that they should offer
prizes for the best plans ; but recently he had had
some conversation with Mr. Payne, a practical man,
and well up in these matters, who advised him that
very little good was to be got out of the course sug-
gested, and when they had got a good plan from a
practical man, it was better to take it than seek
suggestions from all quarters. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. POLLARD (of the Iferts Guardian) said that
some friends of his in the town were disposed to be-
come shareholders, but they entertained the objec-
tion that, if too many of this class of houses were
built in one parish, it would have the effect of making
more poor persons chargeable to that parish. The
cottages proposed to be built ought to be divided
fairly between the different parishes. Mr.Hatchard's
suggestion that the cottages should be of different
sizes, was a very reasonable ime, for if a labouring
man had only one or two children, he did not want
the same sized house as if he had five or six.
The CHAIRMAN--This is a matter which mutt, I
think, be left to the directors.
The Hon. and Rev. G. HASTINGS said it struck
him that one of the primary objects of this company
was to put before the landlords a good model cot-
tage. The question raised by Mr. Pollard was one
which should be put before the landlord. It was too
large a suggestion to be carried out in the small
movement at present contemplated by this com-
pany.
Mr. POLLARD—How many cottages do you pro-
pose to build ?
Mr. R. DIMSDALE—Six or eight. It is possible
to build two with two bedrooms each.
Mr. CHESSHYRE said the cottages he should sug-
gest would be built in pairs, with two rooms below,
and five rooms over, three for one cottage and two
for the other. They might by this means get more
space for the three rooms; and if the cottage with
two bedrooms were let to a married man without
children, he might add to his means by taking in a
lodger. He did not suppose that any one would
suggest that they should build a cottage with a
single bedroom;
Mr. J. GRIPPER said he could not agree with
the suggestions of Mr. Hatchard, nor with some
others that had been thrown out. His object was
not to build the cheapest cottages, but to improve
the dwellings of the poor. He would take it in
this way—that labouring men could pay what
they paid now; and rather than give them the
cheapest cottages it was possible to erect, he would
improve their condition and their means of earning
money to pay their rent with greater ease, by
giving them better accommodation. (Hear, hear.)
He did not think it worth their while to form a
company merely to build cheap cottages. It was
of far more importance to improve their condi-
tion by providing for them suitable dwellings,
in which they would enjoy better health, and
consequently, incur less expense for sickness, while
they would have more comforts and be more dis-
posed to stay at home. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. CHESSHYRE—Mr. Gripper had said that the
labouring man could afford to pay the rent he now
paid, but where did he get the means ? Were not
employers robbed to an extent that was scarcely
credible ? And in illness it was not the labourer
who had to pay, but the parish. If a man earning
11s. a week, and having six or seven children, paid
3s. a week for rent, how could he honestly provide
the common necessaries of life out of the remaining
Bs. ? No one who looked at the sort of cottages in
which labourers lived, in and around Hertford, but
must be convinced that a vast amount of good might
be done by providing better cottages, as they pro-
posed to do, for less money. They knew how the
rent was now paid, in some by the very worst
means ; and it was only by reducing the amount of
rent that they could remedy this evil. If they
could only secure the payment of proper wages to
the labourer, he should be glad, indeed, to see him
in a still better cottage at a higher rent. (Hear.)
Mr. J. GRIPPER said his objeet was to improve
and benefit the labouring classes, and that could
not be done by putting them in hovels. In his es-
tablishment the labourers earnt at least 18s. a week.
Those were labourers, not artizans, who were paid
much higher wages; and taking it as a fact that
they did pay a certain amount of rent now, he
would improve their condition, so that they might
pay it with greater ease, instead of putting them
into the cheapest dwelling that could be built for
them. With reference to what had been said about
sickness, he thought it clear that whatever assist-
ance a poor man might receive at those times, sick-
ness always made him poorer, and that if the health
of himself and his family was improved, he would
be benefited in every way.
Mr. POLLARD said labourers might be divided
into three classes—skilled artizans, who earned
from 21s. to 30s. a week; labourers to merchants,
who earned 18s. a week; and agricultural labourers,
who earned from 1 ls. to 14s. Mr. Gripper's
labourers were better paid than agricultural
labourers, and could afford to pay higher rents ;
and this brought them back to Mr. Hatchard's
suggestion—that different kinds of cottages should
be built.
The CHAIRMAN—As we have very limited means,
we must try to benefit the labourers of the lowest
class first.
Mr. POLLARD—In the village I was brought up in
the agricultural labourer did not pay more than 2s.
per week rent. That was in one of the Midland
counties.
The CHAIRMAN said it wa3 better that persons of
small means should have dwellings the rents of
which they could pay honourably.
Mr. POLLARD—That will follow as a matter of
course.
Mr. HosKINs thought it was best to adopt the
principles which they found safest in life, and take
a just medium between two extreme courses. They
had entered into this company with purely bene-
volent feelings, and looked for no large pecuniary
return ; but as they proposed to set an example, and
show what could be done, they should have regard
to cost and rent. Their object was to provide as
good cottages as they could without making the
rent so high as to exclude those they wanted to
place in them. But they did not want to make it
too low, so as to remove from the mind of the
labouring man the idea that he must depend upon
himself. (Hear, hear.) If their plans succeeded he
hoped that in the course of two or three years theY
would have eighty or a hundred cottages built; but
if, commencing with the erection of so small a num-
ber as six or eight cottages, they introduced a
greater variety than had, been suggested by Mr.
Chesshyre, namely, cottages with two or three
rooms up-stairs, they must have as many different
scales of rent as varieties of building, and would get
into confusion. On every ground he thought it
undesirable to have more than two styles of cot-
tage. (Hear, hear.)
The Hon. and Rev. G. HASTINGS said he took
a somewhat different view of the question from
almost every one who had spoken. This Company
arose out of another Society—the Hertford
Labourers' Friend Society, originated by Lord
Raynham; and it 'struck Mr. R. Dimsdale, that
one of the most practicable means of improving the
condition of the labourer was by the erection of
model cottages. It was not, however, so much in-
tended to provide cottages for the poor, as to build
a few to show landlords what nice, comfortable,
well e
built for a small sum of money. They would
further,
St.
in,n s T teheubljaencdtlowrdas's
tpurouvreinutceinifHtehretyforwd,enatt
hiand other places, model cottages which
gentlemen
ght see as they passed by and be in-
duced to adopt. That was his idea in
,joining this
wantedh S it abl e dwellings in hu
countyww iothrkmtfuoourr.
dp
Gritouhrvietipdhpe provide
s Gripper labourer
hutewhmauthat
nhwua
yec.a sr
hear.)
the
He agreed landlords'
(bweff:
ieniter
aepirtam,
if these were provided, the labourer would be bene-
fitted physically, morally, and in every way ; but
he thought their present object was not to erect a
large number of houses and become a rich Com-
pany. (Hear, hear.) As an illustration of the
usefulness of their operations, he might mention
that he was going up to London by railway the
other day, when a gentleman asked him whether
he knew where there was any good model for a
cottage ? and he told him that before long they
would have some good model cottages at Hertford.
(Hear, hear.) Mr. Hastings concluded by pro-
posing--" That the following gentlemen be ap-
pointed Directors of the Company:—The Marquis
Townshend ; the Right Hon. W. F. Cowper, M.P.;
Viscount Raynham, M.P. ; Martin Hadsley Gos-
selin, Esq., William R. Baker, Esq., Charles John