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

HERTFORD BUILDING COMPANY.

The first ordinary meeting of the shareholders in
the Hertford Building Company (established for
the purpose of building and improving dwellings for
the working, classes) was held at the Shire-hall on
Tuesday; Itl. H. Gosselin, Esq., presided. Amongst
the shareholders present were—the Hon. and Rev.
Godolphin Hastings, R. Dimsdale, Esq., J. W.
Chesshyre, Esq., G. E. Hyde, Esq., Jasper Gripper,
Esq„ E. H. Hoskins, Esq., E. Lewis, Esq., W. M.
Armstrong, Esq., Mr. S. Hatchard, Mr. Ludlow,
Mr. S. Andrews, Mr. W. Wilds, 8:c.
The CHAIRMAN said they had met to-day to com-
lete the constitution of the company, which had
been duly registered, by the appointment of direc-
tors and auditors and other officers to carry out the
objects which they had in view. It would also be
necessary to make a call upon the shareholders in
order that they might commence operations. He
was sorry that the attendance at this important
meeting was so scanty,• but those of their friends
who were kept away by other engagements would
doubtless be satisfied with what was done at this
meeting. He would call on Mr. Dimsdale to pro-
pose the first resolution.
Mr. R. DIMSDALE said the company had now
arrivedat that stage of its proceedings when, having
been registered under the Act of Parliament, it was
necessary to take further steps to complete its orga-
nisation. The number of shares already taken was
379, and the donations amounted to the sum of
£195. They had, therefore, the means of commenc-
ing their work. It was not proposed, in the first in-
stance, to enter upon any very extensive scheme.
At the outset it would probably be sufficient to erect
half-a-dozen cottages, after some of the excellent
plans and models upon the tables ; and if they
were successful in producing at a reasonable
cost a suitable class of dwellings, others would
be induced to assist them, and they might easily
extend their operations. Amongst the many good
plans upon Ithe table, there were some according
to which they might build excellent cottages at
£9O each ; and he had seen a gentleman who was
willing to give them a small piece of land on one of
the roads going out of Hertford at a moderate price.
If, then, they could build cottages at £7O or £BO
each, they would be able to make a start with a
capital of £5OO or £6OO. Amongst the questions
suggested at the very outset of this undertaking,
there was one of great importance—What sum can
the labouring man be expected to pay as rent ?
Now, in answer to that, he would say that if they
fixed their rents at £6 a year they would be giving
the labourer a good cottage for less money than he
could at present get anything that was fit to live
in. (Hear.) And if that were the sum fixed, it would
give them for six cottages an annual rental of £36
on—say an expenditure of £620. That would be a
good income to start with. It would be rather more
than 6 per cent., and if they deducted 1 per cent.
for a sinking fund, there would be 5 per cent. left
for the shareholders. (Hear, hear.) In his opinion
the best thing they could do was to carry out their
scheme on a small scale at first, and see how it
answered. With this view they proposed to com-
mence by making a call upon the shareholders to
the extent of £2 10s. a share, which would produce
a little short of £l,OOO, and as they would only want
between £6OO and 1700 to build three pair of
cottages, the balance might remain at their bankers.
He was sorry that there was not a larger number
of shareholders present, as he was most anxious to
elicit their opinions ; but amongst those around
him there were practical men fully competent to
form a judgment on all the matters which would
come under their notice. He begged to propose—
" That a call of £2 10s. per share be made on the
shareholders in the Hertford Building Company
(Limited), payable on or before the Ist of May next,
and that interest at the rate of 5 per cent. per
annum be charged on all calls unpaid on that day."
Mr. CHESSIIYItE, in seconding the motion, said
he hoped he should not be taxing the patience of the
shareholders, if he entered into a somewhat more
detailed statement of the position and plans of the
company than they had just listened to. Mr.
Dimsdale and himself differed a little in figures, and
the proposition which occurred to him was a rather
larger one than that which Mr. Dimsdale had sub-
mitted. The shareholders were aware that no Joint
Stock Company could be carried on without the
observance of certain regulations as prescribed by
the particular Act of Parliament under which it was
established. This Company had been formed and
registered under an Act of Parliament passed in
1856, called the " Limited Liability Act," which pro-
vided that no shareholder should be responsible for
more than the amount of the shares for which he had
subscribed, that there should be annual meetings of
the shareholders, and that at the first of those meet-
ings directors should be appointed (which was one of
the propositions to be submitted to-day.) There were
rules relative to the keeping of a register of the share-
holders, and other stringent regulations prescribed
by the Act of Parliament,—and that at all meetings,
shareholders should be entitled to vote according to
the number of shares held by them. He just men-
tioned these particulars, because very few people
really understood the nature of companies of this
description. Now it would be apparent that the suc-
cess of such an undertaking depended solely on the
judgment and discretion of the directors. In con-
sidering any plans that might be submitted to them
for the erection of cottages the question of cost
would be of main importance, and it would also
be necessary that every part of the work should be
erected in a substantial manner. No pay was at-
tached to any office in the company, and there-
fore a considerable onus rested upon those who un-
dertook the management of the company. In saying
this, he was anxious to explain how it happened
that Mr. Dimsdale's name and his own appeared as
managing directors. It was necessary that some-
body should pay the fees, and go through the form
of registering the company, and they had been ap-
pointed at the last board meeting to that office.
They were mainly indebted to Mr. Dimsdale for
the extent of their share list, and for the amount of
the donations received, for he had taken upon him-
self the trouble of writing to parties and inducing
them to assist in the undertaking. For himself he
could say that he should be happy to continue his
services as long as he could find time to devote to the
promotion of its interests. (Cheers.) Nearly 400
shares, representing a capital of £2,000, had been
subscribed and the call of £2 lOs proposed to be made
would realise about £l,OOO, which would be invested
at interest and withdrawn as the building works pro-
gressed. It had not, of course, yet been decided to
what purpose the donation fund of nearly £2OO should
be applied, but he thought that a portion of it might
be fairly applied towards the preliminary and other
incidental expenses in the establishment of the Com-
pany. There was a great deal more than at first sight
appeared in the proposal to erect a few model cot-
tages in the neighbourhood of Hertford ; and if this
had been the aim and end of the company, he cer-
tainly should never have devoted so much time to
such an object, because the good to be done would
have been confined within so narrow a limit' that
he should have felt his time and labour might have
been much better employed. But the fact of the
existence of such a company had already drawn
attentiox in this neighbourhood to the wretched
accommodation for the labouring-classes • and had
induced inquiry to be made as to the general
cost of cottage building, the description of cottage
best suited to meet the requirements of the
poor, and the rent a man can afford to pay.
In reference to the latter point—the rent an
agricultural labourer could afford to pay—he some-
what differed with Mr. Dimsdale. It was true that
no decent accommodation could now be obtained in
the town of ,Hertford by the labouring man for a
rent of £6, or even higher. Their means and their
plans at present went no further than the building
of a certain number of cottages ; but their success
in this beginning would secure increased patronage,
and would, he hoped, enable them to do something
towards remodelling and improving existing dwell-
ings in overcrowded courts and alleys in villages
and towns, and in erecting buildings of that much
needed class—common lodging houses. (Hear,
hear.) The proposed plan of erecting a few
model cottages was entirely experimental—the ob-
ject being to ascertain whether or not it was pos-
sible to build them at such a cost as would remu-
nerate the proprietor; and if they were successful
in that experiment there could be little doubt that it
would stimulate others to turn their attention to the
subject, and thus indirectly effect a vast amount of
good. (Hear, hear.) If as a company:they failed
in obtaining a large return on their investment, it
would not follow that landed proprietors might
not, in the erection of cottages on their own land,
reap the advantages of improved cultivation, and
the blessing of a comfortably housed population
around them, And if so, the company would in
some measure have been instrumental in effecting
this desirable change. (Hear, hear.) Now it was
Perfectly clear that the object of this company—
the improvement of the condition of the labouring
classes, by the erection of model cottages and other
dwellings, could never be effected unless the rentals
charged were within the means of those whom the
company proposed to benefit. It would be absurd
to build a villa residence, awl offer it to a labouring
man for £2O a year ; and equally so to build a
cottage, and ask him to pay a rental exceeding, in
amount that which, on a fair calculation of his
average wagee, he could afford to pay, at the same
time providing for himself and family the common
necessaries of life. Nor would it have been possi-
ble to establish this company if the principle of
providing the labourer with a house at a rental he
could afford to pay had not been kept in view.
Those who had taken sltares had not done so with
a view to profit, though many undoubtedly looked
for some return ' • whilst those who had assisted the
company with donations regarded the movement

entirely from a benevolent point of view, and
looked for no return at all. To meet the views of
both parties, it was essential not only that good
and commodious dwellings should be erected for
the working classes, but that they should be
erected at the least possible cost, and that that cost
should not exceed a sum upon which a moderate
and fair rental would give a return of not less
than three or four per cent. Although there were
various opinions as to the description of dwelling,
in minor details, best suited to meet the require-
ments of an agricultural district, all appeared
to agree upon one point—that no cottage could
afford proper accommodation for a married man
with a family exceeding two or three children of
different sexes, and beyond a certain age, which did
not possess at least one sitting-room and three bed-
rooms ; but if any ordinary parish were selected, it
would probably be found that, if one half of the
cottages for familios had a sitting-room and two bed-
rooms, the requirements of the district would be
amply provided for. This was not taking into con•
sideration the question of cottages for single men,
who might find a home in the second class of cot-
tages, occupied by married men without families.
Then, it was also generally admitted that detached
cottages, built in pairs, were preferable to cottages
, built in an unbroken line. (Hear, hear.) Now,
supposing these opinions met the views of the di-
rectors, and that it was decided on commencing
operations by building a certain number of such
cottages as he (Mr. Chesshyre) had suggested, in
the immediate vicinity of this town—the first
question to be considered was the cost of erection
and of the purchase of land. The quantity of land
required would depend upon the number of cottages
proposed to be built, and the cost of purchase very
much upon the generosity of its owner. The value
of land near the town of Hertford, fortunately, was
not so great as in the neighbourhood of some towns;
and if they reckoned from £3 10s. to £4 an acre
per annum, they were stating about the average
rentals paid. Therefore they might fairly expect to
purchase an acre of land on an eligible site for about
£l2O, though he confessed he was not at this moment
prepared to name any owner who would. sell such land
at all. (Hear.) Taking it, however, for granted that
a movement of this kind would be liberally met by
the owners of property, they might calculate on pur-
chasing an acre of land for about £l2O. Well, an
acre of land would be amply sufficient for the
erection of eight cottages, in pairs, containing, on
the ground-floor of each, a good-sized sitting-room
and small kitchen; and, on the upper floor, three
bed-rooms over one part and two over the other.
Taking, then, the land at £l2O, and the four double
cottages at £l6O each (£640), the total cost would
be £760, to which must be added, for fences and
extras, at least £4O, making in all £BOO for the
eight model cottages. There was no doubt that
cottages of this class, if thrown into the market,
would command rentals of at least £7 10s. per
annum, or £l5 the pair, which would make a
return of no less than 71 per cent. on the in-
vestment ; but the question then arose whether
the labouring classes, for whose especial benefit
this company proposed to erect cottages, could
afford to pay a rental of 3s. per week out of the
average wages which they received. Upon in-
quiry, he found that the rentals paid by agricul-
tural labourers in parishes in the surrounding
country varied from ls. 3d. to 2s. per week ; but
in no case did he find that the variation depended
ou the rate of wages adopted in those particular
parishes. Without going further into this difficult
question, which depended so much on the number
of a man's family, the description of labour he had
to perform, and whether his employment were con-
stant or not, he would assume that a labourer with
a family, earning 1 ls. per week during the whole
year, could afford to pay £4los. a-year, which was
little less than is. 9d. per week, for his cottage.
Taking, then, four of the cottages as producing this
amount, and the other four let at 10s. a-year less,
they had this result : the cottages would produce
£34 per annum, which would be about 4 per cent.
on the capital invested. Each cottage would have
little less than an eighth of an acre of land for
garden purposes. (Hear, hear.) Now, he confessed
that he felt considerable diffidence in offering
these calculations to the notice of the shareholders,
because he had been often told that cottage property
was the worst possible investment. Landowners
would not regard it as a bad investment if they
could get 4+ per cent. ; but then they must recollect
that no man, unconnected with land, thought he
made a good building investment if he did not get
from 71 to 10 per cent. It would be easy, however,
to show that, as compared with investments in land
and in connection with land, cottage property was
a profitable investment in various ways. (Hear.)
It, however, unfortunately happened that there
was a prevalent opinion amongst landed proprietors
in this county, and, indeed, in the country gener-
ally, that the erection of cottages on their estates
had the effect of creating a burden on the land in
the shape of poor-rates, instead of enhancing its
value. Hence, instead of erecting cottages for la-
bourers employed upon their e.tateo, they made no
provision for the increased demand of that descrip-
tion of dwellings ; and where such dwellings had
been erected, the style adopted had entailed such a
large outlay that it would be absurd to expect any-
thing like a moderate return for the investment.
No one who had travelled much in this country but
must have been struck by the contrast presented by
the cottages to be met with in agricultural districts.
In immediate contiguity to the common lath and
plaster and thatched cottages of the olden style—
which, if water-tight, were certainly not air-tight
—they observed large, roomy, substantial houses,
more like villas than labourers' cottages, and which
had been erected at a cost of from £l5O to £2OO. It
was certainly not to be wondered at that such pro-
perty did not pay. (Hear.) With regard to the
question of increased poor-rates, and also the I:em u-
nerativencss of cottage property, he would, with
the permission of the meeting, read a very sensible
practical letter of Mr. Christopher Neville, published
in the Times two years ago, and which to his mind
furnished the most conclusive argument he had
met with on the subject, not only with reference
to the pecuniary part of the question, but also with
regard to the advantages of increased accommoda-
tion for the labourer on the land on which he had
to work. The letter was as follows:
" In an excellent article in your last Monday's paper you
say, ' A good cotta;;•e let to an agricultural labourer is not
remunerative, at least we shall be glad to be corrected on
this point.' I hope to be able to show you that judicious
cottage building for agricultural labourers is remunerative.
It is admitted that 3 per cent. is an ample net return for
landed property. Now, I will say nothing of the ruinous
consequences in a national point of view of the present in-
human system of dividing a parish into the three or four
farms of 500 or 700 acres each, and driving the unfortunate
labourers into wretched habitations three or four miles off;
but I will take the case of an individual proprietor owning
an entire parish.
" It is quite sufficient if half the cottages have three bed-
rooms and half have only two. A plain good cottage of
bricks and tile can be built for £75 by building two to-
gether, with five bed-rooms over the living rooms. A la-
bourer can well afford to pay £4los. a-year for one of these
cottages and half an acre of land, usually let at £1 per acre,
so £4 is left to pay the interest of £75, which is 51 per cent.
Deducting 31 per cent. there is more than 11 per cent. for
a reserved fund, which would build the cottage over again
in 50 years. The cottage would, however, be very goo in
that time, and therefore an agricultural labourer can pay
31 per cent. and pay for building his cottage himself. If
only one hour a -day is saved in going to his work and re-
turning home, it amounts to more than 300 hours a-year,
or 30 days of 10 working hours each, which at 2s. a-day is
£3 a-year ; but a labourer can earn much more than 2s.
a-day in his own garden. All this I know by my own ex-
perience for many years.
" I have, now, however, to meet the objection of increased
poor-rates. It has been proved by Mr. Knight, in his able
book upon the Poor •law,that the parish where the labourer
spends his wages is far more enriched than the parish where
arsm sebaerreeolyf
improved
earns them; and it is clearly shown that, whereas open
or populous parishes have doubled and trebled in value in a
certain
years,
close
vparishesalue.
Ihna have
obediencein most
t ordi-
naryo th
law, I had •
to give £.50 for a sin ;le rood of leasehold land in
the adjoining parish of llarb •because has b
posed to be ruined by cottage3Lild. een sup-
posed
admit that the poor-rates may be increased
smalld freeholds..
creased population, but the landownere
realitymicnrease by an
thein-
poor-rates ; and I had rather pay 3s in the pays
pound upon a
rental of 30s. or £2 an acre, than Is in a the pound upon
rental £1 an acre. The entire parish which I live be-
longs to me, and in no way have I more closely considered
my own real interest than in retaining the
and in adding to the cottages on my estate."
That was a letter which should be published and
read by every landowner in England. (Cheers.)
If he had not already occupied so much of their
time, he would have read ,a speech delivered by
Lord Palmerston at Romsey in December last bear-
ing upon some of the same points, and which was
so much to the purpose, and brought before them
such common-sense views with reference to cottage
property, that every one shouldi
readt, (Hear,
hear.) The real history of overcrowded dwellings
—of courts and alleys, in towns and villages, setting
aside political motives, which induced many to build
them in former days—was, that so little accommo-
dation was provided on the land, that agricultural
labourers were obliged to resort to such places to
live in. (Hear, hear.) In conclusion, he begged
to second the resolution proposed by Mr. Dimsdale.
(Cheers.)
Mr. HATCHAIID said it would have been satisfac-
tory if there had been more models and plans of
cottages, so that they might have unanimously ap-
proved of some one. He was sorry there was not
some design they could all agree to as the best.
He would suggest that a portion of the amount
received in donations should be appropriated as
premiums for working models of cottages, such as
they might be likely to adopt, and that no cot-
tages be built until they had such models. In
the model on the table, the roof was objection-
able, but perhaps, with a little expense, they
might have an improved roof. 1% ith regard to
the rent to be paid, it struck him that as a labour-
ing man's means very much depended upon the
number
of his family, these with the larger farm-