House Property and Its Management

III BLANK COURT (1871)

How this relation between landlord and tenant might be established in some of the lowest districts of London, and with what results, I am about to describe by relating what has been done in the last two years in Blank Court.

In many of the houses the dustbins were utterly unapproachable, and cabbage-leaves, stale fish and every sort of dirt were lying in the passages and on the stairs; in some the back kitchen had been used as a dustbin, but had not been emptied for years, and the dust filtered through into the front kitchens, which were the sole living and sleeping rooms of some families; in some, the kitchen stairs were many inches thick with dirt, which was so hardened that a shovel had to be used to get it off; in some there was hardly any water to be had; the wood was 32eaten away, and broken away; windows were smashed, and the rain was coming through the roofs. At night it was still worse; and during the first winter I had to collect the rents chiefly then, as the inhabitants, being principally costermongers, were out nearly all day, and they were afraid to entrust their rent to their neighbours. It was then that I saw the houses in their most dreadful aspect. I well remember wet, foggy Monday nights, when I turned down the dingy court, past the brilliantly lighted public-house at the corner, past the old furniture outside the shops, and dived into the dark, yawning passage-ways. The front doors stood open day and night, and as I felt my way down the kitchen stairs, broken, and rounded by the hardened mud upon them, the foul smells which the heavy, foggy air would not allow to rise met me as I descended, and the plaster rattled down as I groped along. It was truly appalling to think that there were human beings who lived habitually in such an atmosphere, with such surroundings. Sometimes I had to open the kitchen door myself, after knocking several times in vain, when a woman, quite drunk, would be lying on the 33floor on some black mass which served as a bed; sometimes, in answer to my knocks, a half-drunken man would swear, and thrust the rent-money out to me through a chink of the door, placing his foot against it so as to prevent it opening wide enough to admit me. Always it would be shut again without a light being offered to guide me up the pitch-dark stairs. Such was Blank Court in the winter of 1869. Truly, a wild, lawless, desolate little kingdom to come to rule over.

On what principles was I to rule these people? On the same as I had already tried, and tried with success, in other places, and which I may sum up as the two following: firstly, to demand a strict fulfilment of their duties to me—one of the chief of which would be the punctual payment of rent; and secondly, to endeavour to be so unfailingly just and patient that they should learn to trust the rule that was over them.

With regard to details, I would make a few improvements at once, such, for example, as the laying on of water and repairing of dustbins; but, for the most part, improvements should be made only by degrees, as the people became more capable of valuing them and not abusing them. I would have 34the rooms distempered and thoroughly cleansed as they became vacant, and then they should be offered to the more cleanly of the tenants. I would have such repairs as were not immediately needed used as a means of giving work to the men in times of distress. I would draft the occupants of the underground kitchens into the upstairs rooms, and would ultimately convert the kitchens into bathrooms and washhouses. I would have the landlady’s portion of the house—i.e. the stairs and passages—at once repaired and distempered, and they should be regularly scrubbed, and, as far as possible, made models of cleanliness, for I knew, from former experience, that the example of this would, in time, silently spread itself to the rooms themselves, and that payment for this work would give me some hold over the older girls. I would collect savings personally, not trust to their being taken to distant banks or savings clubs. And, finally, I knew that I should learn to feel these people as my friends, and so should instinctively feel the same respect for their privacy and their independence, and should treat them with the same courtesy that I should show towards any other personal friends. There 35would be no interference, no entering their rooms uninvited, no offer of money or the necessaries of life. But when occasion presented itself I should give them any help I could, such as I might offer without insult to other friends—sympathy in their distresses; advice, help and counsel in their difficulties; introductions that might be of use to them; means of education; visits to the country; a lent book when not able to work; a bunch of flowers brought on purpose; an invitation to any entertainment, in a room built at the back of my own house, which would be likely to give them pleasure. I am convinced that one of the evils of much that is done for the poor springs from the want of delicacy felt, and courtesy shown, towards them, and that we cannot beneficially help them in any spirit different to that in which we help those who are better off. The help may differ in amount, because their needs are greater. It should not differ in kind.

I have learned to know that people are ashamed to abuse a place they find cared for. They will add dirt to dirt till a place is pestilential, but the more they find done for it, the more they will respect it, till at last 36order and cleanliness prevail. It is this feeling of theirs, coupled with the fact that they do not like those whom they have learned to love, and whose standard is higher than their own, to see things which would grieve them, which has enabled us to accomplish nearly every reform of outward things that we have achieved; so that the surest way to have any place kept clean is to go through it often yourself.

Amongst the many benefits which the possession of the houses enables us to confer on the people, perhaps one of the most important is our power of saving them from neighbours who would render their lives miserable. It is a most merciful thing to protect the poor from the pain of living in the next room to drunken, disorderly people. “I am dying,” said an old woman to me the other day; “I wish you would put me where I can’t hear S—— beating his wife. Her screams are awful. And B—— too, he do come in so drunk. Let me go over the way to No. 30.” Our success depends on duly arranging the inmates; not too many children in any one house, so as to overcrowd it; not too few, so as to overcrowd another; not two bad people side by side, 37or they drink together; not a terribly bad person beside a very respectable one.

It appears to me, then, to be proved by practical experience that when we can induce the rich to undertake the duties of landlords in poor neighbourhoods, and ensure a sufficient amount of the wise, personal supervision of educated and sympathetic people acting as their representatives, we achieve results which are not attainable in any other way. I would call upon those who may possess cottage property in large towns to consider the immense power they thus hold in their hands and the large influence for good they may exercise by the wise use of that power. When they have to delegate it to others, let them take care to whom they commit it; and let them beware lest, through the widely prevailing system of subletting, this power ultimately abide with those who have neither the will nor the knowledge which would enable them to use it beneficially.

It is on these things and their faithful execution that the life of the whole matter depends, and by which steady progress is ensured. It is the smaller things of the world that colour the lives of those around us, and it is on persistent efforts to reform 38these that progress depends; and we may rest assured that they who see with greater eyes than ours have a due estimate of the service, and that if we did but perceive the mighty principles underlying these tiny things we should rather feel awed that we are entrusted with them at all, than scornful and impatient that they are no larger. What are we that we should ask for more than that God should let us work for Him among the tangible things which He created to be fair and the human which He redeemed to be pure? From time to time He lifts a veil and shows us, even while we struggle with imperfections here below, that towards which we are working—shows us how, by governing and ordering the tangible things one by one, we may make of this earth a fair dwelling-place. And, far better still, how, by cherishing human beings, He will let us help Him in His work of building up temples meet for Him to dwell in—faint images of that best Temple of all which He promised that He would raise up on the third day, though men might destroy it.

IV THE INFLUENCE OF MODEL DWELLINGS UPON CHARACTER (1892)

As it now seems fairly clear that the working population of London is likely to be more and more housed in “blocks,” it is not very profitable to spend time in considering whether this is a fact to rejoice in or to deplore, except so far as the consideration may enable us to see how far the advantages of the change may be increased or the drawbacks diminished. The advantages of the change are very apparent and are apt to appear overwhelming, and the disadvantages are apt to be dismissed as somewhat sentimental or inevitable. I have, however, little to say upon advantages. They may, I think, be briefly summed up under two heads. It is supposed that better sanitary arrangements are secured in blocks. It is also certain that all inspection and 40regulation are easier in blocks; and on inspection and regulation much of our modern legislation, much of our popular hope is based.

With regard to the sanitary arrangements, I think all who are at all conversant with the subject are beginning to be aware that these at least may be as faulty in blocks as in smaller buildings; but it is undoubtedly true that even where this is so, the publicity of the block enables inspection to be carried out much more easily, and so, theoretically at least, a certain standard can be enforced. And though this is not quite so true in actual practice as those who put their faith in enforcement of sanitary law are apt to imagine, still it is true, and it is a very distinct advantage to be noted.

Your readers may be astonished that I do not put down the greater economy of the block system as a distinct gain, but I am not so wholly sure as may seem that it exists. For, first, room by room the block dwellings are not at all invariably cheaper than those in small houses. Moreover, I think we can hardly permit, and assuredly cannot permanently congratulate and pride ourselves upon, a form of construction which 41admits so very little sunlight into lower floors. So that to the present cost of block buildings must, I should think, be fairly added in the future such diminution of height or such increase of yard space as would allow of the freer entrance of air and light. This would increase the ground-rent payable on each room. I think also that the cheapness of erecting many-storied buildings is exaggerated. I have built very few blocks, but I have been consulted about some, and I have more than once proved in £ s. d. that cutting off a story from the block as shown in the plans was a very small net loss, when cost of building, saving on rates, repairs, etc., and possibly even diminution in wall thickness, justified by the lower elevation, were taken into account. We must also remember the increase of rent gladly paid by the sober and home-loving man for ground-floor rooms lighter and pleasanter than if overshadowed by high blocks. I do not wish to generalize—the matter is one of £ s. d.—but I say that the figures are well worth careful study on each building scheme, and that, as far as the model dwellings are concerned, I think their undue height in proportion to width of yard 42has sometimes been due to the mistaken zeal for accommodating numbers of families. I say mistaken, for with our increased means of cheap transit we should try to scatter rather than to concentrate our population, especially if the concentration has to be secured by dark lower rooms.

With regard to the disadvantages of blocks, I think they may be divided into those which may be looked upon, by such of us as are hopeful, as probably transitory, and those which seem, so far as we can see, quite essential to the block system. The transitory ones are by far the most serious. They are those which depend on the enormously increasing evil which grows up in a huge community of those who are undisciplined and untrained. They disappear with civilization; they are, so far as I know, entirely absent in large groups of blocks where the tenants are the quiet, respectable working-class families who, to use a phrase common in London, “keep themselves to themselves,” and whose well-ordered, quiet little homes, behind their neat little doors with bright knockers, nicely supplied with well-chosen appliances, now begin to form groups where responsible, respectable citizens live 43in cleanliness and order. Under rules they grow to think natural and reasonable, inspected and disciplined, every inhabitant registered and known, School Board laws and laws of the landlord or company regularly enforced, every infectious case of illness instantly removed, all disinfecting done at public cost, is developed a life of law, regular, a little monotonous, and not encouraging any great individuality, but consistent with happy home life, and it promises to be the life of the respectable London working man.

On the other hand, what life in blocks is to the less self-controlled hardly any words of mine are strong enough to describe, and it is abhorred accordingly by the tidy and striving, wherever any—even a small number—of the undisciplined are admitted to blocks, or where, being admitted, there is no real living rule exercised. Regulations are of small avail; no public inspection can possibly, for more than an hour or two, secure order; no resident superintendent has at once conscience, nerve and devotion single-handed to stem the violence, the dirt, the noise, the quarrels; no body of public opinion on the part of the tenants themselves asserts itself: one by one the tidier 44ones depart disheartened, the rampant remain and prevail, and often, though with a very fair show to the outsider, the block becomes a sort of pandemonium. No one who is not in and out day by day, or, better still, night after night; no one who does not watch the swift degradation of children belonging to tidy families; no one who does not know the terrorism exercised by the rough over the timid and industrious poor; no one who does not know the abuse of every appliance provided by the benevolent or speculative but non-resident landlord, can tell what life in blocks is where the population is low class. Sinks and drains are stopped; yards provided for exercise must be closed because of misbehaviour; boys bathe in the drinking-water cisterns; washhouses on staircases—or staircases themselves—become the nightly haunt of the vicious, the Sunday gambling places of boys; the yell of the drunkard echoes through the hollow passages; the stairs are blocked by dirty children, and the life of any decent hard-working family becomes intolerable.

The very same evils are nothing like as injurious where the families are more 45separate, so that, while in smaller houses one can often try difficult tenants with real hope of their doing better, it is wholly impossible usually to try (or to train) them in blocks. The temptations are greater, the evils of relapse are far greater. It is like taking a bad girl into a school. Hence the enormous importance of keeping a large number of small houses wherever possible for the better training of the rowdy and the protection of the quiet and gentle; and I would implore well-meaning landlords to pause before they clear away small houses and erect blocks, with any idea of benefiting the poorer class of people. The change may be inevitable, it may have to come, but as they value the life of our poorer fellow-citizens, let them pause before they throw them into a corporate life for which they are not ready, and which will, so far as I can see, not train them to be ready for it. Let them either ask tidy working people they know, or learn for themselves, whether I am not right in saying that in the shabbiest little two-, four-, six- or eight-roomed house, with all the water to carry upstairs, with one little w.c. in a tiny backyard, with perhaps one dustbin at the end of the court, and even, 46perhaps, with a dark little twisted staircase, there are not far happier, better, yes, and healthier homes than in the blocks where lower-class people share and do not keep in order far better appliances.

And let them look the deeper into this in so far as our reformers who trust to inspection for all education, our would-be philanthropists or newspaper correspondents who visit a court or block once and think they have seen it, even our painstaking statisticians who catalogue what can be catalogued, are unable to deal with these facts. Those who know the life of the poor know—those who watch the effect of letting to a given family a set of rooms in a block in a rough neighbourhood, or rooms in a small house in the same district, know—those who remember how numerous are the kinds of people to whom they must refuse rooms in a block for their own sake, or that of others, know. To the noisy drunkard one must say, “For the quiet people’s sake, No”; to the weak drunkard one must say, “You would get led away, No”; to the young widow with children one must say, “Would not you be better in a small house where the resident landlady would see a 47little to the children?” thinking in one’s heart also, “and to you.” For the orphaned factory girl who would “like to keep mother’s home together” one feels a less public life safer; for the quiet family who care to bring up their children well one fears the bad language and gambling on the stairs. For the strong and self-contained and self-reliant it may be all right, but the instinct of the others who cling on to the smaller houses is right for them.

For, after all, the “home”—the “life”—does not depend on the number of appliances, or even in any deep sense on the sanitary arrangements. I heard a workman once say, with some coarseness but with much truth, “Gentlemen think if they put a water-closet to every room they have made a home of it,” and the remark often recurs to me for the element of truth there is in it, and there is more decency in many a tiny little cottage in Southwark, shabby as it may be—more family life in many a one room let to a family—than in many a populous block. And this is due partly to the comparative peace of the more separate home: for it seems as if a certain amount of quiet and even of isolation 48made family life and neighbourly kindness more possible. People become brutal in large numbers who are gentle when they are in smaller groups and know one another, and the life in a block only becomes possible when there is a deliberate isolation of the family and a sense of duty with respect to all that is in common. The low-class people herd on the staircases and corrupt one another, where those a little higher would withdraw into their little sanctum. But in their own little house, or as lodgers in a small house, the lower-class people get the individual feeling and notice which often trains them in humanity.

Whatever may be the way out of the difficulty, let us hope that it may come before great evil is done by the massing together of herds of untrained people, and by the ghastly abuse of staircases, open all night but not under public inspection, not easily inspected even if nominally so placed. The problem is one we ought all, so far as in us lies, to lay to heart and do what we can to solve. I have not dwelt here on what may be called the “sentimental” objections to blocks. The first is the small scope they give for individual freedom. The second is 49their painful ugliness and uninterestingness in external look, which is nearly always connected with the first. For difference is at least interesting and amusing, monotony never. Let us hope that when we have secured our drainage, our cubic space of air, our water on every floor, we may have time to live in our homes, to think how to make them pretty, each in our own way, and to let the individual characteristics they take from our life in them be all good, as well as healthy and beautiful, because all human life and work were surely meant to be like all Divine creations, lovely as well as good.

V SMALL HOUSES IN LONDON (1886)

“Land is too valuable in London for us to build cottages, we must have blocks.” Let that be granted for the moment; but that does not preclude those who own such cottages from keeping them where they are built. And I wish that any words of mine might avail with even one such owner, to induce him to pause and consider, very seriously, whether, at any rate for a time, he might not manage to drain and improve water supply and roofs, and thoroughly clean such old buildings, instead of sweeping them away. As to cost, the cottages are far more valuable than the cleared space; as to health, they may be made, at a small cost, far more healthy than any but the very best constructed and best managed blocks. As to the life possible in them—of which the charitable and reforming and legislating bodies know so little—it is 51incomparably happier and better. Let us keep them while we can.

And suppose we grant that London is coming to block buildings, and must come to them; the preservation of the cottages gives time for the question of management to be studied and perfected. The improvement may come from the training and subsequent employment of ladies like my own fellow-workers, under the directors of large companies and in conjunction with good resident superintendents. Or it may come from the co-operation of a consultative body of good tenants, to assist the managers. Or it may come by the steady improvement of the main body of the roughest tenants, making them gradually fitted to use things in common. But, seeing in all classes how difficult it is to get anything cared for which is used in common, unless there be some machinery for its management, I think this latter remedy should rather be counted on as making the work easier than as sufficient in itself. While I am on this subject, may I remark that it would be well if those who build blocks would consider, in settling their plans, what machinery they are mainly trusting to for securing good order?

VI LETTERS TO FELLOW-WORKERS — Work under the Ecclesiastical Commissioners. — Payment of Rates by Tenants. — Gardens in London. — The Workers. — The Work. — Spirit of the Work.

In 1872 Miss Octavia Hill began the practice of writing at the end of each year a letter which was sent to all who were associated with her in her work. The following are some selections:

Letter of 1902.—During the past year the Ecclesiastical Commissioners asked us to take charge of some of their property, of which the leases fell in, in Southwark and Lambeth.

In Southwark the area had been leased long ago on the old-fashioned tenure of “lives.” That is, it was held not for a specified term of years, but subject to the life of certain persons. The lease fell in, therefore, quite suddenly, and fifty of the houses, which were occupied by working 53people, were placed under my care. I had only four days’ notice before I had to begin collecting. It was well for us that my fellow-workers rose to the occasion and at once undertook the added duties; well, too, that we were then pretty strong in workers. It was a curious Monday’s work. The houses having been let and sublet, I could be furnished with few particulars. I had a map and the numbers of the houses, which were scattered in various streets over the five acres which had reverted to the Commissioners, but I had no tenant’s name nor the rental of any tenement, nor did the tenants know or recognize the written authority, having long paid to other landlords. I subdivided the area geographically between my two principal South London workers, and I went to every house, accompanied by one or other of them. I learnt the name of the tenant, explained the circumstances, saw their books and learnt their rental, and finally succeeded in obtaining every rent. Many of the houses required much attention, and since then we have been busily employed in supervising necessary repairs. The late lessees were liable for dilapidations, and I felt once more how 54valuable to us it was to represent owners like the Commissioners, for all this legal and surveying work was done ably by responsible and qualified men of business, while we were free to go in and out among the tenants, watch details, report grievous defects, decide what repairs essential to health should be done instantly. We have not half done all this, but we are steadily progressing.

The very same day the Commissioners sent to me about this sudden accession of work in Southwark, they asked me whether I could also take over one hundred and sixty houses in Lambeth. I had known that this lease was falling in to them, and I knew that they proposed rebuilding for working people on some seven acres there, and would consult me about this. But I had no idea that they meant to ask me to take charge of the old cottages pending the rebuilding. However, we were able to undertake this, and it will be a very great advantage to us to get to know the tenants, the locality, the workers in the neighbourhood, before the great decisions about rebuilding are made. In this case I had the advantage of going round with the late lessee, who gave me names, rentals and 55particulars, and whose relations with his late tenants struck me as very satisfactory and human. On this area our main duties have been to induce tenants to pay who knew that their houses were coming down (in this we have succeeded), to decide those difficult questions of what to repair in houses soon to be destroyed, to empty one portion of the area where cottages are first to be built, providing accommodation elsewhere so far as is possible, and to arrange the somewhat complicated minute details as to rates and taxes payable for cottages partly empty, temporarily empty, on assessments which had all to be ascertained, and where certain rates in certain houses for certain times only were payable by the owners whom we represent.

Letter of 1903.—The past year has brought one very large expansion of our work, larger than that of any previous year; and it is started on independent lines, in a way which gives hope for future growth. The Ecclesiastical Commissioners wrote to tell me in the autumn that an area in South London containing twenty-two acres, and with between five hundred and six hundred houses 56on it, was falling in to them at the expiration of a long lease, and they asked me to undertake the management of the property. Bearing in mind what they themselves had said as to providing for the continuity of such work, and with a deep desire not to lose near touch with my own old tenants, workers and places, if I spread my time over still larger areas, I set myself to think whether this new work might not be started from a new centre, and have been fortunate enough to be able to recommend a lady of great power and experience, who consents to undertake this new property, with direct responsibility to the Commissioners.

It was a huge undertaking, and needed much care and labour to start it well, and naturally we were all keen to help. It was a great day when we took over the place. Our seconds-in-command took command manfully for a fortnight of all our old courts, and fourteen of us met on Monday, October 5th, to take over the estate and collect from five hundred to six hundred tenants wholly unknown to us. We organized it all thoughtfully; we had fifteen collecting books and all the tenants’ books prepared, opened a bank account, found a room as an office, and 57divided the area among the workers. Our first duty was to get the tenants to recognize our authority and pay us. I think we were very successful; we got every tenant on the estate to pay us without any legal process, except one who was a regular scamp. We collected some £250, most of it in silver, and got it safely to the bank. Then came the question of repairs; there were written in the first few weeks one thousand orders for these, although, as the whole area is to be rebuilt, we were only doing actually urgent and no substantial ones. All these had to be overlooked and reported on and paid for. Next came pouring in the claims for borough and water rates. We had to ascertain the assessments of every house, the facts as to whether landlord or tenant was responsible, whether the rates were compounded for or not, what allowance was to be claimed for empty houses or rooms. There were two Water Companies supplying the area, and we had to learn which supplied each house.

The whole place was to be rebuilt, and even the streets rearranged and widened, and I had promised the Commissioners I would advise them as to the future plans. These had to be prepared at the earliest date 58possible, the more so as the sanitary authorities were pressing, and sent in one hundred orders in the first few days we were there. It is needless to say with what speed, capacity and zeal the representatives of the Commissioners carried on their part of these preparations, and they rapidly decided on which streets should be first rebuilt. But this only implied more to be done, for we had to empty the streets swiftly, and that meant patching up all possible empty houses in other streets and moving the tenants into them. Fortunately, there were several houses empty, the falling in of the leases having scared some people away. The Commissioners had decided to close all the public-houses on the estate, and we let one to a girls’ club, and had to put repairs in hand to fit it for its changed destination.

The matter now stands thus: we have got through the first quarter; have collected £2,672, mostly in silver; the quarter’s accounts are nearly ready to send in; we have completed the most pressing repairs; have emptied two streets, and plans for rebuilding them are decided on; tenders have been accepted for these, and they have been begun. Plans have been prepared 59for rebuilding and rearrangement of the whole estate, and these are now before the Commissioners for their consideration. They provide a site for rebuilding the parish school, an area of about an acre as a public recreation ground, the substitution of four wide for three narrow streets, and afford accommodation for 790 families in four-roomed and six-roomed cottages, cottage flats, and flats of three- and two-roomed tenements in houses in no case higher than three stories.

But there remains one most important point still under the consideration of the Commissioners. It is whether this domain is to be leased to builders and managed by them and their successors for some eighty years or whether it is to remain under the direct control of the Commissioners. All of you who know anything of how much depends on management will realize how earnestly I trust that they may decide to retain the area, and may feel confident of finding representatives in the future to manage it for them on sound financial principles and in the best interests of tenants and landlords. Those who know what a country landlord can do in a village will 60realize the influence of wise government in such an area. This land is Church land, it adjoins the parish church, it is quite near the Talbot Settlement, established by, and named after, the Bishop of the diocese; surely it should not pass from the control of the owners. If clauses in leases were as wisely planned and as strongly enforced as possible, they could still not be like the living government of wise owners, and since needs and standards are for ever altering, many decisions involving change during the next eighty years may be desirable.

Letter of 1894.—In all these new cottages I am introducing the plan of arranging that the tenants should pay their own rates, the rent being fixed much lower to enable them to do this.

The plan of making weekly tenants responsible for rates is very difficult to work; not being general, the machinery and arrangements do not help us. But I have felt it to be very important, as well as to be worth a great effort. It may be that some of those in authority will realize its value and 61that we may get some help in time. What would conduce most to make the plan succeed would be that some allowance should be made for tenants paying their rates in advance, analogous to, though not naturally so great as, that made to landlords who compound: also that by some means the various payments might be spread over the year, falling due at different quarters. This would go far to mitigate the difficulty for working people of paying a lump sum down twice a year, as is demanded in some London parishes. Weekly or fortnightly collection, which I hear is arranged for in Edinburgh, would manifestly be more costly, but our tenants would manage a quarterly payment pretty easily. However, at present there is no hope of any modification of existing arrangements, and we must do our best to fit in with the present regulations in the several parishes. I hope that, if we lead the van, others will follow, and co-operation may come in time from officials. All newly elected vestrymen might, meantime, do well to try to secure that fuller facts should be inserted on claims and receipts. The words “made,” “due” and “payable” are used in a way not always clear to the ratepayer, 62while the option of paying in separate instalments is often not shown clearly on the claims.

This subject, however, is somewhat technical, and I only refer to it here because it is interesting me deeply. I think it would tend towards municipal economy, likely to tell to the advantage of the time to come.

Letter of 1875.—When I look at the unused bits of ground around a farm or cottage, I sometimes think what they would be worth at the back of a London house.

But even in the front of their houses in a London court, are the poor much better off? I go sometimes on a hot summer evening into a narrow court, with houses on each side. The sun has heated them all day, until it has driven nearly every inmate out of doors. Those who are not at the public-house are standing or sitting on their doorsteps, quarrelsome, hot, dirty; the children are crawling or sitting on the hard, hot stones, till every corner of the place looks alive. Everyone looks in everyone else’s 63way; the place echoes with words not of the gentlest. Sometimes on such a hot summer’s evening, in such a court, when I am trying to calm excited women shouting their execrable language at one another, I have looked up suddenly and seen one of those bright gleams of light the summer sun sends out just before he sets, catching the top of a red chimney-pot, and beautiful there, though too directly above their heads for the crowd below to notice it much. But to me it brings sad thought of the fair and quiet places far away, where it is falling softly on tree and hill and cloud, and I feel that that quiet, that beauty, that space would be more powerful to calm the wild excess about me than all my frantic striving with it.

Leicester Square shows us another thing: such places must be made bright, pretty and neat—a small place which is not so becomes painfully dreary; it is quite curious to notice how little one feels shut in when the barriers are lovely, or contain beautiful things which the eye can rest on. The small enclosed leads which too often bound the view of a back dining-room in London oppress one like the walls of a prison; but 64a tiny cloistered court of the same size will give a sense of repose; and colour introduced into such spaces will give them such beauty as will prevent one from fretting against the boundaries. Strange and beautiful instance this of how—if we recognize the limitations appointed for us, accept them, and deal well with what is given—the passionate longing for more is taken away and a great peace hallows all.

Letter of 1900.—I have been thinking a great deal about how responsible bodies can, in the future, secure such management by trained ladies as has been found helpful in the past. This has turned my attention much more than heretofore to the thought of how to provide more responsible professional workers, for I feel that, however much volunteers may help, it is only to professional workers that responsible and continuous duties can, as a rule, be entrusted, especially by large owners or corporations.

Up to now my professional workers have been among my most zealous and selfless colleagues, always ready to take onerous 65duties, to fill vacant places, to slip out of the way and go to new fields when it seemed best, always ready to help to train others for management in houses, whether in London, the provincial towns, Scotland, Ireland, America, Holland, or any other place from which work came, taking their holidays, when best they could be spared, and in every way proving themselves true helpers by their hearty recognition that what we had to do was to teach, initiate and supplement as many earnest workers as we could. What I owe to them in the past for the devoted help they have thus rendered for now many years, no one will ever know.

But hitherto I or some tried and experienced volunteer have been the responsible person to whom private owners, or men of business or corporations have entrusted their houses; and it is we who have reported upon all business. As a matter of fact, as you all know, we have put all management on a business footing, and with few exceptions have charged the owners the ordinary 5 per cent. on rental usually paid to collectors.

Thinking over all this with regard to the further future and to the larger areas that we can cover, it seemed to me that the present 66plan had its limitations. Even if many more such leaders were found, how would they be known? Could responsible bodies make plans dependent on them? Then I realized that my best plan for the future would be not only to train such volunteers as offered and the professional workers whom we required, but to train more professional workers than we ourselves can use, and, as occasion offers, to introduce them to owners wishing to retain small tenements in their own hands and to be represented in them by a kind of manager not hitherto existing. The ordinary collector is not a man of education, with time to spare, nor does he estimate that his duties comprise much beyond a call at the doors for rent brought down to him and a certain supervision of repairs that are asked for. If there existed a body of ladies trained to more thorough work, qualified to supervise more minutely, likely to enter into such details as bear on the comfort of home life, they might be entrusted by owners with house property. We all can remember how the training of nurses and of teachers has raised the standard of work required in both professions. The same change might be hoped for in the 67character of the management of dwellings let to the poor. Whether or no volunteers co-operated with them would settle itself. At any rate, owners could have, as I have told them they should have, besides their lawyer to advise them as to law, their architect as to large questions of buildings, their auditor to supervise their accounts, also a representative to see to their people and to those details of repair and management on which the conduct of courts or blocks inhabited by working people depends. Where people live close together, share yards, washhouses and staircases, too often there is no one whose business it is to supervise and govern the use of what is used in common or to see how one tenant’s conduct affects others.

Letter of 1879.—I should like, in my letter this year, to note down what it appears to me you are all feeling as to the difference between the charge of a court where the people are your tenants and much other visiting among the poor. The care of tenants calls out a sense of duty founded on relationship; 68the work is permanent, and the definite character of much of it makes its progress marked. Have you ever asked yourselves why you have chosen the charge of courts, with all its difficulties and ties? The burthen of the problems before you has been heavy, and the regularity of the occupation has often demanded of you great sacrifices. Why have you not chosen transitory connection with hundreds of receivers of soup, or pleasant intercourse with little Sunday scholars, or visiting among the aged and bedridden, who were sure to greet you with a smile when you went to them and had no right to say a word of reproach to you about your long absences in the country? Why did you not take up district-visiting, where, if any family did not welcome you, you could just stay away? Because you preferred a work where duty was continuous and distinct and where it was mutual. Because, also, the petty annoyances brought before you at such awkward moments, with so little discretion or good-temper—the smoky chimneys, broken water-pipes, tiresome neighbours, drunken husbands—as well as the great sorrows caused by death, disease, poverty, sin, have called not only 69for your sympathy but for your action. From the greatest to the least, the problems have implied some duty on your part. You have each had to ask yourself, “What ought I, in my relation to the tenants, to do for them in this difficulty?” From the merest trifle of a cupboard key broken in the lock to the future of some family desolated by death, or sunk in misery through drink, all has asked your sympathy, much has demanded your action. I have said the charge of tenants has been valued by you also because the duty is mutual: it implies your determination, not simply to do kindnesses with liberal hand, popular as that would be, but to meet the poor on grounds where they too have duties to you.

Letter of 1890.—I will not in this, which is my one letter of the year to you, my friends and fellow-workers, enter on the great public questions which are attracting an ever-increasing degree of interest.

Whatever be done about free meals, free education (why do we call them free, instead of paid for by charity, by rates, or by 70tax, do you think?)—whatever may happen about strikes or immigration from the country—for you and me there remain much the same great eternal duties, love, thought, justice, liberality, simplicity, hope, industry, for ever; still human heart depends on human heart for sympathy, and still the old duties of neighbourliness continue. Let us see that we fulfil them, each in our own circle, large or small; perhaps we may find the fulfilment of them answer more social problems than we quite expected. Perhaps we may find changes of system effect little reform unless courageous and honest men carry them out with single-mindedness and thought for others.

If the free meal, free education, subsidized house accommodation attract you, will you pause and remember, first, that they are by no means free, but cost someone, somehow, just as much, probably a great deal more, than if provided otherhow? The question, if you get rid of the word “free,” which is deceptive, clears up a little, and becomes, “Is this the best way of, first, providing, and second, paying for these necessities?”

And then, having answered this for yourself, 71see to it that you are wholly single-minded if you advocate this sort of subsidy for the poor. Be sure you do so neither from cowardice nor from ambition. If, indeed, it be pity, genuine kindness and a sense of justice that moves you, then the feeling is so good that in some way I believe it will lead you right; besides, you will keep your power to watch and see and alter as you come face to face with facts, and may modify all systems, and keep the desire to do justice and help in whatever way is seen finally to be really helpful.

But if you let one touch of terror dim your sight and flinch before the most terrible upheaval of rampant force or threat; if, for popular favour, or seat at board, or success on platform, you hesitate to speak what you know to be true, then shall your cowardice and your ambition be indeed answerable for consequences which you little dream of. They may come now, or they may come later, but come they will; for only Truth abides and will stand the test of time. Let us see that we hold her very fast; only those who are loyal to her can.

VII WOMEN MANAGERS—A CROWN ESTATE [2]

A scheme of reconstruction which should be of interest to local authorities about to exercise the new powers conferred upon them by the Housing Act has been undertaken by the Office of Woods on a London estate near Regent’s Park, belonging to the Crown.

The area in question lies to the east of Albany Street. It forms part of an estate, known as the “Marylebone Farm,” which about a hundred years ago was leased by the Office of Woods principally for residential purposes, ample provision being made in the type of building for all classes. The estate includes the Cumberland Basin, connected with the Regent’s Canal; Cumberland Market, an ancient market for the sale of 73hay and straw; and two other open spaces. The Market is now seldom used, but it is still paved with setts and furnished with a weighing-house. The other two spaces are squares, laid out with trees and shrubs, and are managed by the London County Council.

During the last year or two many of the leases of property of the tenement class have fallen in, and others, which are not yet quite due, have been surrendered by the owners in preference to putting the houses into repair.

With the gradual falling in of the leases the Office of Woods were faced with the question whether the site was again to be let on lease or whether it was to be held and managed on behalf of the Crown. The latter course was happily decided upon, and it was resolved to place the property immediately under the care of Miss Jeffery, an experienced house-property manager, trained under Miss Octavia Hill’s system, who has under her a staff of trained women.

The plan of reconstruction, which includes rebuilding most of the houses and altering the course of some of the streets, is being prepared by the Office of Woods. It is intended to convert Cumberland Market 74into a public garden and to form one or more children’s playgrounds in addition.

Rebuilding is hardly to be thought of for the moment. The immediate need is to make the existing houses reasonably fit for habitation. Most of them are dilapidated and some of them are filthy. Backyards have been built over, and in some instances another cottage has been put up, the only entrance to which is through the house which faces the street. The property has been for the most part badly neglected during the later years of the leases, while in the earlier years little care was exercised to see that the conditions of the lease were not departed from.

Miss Jeffery has opened a small office on the estate, as a centre from which the rents of the houses are collected week by week. On their visits the women managers find out what repairs are needed to make the houses habitable and clean, and supervise the repairs already in hand. Miss Jeffery and her assistants are thus in constant touch with the tenants, helping them in many ways and inducing them to do their part in improving their surroundings. While insisting that necessary alterations and 75cleansing must be carried out forthwith, the managers do their best to study the comfort and convenience of the tenants as far as possible. If the tenants must be removed for a time, temporary accommodation is found for them.

It is intended that the number of licensed houses on the estate shall be reduced as the leases fall in, and the managers are taking steps to ensure improved management, on Public House Trust lines, of those that will remain.

About 170 families (representing a population of nearly 1,000) are already paying their rent to the women managers, and fresh houses come in every few weeks. The managers, with the Office of Woods behind them, believe that the work of reconstructing the estate can be successfully accomplished only if they can ensure the good will and co-operation of the present tenants. With this end in view, they called a meeting of the tenants already on their rent-roll in March last, and suggested the formation of a Tenants’ Association. The intentions of the Office of Woods with regard to the estate were explained to the meeting, as well as the reasons for desiring the tenants themselves 76to combine and co-operate in carrying out the scheme. The Association has been formed, a Chairman elected, and several other meetings have since been held. The scope of the scheme has been further explained, and points arising in the management—such as whether rates should be paid direct to the local authority or with the rent—have been discussed. That the powers and responsibilities of a Tenants’ Association are beginning to be realized is shown by the fact that within the last few days a petition has been put forward by the Association, asking that one of the first buildings to be put up on the estate may be a building containing rooms in which working men’s clubs may be held; at present these clubs, several of which have a large number of members, are held in the public-houses because there is no other place for them.

The scheme bids fair to be a success. The necessary changes will be carried through with the least possible disturbance and friction among the tenants, because the women managers have already won the confidence of a large number of them. Many tenants do not want to part with their old cottages, dirty and dilapidated as they are, 77and others are afraid that, when the new houses are built, they will not be the persons to get them. The women managers, being on the spot, will get to know the individual needs of each household, and they will use every effort to meet the needs of these households when the houses are rebuilt. In the meantime, they are in a position to persuade the tenants gradually to adopt higher standards of cleanliness and comfort, and so enable them to take care of the new houses when they get them.

Local authorities who are about to take over slum areas and reconstruct them may find it of advantage to follow the example of the Office of Woods and place an area, as soon as it comes into their hands, under the management of women educated and trained for this work.

VIII MANAGEMENT OF MUNICIPAL HOUSES IN AMSTERDAM [3]

The Municipality of Amsterdam has provided, either directly or through Public Utility Societies, a large number of dwellings for its working-class inhabitants. Up to the present time 4,000 families have been housed in these municipal dwellings, 6,000 more dwellings are in course of erection, and plans are laid for bringing the total number up to 20,000 at no very distant date.

The housing policy of Amsterdam is comprehensive. The town has assumed the duty not only of supplying houses to meet the general shortage, but of providing houses for those for whom no one else is able or willing to find accommodation, and especially for large families. It does not, like most English 79local authorities, select its tenants, but accepts all, even the worst class, if they are houseless citizens of Amsterdam.

In these circumstances the question of managing the municipal houses becomes a very important one. Mr. Keppler, who has presided over the Housing Department of Amsterdam for five years, came over to England to see for himself the methods of managing working-class property introduced by Miss Octavia Hill, and it was decided, as a result of his experience, to appoint women managers to take charge of the municipal houses and their tenants on the same lines. The first two women appointed had been trained years earlier under Miss Hill in London. There is now a staff of thirteen managers working under the Chief Woman Manager.

It is the duty of the Chief Manager to receive applications from and to interview would-be tenants, to inquire into their circumstances, and to allot new or empty houses to those families whose need she considers most acute. Great care is taken in assigning the new dwellings. Some groups of houses are designed expressly for families with five or more children and are reserved 80for them, while families with a member suffering from tuberculosis are placed in dwellings which have a sunny balcony or garden.

The managers collect the rents from the tenants in their homes; they take a note of any repairs needed and inform the Repairs Department. They instruct the women in the use of fittings and apparatus (all the municipal houses are fitted with gas cookers and electric light) and insist upon the tenancy regulations being observed. They co-operate with a number of voluntary societies which help the tenants in various ways.

The majority of tenants are of an average working-class type, and each manager looks after some two hundred to three hundred families. But since no tenants are rejected for reasons of character, it follows that there are among them families which are below the average and a few which can be described only as bad; they do not pay their rent promptly, they are destructive, or they are noisy, drunken and quarrelsome. When families are considered by the managers to belong to this group they are removed into one of the special areas set apart for them. They are placed in temporary wooden one-story 81buildings, built in pairs with a fair amount of space between. These special areas are in open situations on the outskirts of the town. Here the families are under strict supervision—a supervision, however, which has always in view the education and improvement of the tenant. The manager who has charge of one of these areas—on each of which are not more than twenty-five families—resides on the spot, in a dwelling similar to those occupied by the tenants; she reports weekly to the Chief Manager on the circumstances and conduct of each family and does all in her power to help and improve them.

The salary of the Chief Woman Manager rises from £350 to £550 a year. Her assistants are placed in three groups, according to experience and to the responsible nature of their duties. The salary of an apprentice during her year’s training is £83; at the end of the year, if found satisfactory, she receives £125, rising to £183; after this she may rise gradually to £291. During the first twelve months an apprentice must attend an evening course of training at the University School of Social Work in Amsterdam, where she receives instruction in various 82branches of social work, such as the relief of distress, social hygiene, club management, housing and town planning.

The Director of Housing regards the work of the women managers as extremely valuable from a social point of view, and he hopes to be able to find competent women to take charge of all the houses which the municipality are putting up. The salaries of the women managers are a fairly heavy charge upon the revenue, but the municipality considers the money well spent. They find that the tenants gradually improve, that rents are paid promptly and that the property is kept in good order, while good tenants appreciate the consideration shown to them and the interest taken in their welfare.

IX REPORT ON HOUSE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT — I. Introductory Classification of Management. — II. Managers. — III. Training. — IV. Payment. — General Remarks.

In October 1920 the Women’s Section of the Garden Cities and Town Planning Association appointed a Sub-Committee to report on the methods and practice of House Property Management, especially with regard to what is generally called working-class property and management by women.

Having collected evidence from the personal observations of their own members and the written statements of other investigators, and having taken evidence also from a leading Woman Sanitary Inspector and from the first Municipal Woman Housing Officer, the Sub-Committee adopted the following principle for general recommendation and as a basis of their Report:

That the management of working-class property should be in the hands of persons who have had definite training in estate management and in Social Science.

84The points considered and reported on are divided under four heads:

(1) The Classes of Property to be managed.

(2) The Qualifications of Manager and Assistants.

(3) The Training necessary.

(4) Payment.

The Sub-Committee desire to point out that until the advent of the Woman House Property Manager there is no evidence that any special form of Management was considered necessary for the poorer classes of house property.

A very general impression has been prevalent that the Management suitable for better class property (that is, roughly, property let under Agreement in Quarterly and Yearly tenancies) was also suited to tenement and small house property let out in weekly tenancies. In fact, no other system of management existed until Miss Octavia Hill took up the management of weekly tenancies and inaugurated a system of her own.

85When well-built properties are in occupation of selected tenants whose financial and social circumstances ensure that the property will be maintained, with few exceptions, in good condition, the work of management is reduced to a minimum and is chiefly occupied with rent collecting and simple and regular requirements in the way of upkeep and repairs. The assumption in the past that nothing more ought to be needed for property of lower grades has too often led to concentration on the more difficult collection of rents, with a minimum attention to repairs. No attention has been paid to economic and social conditions, and the net result has been the production of the slum.

The Sub-Committee believe that the introduction of a suitable form of management, insisted on by some recognized authority, could have prevented the creation of slums in the past. They further believe that it may do so in the future, and that it can, with special effort, eradicate much that is evil in present bad areas. Miss Octavia Hill’s System put into practice the theory that slums could be eradicated and advanced the proposition that management could be made a means to this end. She, the first 86Woman House Property Manager, and workers she trained, all of them also women, introduced Social Economics into the business of House Property Management. The Sub-Committee feel strongly that many social evils might be avoided by the adoption of Social Economics into business generally. The distinctive mark of Miss Hill’s System is the consideration of the personal, human factor as an integral part of the business. The Sub-Committee can find no justification for condemning this principle as unbusinesslike.

The Sub-Committee have considered the work done by Miss Hill and those who have succeeded her, by visits, and they have read reports of the work in various cities and towns in England and Scotland, in Holland (see Women’s Local Government News, February and March 1921) and in America (see Good Housing that Pays). They find there is evidence of many slum areas redeemed. Improvements by rebuilding have almost necessarily accompanied the work in nearly every case, but there are striking instances of the maintenance of the original old property in excellent sanitary condition. On the other hand, evidences of new properties 87falling into disrepair for lack of management are not wanting.

On all working-class estates, whether of higher or lower grade, there is much evidence to show that managers should be in complete control, attending to all matters connected with the property, including the collection of rents and repairs. There is evidence that the separation of responsibility for rent collecting and for ordering and superintending repairs leads to delay in repairs, and, in some cases, has acted adversely on the rent collecting. Rent collectors who are not responsible for repairs are apt to forget to report the need of them.

Whether the manager should be a man or a woman is not, in the opinion of the Sub-Committee, so important as that the principle of management inaugurated by Miss Hill should be adopted. At the same time, they are agreed that it should not be overlooked—

(1) That the housekeeper is always a woman;

88(2) That the woman usually pays the rent;

(3) That housekeeping and repairs are closely connected; and

(4) That, therefore, a woman will usually be better equipped than a man to deal with the problems arising out of the management of working-class property.

Whether a man or woman, the Committee are of opinion that the Manager should be properly trained under managers of accepted standing, should thoroughly understand the finance and law involved, should be of recognized efficiency for superintending repairs and upkeep, and should be well-versed in the social problems of the day and the methods of dealing with them.

A word should be added on personality. The more social and industrial difficulties are represented on an estate the greater will the prominence of the personal element be. Whatever the class of property, the personal qualifications of the manager are of importance: tact and consideration are always necessary. But the successful redemption of a slum area will demand specially 89strong personal qualifications, with wide sympathies and broad outlook, and, just as some learned people never make good teachers, so some human temperaments will never produce good managers, however much “trained.”

The Sub-Committee feel that, on the whole, the splitting of the management under separate Departments is inadvisable. Where such division has succeeded in the past, it has done so largely because a former (pre-war) selection of tenants has kept the most difficult problems of management away from it. In bad areas it is most important that there should be one Head in as direct contact with the Estate as possible, responsible for upkeep and repairs as well as rent collecting and selection of tenants.

Now that Housing has taken a foremost place among the questions of national importance, it is recognized that the standard of good housing cannot be attained unless accompanied by skilled management. From 1864, when Miss Hill began her work, house property may be said to have been managed 90on the two systems already indicated. The one—the more general—followed by men qualified by the Examinations held for Surveyors and Estate Agents. The other followed by women qualified by a high standard of education and by special training in Social Economics. The training of the men has been thorough on technical, financial and legal lines, if too stereotyped and narrow in outlook. The training of the women has not been thorough enough on the technical side, and has therefore, perhaps, over-emphasized the social side. In the opinion of the Sub-Committee an attempt should be made to combine the two courses.

New houses, tenanted as they are mostly by the better class of tenants, may be easily managed; but where tenants dispossessed from old houses are provided for in modern dwellings, the need is evident for a highly trained manager who will add to his or her business and technical knowledge an educated interest in social conditions and problems. A point in favour of women’s management comes in here. Many of the incoming housekeepers have had no experience in using new fittings. There have been cases in which the tenants have been unable, 91through lack of knowledge, to clean their porcelain-surfaced or painted bath or their earthenware sink, and have been quite at a loss in the matter of their close-ranged flues. Where women managers have been at work instruction has been given and quick deterioration of appliances avoided. In many towns the congestion and overcrowding has been so great that it has been difficult even for families with regular incomes and a tradition of good housekeeping and homemaking to maintain their standard. Where unemployment has made the income uncertain there has certainly been a lowering of the standard. When such families go into the new houses they need the help of a skilled and tactful adviser if they are to become once more makers of happy and comfortable homes. It must be remembered that the past has left to the towns of to-day a heritage of slums which collect the products of all our social errors and are a breeding-ground for every known social evil. Even as the worst forms of disease require the skill of the cleverest physician, so such properties call for the most highly trained management. From the examples the Committee have had before them they find that 92such properties have only been successfully dealt with under the Octavia Hill System, and so far only by women.

The London University now grants a Degree in Estate Management, and a College of Estate Management will shortly be opened in London which will prepare for this Degree. The Sub-Committee have examined the Course laid down for the Degree and recommend that steps be taken to obtain some recognition of the special need for the management of working-class property in its provisions. The College will be open to women as well as to men, and it would be well if some alternative or special section of the Course could be arranged to meet this need. The lines along which training should develop have already been indicated under Managers’ qualifications. These might easily be arranged in the future at the College and on Estates approved by the College or other authority, if the good will of that authority can be obtained.

The best course of training would probably be one which combined the kind of studies arranged at the Household Science Department at King’s College, the London School of Economics and the College of Estate 93Management. All these institutions are linked up to the University of London, and they would doubtless be willing to co-operate in this matter.

Estate Agents are usually paid on Commission, but Housing Managers, Superintendents, etc., under big Corporations are paid salaries.

The Sub-Committee do not consider the percentage system a good one, especially for lower grade property, which needs the more time and skill. Also, where rent varies with the rates, as it does on nearly all the properties managed by women, the basis of variation is undesirable for such payment.

Women Managers (mostly paid on percentage) have hitherto undertaken the work at a sacrifice. Introducing as they did a new system of management, their work was intensified, but their percentage remained the same as that of the former agents.

The Sub-Committee believe that better pay might be secured by the following methods:

(1) By a wider and more general attempt at organization. One Manager, 94responsible for the general principle of the Management, could control a large property or groups of properties, with specially appointed superintendents and staff who have been made to understand the spirit and aims of the work.

(2) By a careful combination of higher grade quarterly tenancies with the lower grade weekly, possibly aided by the promotion of some regular weekly tenancies to monthly payments.

There is very little doubt that management of lower grade properties has been made to pay by undesirable means. Key money, percentage fees on builders’ bills and other “payments” have crept in—in some cases are openly acknowledged and expected. Management should be placed beyond the reach of such practices.

Inefficient management is very largely responsible for the slums of to-day and has led to the need for slum clearances and the consequent enormous expense to the Community. The necessary effort to redeem slum areas now can only be successful by management on modern lines—a strong, efficient business equipment, based on definite 95ideals with definite social aims. Work on such a foundation cannot fail to bring results, but it should be adequately paid. The attempt to overcome the evils of our heritage of bad management by the introduction of efficient management in bad areas may seem, at first, comparatively costly. It will never be quite so costly in the end as inefficient management.

A consideration of the whole situation has led the Sub-Committee to the following conclusions:

(1) While not advocating that all properties should be handed over to women to manage, they are convinced that there are special requirements on certain properties which, at the moment, urgently call for women’s special experience.

(2) It would be advisable for all Local Authorities to appoint women in their Housing Departments. Birmingham City Council has taken the first step by appointing a “Woman Rent Collector and Supervisor of Houses.”

96(3) That every effort should be made to draw the attention of the Local Authorities to the importance of the need for an improved standard of management.