The Project Gutenberg eBook of House property & its management
    
This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this ebook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States,
you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located
before using this eBook.

Title: House property & its management
        Some papers on the methods of management introduced by Miss Octavia Hill and adapted to modern conditions

Author: Octavia Hill

Contributor: I. G. Gibbon

Release date: April 11, 2025 [eBook #75837]

Language: English

Original publication: United Kingdom: George Allen & Unwin Ltd, 1921

Credits: Richard Tonsing and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This book was produced from images made available by the HathiTrust Digital Library.)


*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK HOUSE PROPERTY & ITS MANAGEMENT ***





                             HOUSE PROPERTY
                            & ITS MANAGEMENT
SOME PAPERS ON THE METHODS OF MANAGEMENT INTRODUCED BY MISS OCTAVIA HILL
                    AND ADAPTED TO MODERN CONDITIONS

[Illustration: [Logo]]

                   LONDON: GEORGE ALLEN & UNWIN LTD.
                 RUSKIN HOUSE, 40 MUSEUM STREET, W.C. 1




                       _First published in 1921_


                        (_All rights reserved_)




                              INTRODUCTION

          By I. G. GIBBON, D.Sc., C.B.E., Ministry of Health.


Of standards we have heard much in connection with new housing, and,
quite naturally, nearly always of material standards—of the number of
houses to the acre, the size and the number of rooms, the provision of
baths and the like; but of personal standards little, although persons
of experience know full well that, where there are difficulties, half
the trouble, at a moderate estimate, could be removed by personal
action. The experiment of the ownership and management of large numbers
of houses by Local Authorities is not free from the hazards of
democratic control; some in full sympathy with the experiment view it
not without some misgivings, and the misgivings will not be without
place if adequate measures are not taken for proper management.

It is timely, therefore, that we should be reminded of the most
instructive experiment made during the last century in the management of
house property, the work of Octavia Hill. Her experiment in house
management would probably have by now won her many more practical
followers had she been less of a social worker; but had she been less of
a social worker she would never have made the experiment. There may
still be a few of the comparatively small number of persons who know of
her work who look upon it as an attempt to insinuate a District Visitor
under the disguise of a rent collector. District Visitors doubtless have
their place and season; but the aim of those who would follow in the
footsteps of Octavia Hill, the Women Property Managers, is to manage
property on a firm business basis, to make it pay (and they have shown
that they can make it pay, more so in difficult circumstances than
business management of a dull routine kind), and to carry out the work
with knowledge and experience, with sympathy and tact, and with as
reasonable a regard to the genuine interests of the tenants as of the
owner. This is their aim, and, where person and place fit, their
achievement.

Octavia Hill’s influence was great in this country; but it passed beyond
its borders. One of the most interesting reports issued in recent years
on the management of house property has been that of the Octavia Hill
Association, at Philadelphia, who report the uniform success of
management on the lines laid down by Octavia Hill.[1] In Holland, also,
her influence has been great; and at Amsterdam, for instance, all
municipal house property, which is extensive, is managed by women who
have been trained in her methods.

Footnote 1:

  See _Good Housing that Pays_, by Fullerton L. Waldo. Philadelphia: The
  Harper Press, 1012-20 Chancellor Street. 1917.

The ideal in these matters, I think, is self-management, where the
tenants in a group of houses manage their own affairs with a social
regard to their own real interests, an almost impossible result at the
present time unless the tenants have a substantial financial stake in
the property. We are very far indeed from this solution as yet, though
every effort is needed towards achieving it; and one disappointing
result of the State-assisted scheme of houses is the very poor showing
made by Public Utility Societies. But a large measure of self-management
is not precluded from the scheme of management on Octavia Hill’s lines,
as, indeed, has been demonstrated in practice.

There should be no spirit of patronage in management; if, as happens,
the tenant comes to look upon the property manager as a counsellor and
friend, this should grow out of the business management and as an
incident to it.

Octavia Hill and her successors did not work simply by the light of
nature, or believe that women, as such, had a God-given aptitude for
this business, though, house management being primarily a matter for the
wife and mother, it naturally opens a field for which women should be
well fitted. But the same need of instruction arises whether the
management be by men or by women. The pupil has to be put through a
severe course of training; she has to be versed in the most important
facts of the law as to rents, landlord and tenant, and sanitation; she
has to be acquainted with the defects which occur in houses, and how
most economically to remedy them. Above all, she has to acquire that
measure of firmness, tact and sympathy without which success is not
likely to be attained. A pupil who is likely to be fully successful must
have a goodly measure of that personal aptitude which, though difficult
to test by any system of examination, is as vitally necessary as are the
essential technical qualifications.

If the manager of house property is to give of her best, she must be
trusted with ample responsibility and authority. If hampered by
restrictions, if limited in authority, if not granted powers for
selecting and dealing with tenants and the control of repairs, if she
has to refer to superior authority, whether an employer or an official
or a Committee, before action can be taken, there is not much hope, even
under favourable conditions, of more than a bare success. Here lies one
principal danger, equally of autocracy or democracy. It is not good
business or sound sense to pay a person for duties and to relieve her of
the real responsibility attached to them, including the risk of
dismissal for failure.

In dealing with slum property the lessons of Octavia Hill’s work are
exceedingly encouraging. Weary years must pass before there can be
extensive demolition and rebuilding of slum areas. Are we therefore to
lie resigned and allow these grievous sores to fester in our cities and
towns?

In properly qualified management we have one at least of the keys to a
temporary, if not a permanent, solution of the problem; and in this way
we may effectively deal with the real evil. The ordinary method of
clearance and rebuilding has often resulted too much in the shifting of
the evil to another quarter, though it may be, happily, in a less
concentrated form.

One incidental gleam from the reading of the papers in this volume is of
the great advances which have really been made in housing conditions. We
are apt at times, not without reason, to gird at the slowness with which
the manifest evils around us are being removed, but it is well
occasionally, for a proper sense of proportion and for reform itself, to
be reminded of the great improvements which have been achieved.

It is important to bear in mind that the principles of trained
management apply as much to privately owned as to public property. If
the owners of properties in areas which are now classed as slums would
but join together and employ for the common management of their property
persons trained and with aptitude for the work, it is no exaggeration to
say that within a few years a great transformation would be effected in
the slum problem of London and of other towns, a transformation which
would not only ease the manifold burdens of public authorities, but
would be less irksome to the owners of the property and of untold
benefit to its occupiers.

Equally important is it to remember that the methods of management
associated with Octavia Hill are as pertinent for new property as for
old—indeed, in some ways more so, for prevention is better than cure.
She learnt her secrets in dealing with bad property, just as the
scientist wrests his secrets from the pathological. Management of house
property on the general lines laid down by her, adapted and developed,
and, as I believe, with increasing emphasis on co-operative
self-management, will help materially not only in the minor achievement
of preventing property from degenerating into slums—and this, as
experience shows, may well happen even with good and well-planned
property—but in the greater achievement of attaining that higher
standard of contentment and of pride of home and locality which should
be the aim of all those who have the interests of the country at heart.


The following are some papers written by Miss Octavia Hill in connection
with her housing work.

They are republished in the hope that her methods may be widely adopted
in the efforts that are now being made to improve the very defective
housing conditions in our cities.

                                                          M. M. JEFFERY.
                                                          EDITH NEVILLE.




                                CONTENTS


                                                                    PAGE
       INTRODUCTION. By I. G. Gibbon, D.Sc., C.B.E., Ministry of
         Health                                                        5

                 SELECTIONS FROM OCTAVIA HILL’S WRITINGS
    I. MANAGEMENT OF HOUSES FOR THE POOR                              15
   II. COTTAGE PROPERTY IN LONDON                                     20
  III. BLANK COURT                                                    31
   IV. THE INFLUENCE OF MODEL DWELLINGS UPON CHARACTER                39
    V. SMALL HOUSES IN LONDON                                         50
   VI. LETTERS TO FELLOW-WORKERS                                      52

                              OTHER PAPERS
  VII. WOMEN MANAGERS—A CROWN ESTATE                                  72
 VIII. MANAGEMENT OF MUNICIPAL HOUSES IN AMSTERDAM                    78
   IX. REPORT ON HOUSE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT BY A SUB-COMMITTEE OF
         THE WOMEN’S SECTION OF THE GARDEN CITIES AND TOWN PLANNING
         ASSOCIATION                                                  83




                   House Property and its Management




                                   I
                   MANAGEMENT OF HOUSES FOR THE POOR
                                 (1899)


Thirty-four years ago, when I first began to manage houses inhabited by
working people, London was in a very different state from what it is
now, and it is useful and interesting to review the changes, their
effects, and their bearing on the special work we are considering
to-day.

(1) The standard of comfort was far lower then than now. In Marylebone,
where I began work, nearly every family rented but one room; now there
are hundreds of two- and three-roomed tenements. There were no
cooking-ranges in the rooms; water was hardly ever carried up higher
than the parlours. There were hardly any amusements open to the people;
there was no underground railway, no trams, few cheap omnibuses; there
were no free libraries, no Education Act, no Board schools. Wages were
very decidedly lower, hours of work were longer. The bright oil-lamps
did not exist. Food was not so cheap or so various. Flowers were never
sold in the streets to the poor. The people stood in those days far more
in need of cheer and of help.

(2) The knowledge of sanitary matters had penetrated hardly at all;
gross ignorance prevailed. There were, moreover, few, if any,
Convalescent Homes, no country holiday arrangements. The Building Acts
took cognizance of very few of the requirements for health, and hardly
any sanitary measures were enforcible—fewer were enforced. Few hospitals
for infectious diseases existed. Many excellent appliances for drainage
were not invented.

(3) There was not one-tenth part of the sympathy and interest in the
welfare of the people which permeates all classes now.

From these and many other causes a London court in 1864 was a far more
degraded and desolate place than it can be now, even in the remotest and
forlornest region, and in taking charge of it one had to do a variety of
things oneself, where now one finds the intelligent and willing
co-operation of many other agencies.

Again, there were next to no “model” dwellings and little power of cheap
locomotion, so that a court in those days was subject to little change
of population; the same families clung to it, lived, married and died in
it. Cheap locomotion and facilities in reading have brought the
different parts of London into much closer communication.

Many of these facts made the necessity for preserving and regulating the
old courts and houses far more important than is the case now. The old
courts are rapidly disappearing, and numerous blocks of buildings with
modern appliances are now scattered over most neighbourhoods. But in
1864 tenants were neither routed out of foul and close courts nor would
they have been received into the rare and select model dwellings.
Moreover, in the rough courts they were little meddled with, and could
pursue in ignorance their insanitary habits further than would be
possible now.

It was very natural, therefore, that my first efforts should have been
directed to rough courts and the inhabitants as I found them there.
Steady and gradual improvement of the people of the houses, without
selection of the former or sudden reconstruction of the latter, was our
first duty, and my little book on _Homes of the London Poor_ tells the
history of that early work. But if there is one duty more incumbent on
us than another in such efforts, it is to be quick to see where advance
is possible, how higher standards can be realized, and how much old
forms may be rightly superseded. With certain exceptions in regard to
small old houses, our work of late years has been increasingly in new
houses and with chosen tenants.

The principles, however, are the same, and there is one great fact which
the changing form has only brought out more and more clearly, and that
is that the conduct of houses or blocks, old or new, so as to secure
health and comfort and homelike feeling, depends on management. One can
see any day excellent buildings execrably managed, and one may see
tumble-down old places of wretched construction both healthier and far
more homelike because well managed. And I may confidently say that the
distinctive feature of our work has been that of devoting our full
strength to management. It will be realized at once how much more this
implies than “rent collecting.” An ordinary clerk will go from door to
door for rents; that is a very different matter from managing houses. We
have tried, so far as possible, to enlist ladies, who would have an idea
of how—by diligent attention to all business which devolves on a
landlord, by wise rule with regard to all duties which a tenant should
fulfil, by sympathetic and just decisions with a view to the common
good—a high standard of management could be attained: repairs promptly
and efficiently attended to, references carefully taken up, cleaning
sedulously supervised, overcrowding put an end to, the blessing of
ready-money payments enforced, accounts strictly kept, and, above all,
tenants so sorted as to be helpful to one another.




                                   II
                       COTTAGE PROPERTY IN LONDON
                                 (1866)


Two years ago I first had an opportunity of carrying out the plan I had
long contemplated, that of obtaining possession of houses to be let in
weekly tenements to the poor. That the spiritual elevation of a large
class depended to a considerable extent on sanitary reform was, I
considered, proved, but I was equally certain that sanitary improvement
itself depended upon educational work among grown-up people; that they
must be urged to rouse themselves from the lethargy and indolent habits
into which they have fallen, and freed from all that hinders them from
doing so. I further believed that any lady who would help them to obtain
things, the need of which they felt themselves, and would sympathize
with them in their desire for such, would soon find them eager to learn
her view of what was best for them; that whether this was so or not, her
duty was to keep alive their own best hopes and intentions, which come
at rare intervals, but fade too often for want of encouragement.

I laid the plan before Mr. Ruskin, who entered into it most warmly. He
at once came forward with all the money necessary, and took the whole
risk of the undertaking upon himself. He showed me, however, that it
would be far more useful if it could be made to pay; that a working man
ought to be able to pay for his own house; that the outlay upon it
ought, therefore, to yield a fair percentage upon the capital invested.
Thus empowered and directed, I purchased three houses in my own
immediate neighbourhood. They were leasehold, subject to a small
ground-rent. The unexpired term of the lease was for fifty-six years;
this we purchased for £750. We spent £78 additional in making a large
room at the back of my own house, where I could meet the tenants from
time to time. The plan has now been in operation about a year and a
half; the financial result is that the scheme has paid 5 per cent.
interest on all the capital (it should be remembered that 5 per cent.
interest in England on house property is equivalent to at least 8 per
cent. in the United States), has repaid £48 of the capital; sets of two
rooms have been let for little more than the rent of one, the houses
have been kept in repair, all expenses have been met for taxes,
ground-rent and insurance. In this case there is no expense for
collecting rents, as I do it myself, finding it most important work; but
in all the estimates I put aside the usual percentage for it, in case
hereafter I may require help, and also to prove practically that it can
be afforded in other cases. It should be observed that well-built houses
were chosen, but they were in a dreadful state of dirt and neglect. The
repairs required were mainly of a superficial and slight character;
slight in regard to expense—vital as to health and comfort. The place
swarmed with vermin; the papers, black with dirt, hung in long strips
from the walls; the drains were stopped, the water supply out of order.
All these things were put in order, but no new appliances of any kind
were added, as we had determined that our tenants should wait for these
until they had proved themselves capable of taking care of them. A
regular sum is set aside for repairs, and this is equally divided
between the three houses; if any of it remains, after breakage and
damage have been repaired, at the end of the quarter, each tenant
decides in turn in what way the surplus shall be spent, so as to add to
the comfort of the house. This plan has worked admirably; the loss from
carelessness has decreased to an amazing extent, and the lodgers prize
the little comforts which they have waited for, and seem in a measure to
have earned by their care, much more than those bought with more lavish
expenditure. The bad debts during the whole time the plan has been in
operation have only amounted to £2 11s. 3d. Extreme punctuality and
diligence in collecting rents, and a strict determination that they
shall be paid regularly, have accomplished this; as a proof of which it
is curious to observe that £1 3s. 3d. of the bad debts accumulated
during two months that I was away in the country. I have tried to
remember, when it seemed hardest, that the fulfilment of their duties
was the best education for the tenants in every way. It has given them a
dignity and glad feeling of honourable behaviour which has much more
than compensated for the apparent harshness of the rule.

Nothing has impressed me more than the people’s perception of an
underlying current of sympathy through all dealings that have seemed
harsh. Somehow, love and care have made themselves felt. It is also
wonderful that they should prize as they do the evenness of the law that
is over them. They are accustomed to alternate violence of passion and
toleration of vice. They expected a greater toleration, ignorant
indulgence and frequent almsgiving; but in spite of this have recognized
as a blessing a rule which is very strict, but the demands of which they
know, and a government which is true in word and deed. The plan of
substituting a lady for a resident landlady of the same class as her
tenants is not wholly gain. The lady will probably have subtler sympathy
and clearer comprehension of their needs, but she cannot give the same
minute supervision that a resident landlady can. Unhappily, the
advantage of such a change is, however, at present unquestionable. The
influence of the majority of the lower class of people who sublet to the
poor is almost wholly injurious. That tenants should be given up to the
dominion of those whose word is given and broken almost as a matter of
course, whose habits and standards are very low, whose passions are
violent, who have neither large hope nor clear sight, nor even sympathy,
is very sad. It seems to me that a greater power is in the hands of
landlords and landladies than of schoolteachers—power either of life or
death, physical or spiritual. It is not an unimportant question who
shall wield it. There are dreadful instances in which sin is really
tolerated and shared; where the lodger who will drink most with his
landlord is most favoured, and many a debt overlooked, to compensate for
which the price of rooms is raised; and thus the steady and sober pay
more rent to make up for losses caused by the unprincipled.

With the great want of rooms there is in this neighbourhood it did not
seem right to expel families, however large, inhabiting one room.
Whenever from any cause a room was vacant and a large family occupied an
adjoining one, I have endeavoured to induce them to rent the two. To
incoming tenants I do not let what seems decidedly insufficient
accommodation. We have been able to let two rooms for four shillings and
sixpence, whereas the tenants were in many cases paying four shillings
for one. At first they considered it quite an unnecessary expenditure to
pay more rent for a second room, however small the additional sum might
be. They have gradually learnt to feel the comfort of having two rooms,
and pay willingly for them. (It is not possible to form any comparison
between the rent of rooms in London and New York, the circumstances of
the two cities being so different; but the point to be observed is that,
by a very small increase of rent, the amount of accommodation may be
doubled.)

The pecuniary success of the plan has been due to two causes. First, to
the absence of middlemen; and, secondly, to great strictness about
punctual payment of rent. At this moment not one tenant in any of the
houses owes any rent, and during the whole time, as I have said, the bad
debts have been exceedingly small. The law respecting such tenancies
seems very simple, and when once the method of proceeding is understood,
the whole business is easily managed; and I must say most seriously that
I believe it to be better to pay legal expenses for getting rid of
tenants than to lose by arrears of rent—better for the whole tone of the
households, kinder to the tenants. The rule should be clearly understood
and the people will respect themselves for having obeyed it. The
commencement of proceedings which are known to be genuine and not a mere
threat is usually sufficient to obtain payment of arrears; in one case
only has an ejectment for rent been necessary. The great want of rooms
gives the possessors of such property immense power over their lodgers.
Let them see to it that they use it righteously. The fluctuations of
work cause to respectable tenants the main difficulties in paying their
rent. I have tried to help them in two ways. First, by inducing them to
save; this they have done steadily, and each autumn has found them with
a small fund accumulated, which has enabled them to meet the
difficulties of the time when families are out of town. In the second
place, I have done what I could to employ my tenants in slack seasons. I
carefully set aside any work they can do for times of scarcity, and I
try so to equalize in this small circle the irregularity of work, which
must be more or less pernicious, and which the childishness of the poor
makes doubly so. They have strangely little power of looking forward; a
result is to them as nothing if it will not be perceptible till next
quarter! This is very curious to me, especially as seen in connection
with that large hope to which I have alluded, and which often makes me
think that if I could I would carve over the houses the motto, “Spem,
etiam illi habent, quibus nihil aliud restat.”

Another beautiful trait in their character is their trust; it has been
quite marvellous to find how great and how ready this is. In no single
case have I met with suspicion or with anything but entire confidence.

It is needless to say that there have been many minor difficulties and
disappointments. Each separate person who has failed to rise and meet
the help that would have been so gladly given has been a distinct loss
to me; for somehow the sense of relation to them has been a very real
one, and a feeling of interest and responsibility has been very strong,
even where there was least that was lovely or lovable in the particular
character. When they have not had sufficient energy or self-control to
choose the sometimes hard path that has seemed the only right one, it
would have been hard to part from them, except for a hope that others
would be able to lead them where I have failed.

Two distinct kinds of work depend entirely on one another if they are to
bear their full fruit. There is, firstly, the simple fulfilment of a
landlady’s bounden duties, and uniform demand of the fulfilment of those
of the tenants. We have felt ourselves bound by laws which must be
obeyed, however hard obedience might often be. Then, secondly, there is
the individual friendship which has grown up from intimate knowledge and
from a sense of dependence and protection. Knowledge gives power to see
the real position of families; to suggest in time the inevitable result
of certain habits; to urge such measures as shall secure the education
of the children and their establishment in life; to keep alive the germs
of energy; to waken the gentler thought; to refuse resolutely to give
any help but such as rouses self-help; to cherish the smallest lingering
gleam of self-respect; and, finally, to be near with strong help should
the hour of trial fall suddenly and heavily, and to give it with the
hand and heart of a real old friend, who has filled many relations
besides that of almsgiver, who has long ago given far more than material
help, and has thus earned the right to give this lesser to the most
independent spirits.




                                  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
eaten 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 floor 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 the 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 would 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 order 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, or 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 these 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 regulation 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
admits 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 has 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 in 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 ones 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 separate, 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, perhaps, 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 little 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 made 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 their 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 incomparably 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


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:


              WORK UNDER THE ECCLESIASTICAL COMMISSIONERS.

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 people, 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 valuable 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 particulars, 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 on 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 divided
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
possible, 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 for 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 realize 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.


                      PAYMENT OF RATES BY TENANTS.

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 that 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, while 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.


                           GARDENS IN LONDON.

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 way; 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 a
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.


                              THE WORKERS.

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 duties, 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 plan
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 character 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.


                               THE WORK.

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; the 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 for
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.


                          SPIRIT OF THE WORK.

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 tax, 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, see 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]


Footnote 2:

  Reprinted from _Housing_, the official journal of the Ministry of
  Health, September 27, 1919, by kind permission of the Controller, H.M.
  Stationery Office.


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 hay
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 into 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 cleansing 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 to 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, and 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.

                                                                E. A. C.




                                  VIII
             MANAGEMENT OF MUNICIPAL HOUSES IN AMSTERDAM[3]


Footnote 3:

  Reprinted from _Housing_, the official journal of the Ministry of
  Health, July 19, 1920, by kind permission of the Controller, H.M.
  Stationery Office.


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 local 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 for 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 buildings, 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 branches 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.

                                                                E. A. C.




                                   IX
                  REPORT ON HOUSE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT


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.


The 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.


             I. INTRODUCTORY CLASSIFICATION OF MANAGEMENT.

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.

When 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 Woman 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 falling into disrepair for lack of management are not
wanting.


                             II. MANAGERS.

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;

  (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 strong 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.


                             III. TRAINING.

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 on 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, through
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 such
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
Management. All these institutions are linked up to the University of
London, and they would doubtless be willing to co-operate in this
matter.


                              IV. PAYMENT.

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,
  responsible 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 ideals 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.


                            GENERAL REMARKS.

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.”

  (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.


                       _Members of Sub-Committee._

           M. M. JEFFERY, _Chairman_.
           E. A. CHARLESWORTH.
           D. MEYNELL.
           F. C. PRIDEAUX } _Members of the Association of_
           M. GALTON      } _Women House Property Managers._
           E. A. BROWNING,  _Secretary_.

                             (Signed) GERTRUDE EMMOTT,
                                 _Chairman Women’s Section Garden Cities
                                     and Town Planning Association_.


                     _Printed in Great Britain by_
     UNWIN BROTHERS, LIMITED, THE GRESHAM PRESS, WOKING AND LONDON

------------------------------------------------------------------------




                          TRANSCRIBER’S NOTES


 ● Typos fixed; non-standard spelling and dialect retained.
 ● Enclosed italics font in _underscores_.





*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK HOUSE PROPERTY & ITS MANAGEMENT ***


    

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will
be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United
States without permission and without paying copyright
royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part
of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™
concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following
the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use
of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very
easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation
of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project
Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may
do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected
by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark
license, especially commercial redistribution.


START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE

PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works

1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your
possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be bound
by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person
or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be
used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this
agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™
electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection
of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual
works in the collection are in the public domain in the United
States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the
United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting
free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™
works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the
Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can easily
comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when
you share it without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no
representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other
immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear
prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work
on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed,
performed, viewed, copied or distributed:

    This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most
    other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
    whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
    of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
    at www.gutenberg.org. If you
    are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws
    of the country where you are located before using this eBook.
  
1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is
derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in
the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply
either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or
obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™
trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted
with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works
posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the
beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™
License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg™.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg™ License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format
other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official
version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the
full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
provided that:

    • You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
        the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method
        you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed
        to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has
        agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project
        Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid
        within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are
        legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty
        payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project
        Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in
        Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg
        Literary Archive Foundation.”
    
    • You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
        you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
        does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™
        License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
        copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue
        all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™
        works.
    
    • You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
        any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
        electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
        receipt of the work.
    
    • You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
        distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.
    

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than
are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing
from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project
Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate
or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right
of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium
with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you
with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in
lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If
the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing
without further opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement
violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the
agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or
limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or
unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in
accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the
production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of
the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this
or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or
additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any
Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™

Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future
generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by
U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,
Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website
and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation

Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread
public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest
array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state
visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works

Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be
freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of
volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,
including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.