The smell of an early Victorian slum

A bit for libetarians and for regulators – so take what you will.  It was laws and regualations, not market forces, that ended this, though it seems we can never under-estimate the ability of a greedy State to make a bad situation worse.

This is an account from 1942 looking back to the condition of the poor a century earlier.

In the early years of the [19th] century the builder and landlord were unrestricted. The filthiest hovel or cellar could be let to as many people as would take it; no drainage or water had to be provided.

Ventilation the State heartily discouraged by means of the iniquitous Window Tax, assessed on the number of windows in a house. An Act of 1831-2 attempted to allow occupiers to open new windows free of charge, but the Treasury lawyers found effective ways of evading the intention of the measure, and the tax remained almost as before until its repeal in 1851.

Thus every slum landlord bricked up as many windows as he dared, and built houses with as few as possible. The few prints of slum buildings dating from this time show facades pierced with extremely few windows. As it might cost 8s. 3d. a year to open a window, they were confined to living rooms, while stairs, cellar and closets remained dark and totally unventilated.

Even the living rooms were generally, unventilated and stinking; those unaccustomed to the houses of the poor often fainted on entering them.

Even the middle and upper classes confined their respect for ventilation to a theoretical approval.

Until the 1890s the night air was regarded as Nature’s poison gas, to be excluded by every known device.

Century of Science, pub 1942.

Read more by or more about , , , , or .
This entry was posted in News.
Advert

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert

Recent Comments

  • Nigel Jones
    Yes we need to think through and articulate our Lib dem approach to economics and the way we order society. I see the occasional attempt at this on LDV but out ...
  • Peter Davies
    The broken part is not the provision of water (a commodity and natural monopoly supplied to households) but the disposal of sewage and rain water run-off (a ser...
  • Cassie
    'Knee jerk adoption.. (be it mutuals instead of corporates) does not address the fundamental strategic problems'. Indeed. Dŵr Cymru Welsh Water is not-for-pro...
  • Peter Chambers
    I would like to agree that the "It" is the Royal Navy. But I cannot. The necessary "It" is Social Democracy. The National Preparedness Commission said in the...
  • Rif Winfield
    Whatever the multiple roles which the Navy must undertake (and here I fully agree with you, Edward), what is essential is the quantity of vessels. However effec...