Free market in housing

It was the concentration of people in the burgeoning towns and cities of manufacturing Britain in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries that led to a growing housing crisis.[1] The inflow of population to towns before 1830 was accommodated both by massive new buildings and the subdivision and change of use in existing buildings. Many separate builders and developers provided new building in a variety of different ways and there was no shortage of building land in and around towns.

The landowner was not generally the builder, though small infill developments in gardens and yards could be carried out by the original owner. Usually land was sold to a middleman or developer who would finance and organise the building process. Landowners included municipal corporations, as for example in Liverpool and Newcastle; charities, schools and churches, large private landowners and professional and businessmen with small parcels of land. Developers could include local merchants, tradesmen, professional men (especially lawyers) and builders who would raise capital locally to finance house construction. Land was conveyed freehold in perhaps half of all sales, or through a building lease. Urban house building before 1830 took many forms. Most cities had some grand housing for the rich and leisured classes, perhaps best typified by the sweeping terraces built by John Wood in Bath and the development of Edinburgh’s New Town from the 1750s. Artisans’ housing ranged from substantial terraced houses to small courts. In Birmingham a relatively affluent skilled craftsman might live in a two or three storey house with two rooms on each floor with an associated yard and workshop. It would cost up to £200 to buy in 1800 and would be rented for at least £8 per year. Only a minority of workers could afford such rents and many houses were multi-occupied by 1830. From the 1770s, rows of back-to-back houses were being constructed costing £60 to buy but could be rented for less that £5 a year.

However, as pressure on space increased many of these were also multi-occupied. Some of the worst housing conditions in 1830 were found in London where population pressures and constraints on space were far more acute than in provincial towns. Working-class families generally lived in a single room or cellar without proper sanitation or water supply and paid 2-3 shillings per week rent. Lodging houses were also common in London, and in the poorest districts as many as 15 people would sleep in one room, each paying 1 or 2 pence for a night’s shelter.[2]

William Street, Birmingham in 1905

It is hard to compare rural and urban housing conditions. Contemporary descriptions tend to focus on the horrors of urban living experienced by the very poor, but the situation was little different for the rural poor. The main difference was in the density of urban living. Living literally on top of or beneath neighbours in a multi-occupied tenement was a new experience for many requiring considerable adjustments in lifestyles and daily routine.

Victorian cities were in a state of constant social flux. Many residents in all large cities were migrants but they often did not stay long in one place: 45-55% of urban populations either died or moved from a town within ten years. Most housing throughout the period 1830 to 1914 was rented and owner-occupancy rarely accounted for more than 10% of the housing stock before 1918.[3]   Rented accommodation came in a vast array of types. In central areas most of provided through the construction of purpose-built working-class housing or was in large multi-occupied dwellings filtered down from the middle-classes that had moved to suburban villas or more spacious town houses. From 1850, terraced suburbs increasingly housed the skilled working-class. For those on low incomes, rent levels were crucial to housing availability. Although cheap housing had been built in many cities in the early nineteenth century, by the 1850s, it was increasingly difficult to built new housing to rent at much below 5s per week, well beyond the means of those on low or irregular incomes. Such families had little option but to rent lodgings or take slum housing in the city centre. Income determined where you lived and construction costs controlled the type of housing that was built in different locations. In such areas as Whitechapel or St Giles in London or dockside areas and commercial districts of Liverpool slum accommodation could be obtained quite easily. Accommodation was confined and relatively expensive; for example a single room 12 feet square could be rented for 1s 6d or more per week in a provincial town and for rather more in London. It could be dirty and facilities were shared with the other tenants.

By 1850, construction of new housing in the central areas of towns had almost ceased, but lower-density terraced housing was expanding rapidly in new residential suburbs of all English and Welsh towns. In Scotland tenement construction continued to be the norm. A new terraced house with four rooms, its own privy and in-house water supply would probably cost 5-7 shillings per week to rent. Relatively few such properties were multi-occupied, though the family might take in a lodger. Working-class home ownership was feasible only for those with relatively stable incomes in prosperous areas because of repayments of around 10 shillings per month. High levels were found in parts of north east Lancashire, County Durham, the West Riding and South Wales. Housing provided by employers or by philanthropic organisations, like the Peabody Trust in London, was often locally significant but never accommodated more than a few% of the population.

The process of residential decentralisation with the construction of suburban housing estates by private enterprise gathered momentum after 1890. This was most clearly seen in London, but similar processes were operating in all large towns. In 1850 Ilford, for example, was a quite village on the main railway line from London to Ipswich, seven miles from Liverpool Street station. In 1891 there were some 11,000 people in the parish, but by 1901 the new urban district had expanded to 41,240 people and its population almost doubled again by 1911. Two London builders, W.P. Griggs and A.C. Corbett, encouraged by the good railway communication, acquired large areas of land and began to develop massive private housing estates. In 1906 on the Griggs estate a four-room house started at £260; a four-bedroom, double-fronted house at £375 and a five-bedroom house at £450. Both the builders and Ilford Council provided further incentives to move to the suburbs. Corbett gave loans to purchasers to cover some of the cash deposit while Ilford Council used the Small Dwellings Acquisition Act 1899 to give cheap mortgages. Ilford is a classic example of the ways in which improved transport, availability of land, the willingness of entrepreneurs and public bodies to invest and the demand for suburban living combined to restructure the city in the early twentieth century.

In the Housing of the Working-class Act 1890, government intervened in the free market for the first time and, in so doing, fundamentally affected the expansion and planning of towns. Though the provision of council housing was slight before 1919, some councils had begun building houses before 1890 and the Act gave further impetus to such schemes. Some 24,000 council units were built in Britain before 1914 but most were concentrated in London (9,746 units), Liverpool (2,895 units) and Glasgow (2,199 units). These schemes were too few in number to make any real impact on housing needs and, in any case, rent levels and selection procedures tended to exclude the very poor.[4]

There was little fundamental change in housing between 1830 and 1914. Paying rent to private owners remained the norm, accounting for 80% of all houses. Council housing accounted for only 1% in 1914 and housing associations 9%. Though all towns spawned a succession of new residential suburbs, these were mainly for the affluent working and lower-middle-class families who would leave the older parts of the city centre, and new skilled in-migrants. The poor remained trapped in low-cost, sub-standard housing. The spatial segregation of social groups was cleared structured by the economic realities, reflected in income and occupation that controlled access to different types of housing.

Workers’ housing c1890

---

[1] For urban housing,   Chapman, S.D., (ed.), The History of Working-class Housing: A Symposium, (David & Charles), 1971, Gauldie, E., Cruel Habitations: a history of working-class housing 1780-1918, (Allen and Unwin), 1978 and Burnett, J., A Social History of Housing 1815-1985, (Methuen), 2^nd ed., 1986 are major works. Rodger, R., Housing in Urban Britain 1780-1914, (Macmillan), 1989, (Cambridge University Press), 1996 is an excellent bibliographical study.

[2] Crook, Tom, ‘Accommodating the outcast: common lodging houses and the limits of urban governance in Victorian and Edwardian London’, Urban History, Vol. 35, (2008), pp. 414-436.

[3] Rodger, Richard, ‘The Invisible Hand: Market Forces, Housing and the Urban Form in Victorian Cities’, in ibid, Fraser, Derek and Sutcliffe, Anthony, (eds.) The Pursuit of Urban History, pp. 190-211 and Baer, William C., ‘Is speculative building underappreciated in urban history?’, Urban History, Vol. 34, (2007), pp. 296-316.

[4] See, for example, Durgan, Shirley, ‘Providing for “the needs and purses of the poor”: council housing in Chelmsford before 1914’, Local Historian, Vol. 33, (2003), pp. 175-189, Damer, Seán. ‘“Engineers of the Human Machine”: The Social Practice of Council Housing Management in Glasgow, 1895-1939’, Urban Studies, Vol. 37, (2000), pp. 2007-2026 and Chinn, Carl, Homes for people: council housing and urban renewal in Birmingham, 1849-1999, (Brewin), 1999.

Patriote thinking and the French language

The rebellions in 1837 and 1838 represent a major symbolic occasion in the collective memory of Quebec affirming Québécois national sentiments. In their fight for proper French Canadian political representation, deputies from the Parti Patriote, driven by the liberal ideal of equality, sought to protect and preserve their cultural heritage, especially the French language, as part of their programme to ensure equality of opportunity for French Canadians in the economic and political life of Lower Canada.[1]

The emergence of French Canadian national identity especially between 1820 and 1830 resulted in the transformation of the Patriote movement to form a national group whose socio-economic interests differed from those of British or Anglo-Canadian elites who controlled political decision-making. French Canadians sought an identity in being a French-speaking and Catholic people but also recognised the importance of British and American influences on their political heritage.[2] This challenged the notion of monarchies ruling by divine right and called for a widening of individual freedom. Political legitimacy in liberal thinking lay not with the sovereign but with the nation, and was expressed through a combination of parliamentary institutions and constitutional guarantees. These ideas reached Lower Canada after 1776 in the republicanism of the United States and from Britain in constitutional guarantees enshrined in the 1774 and 1791 constitutions. [3] The Patriotes took advantage of their rights under the British Crown to obtain constitutional institutions likely to represent better their nation. Thus, in the fifty-second of the 1834 Ninety-Two Resolutions

Résolu, Que c’est l’opinion de ce comité, que puisqu’un fait, qui n’a pas dépendu du choix de la majorité du peuple de cette province, son origine française et son usage de la langue française, est devenu pour les autorités coloniales un prétexte d’injure, d’exclusion, d’infériorité politique et de séparations de droits et d’intérêts, cette chambre en appelle à la justice du gouvernement de Sa Majesté et de son parlement, et à l’honneur du peuple anglais; que la majorité des habitants du pays n’est nullement disposée à répudier aucun des avantages qu’elle tire de son origine et de sa descendance de la nation française, qui sous le rapport des progrès qu’elle a fait faire à la civilisation, aux sciences, aux lettres et aux arts, n’a jamais été en arrière de la nation britannique, et qui, aujourd’hui, dans la cause de la liberté et la science du gouvernement, est sa digne émule; de qui ce pays tient la plus grande partie de ses lois civiles et ecclésiastiques, la plupart de ses établissements d’enseignement et de charité, et la religion, la langue, les habitudes, les mœurs et les usages de la grande majorité de ses habitants.[4]

The Patriotes sought to restate their membership of a nation of French origin and as a result the right of this nation to benefits equal to British Canadians. This was an assertion of the principle of national equality within a multi-national state and a call for an end to discrimination on racial grounds. In this context, the importance that Patriote speeches placed on the political features of the Lower Canadian crisis (control of subsidies, appointment of the officers, election to the Legislative Council, short-circuiting of the colonial government by boycotting English products), their willingness to take part in governing the colony and the objective of promoting a social agenda that they believed would ensure a national revival were compromised by existing constitutional institutions and seriously threatened by the Russell’s Ten Resolutions.

Que cette violation [les Résolutions Russel] de notre constitution est attentoire à la liberté du peuple, et tend à détruire son existence politique, par le renversement prochain des lois, culte, langage, mœurs et autres institutions des habitans de cette province.’[5]

This national revival meant maintaining social and cultural institutions specific to Lower Canada in which the French language was an essential component.

Or, le plus important, et le plus sacré de ces usages est indubitablement celui par lequel un peuple donne les mêmes noms aux choses et les mêmes signes aux idées.[6]

In this respect, Patriots asserted the necessity for an adequate French-speaking school system and continuance of the French dimension in government, particularly in the legal field. The question of education preoccupied the Assembly during 1824 over the loi des écoles de fabriques and again in 1829.[7]

Si l’on vouloit anéantir, pour les Canadiens, tous les moyens d’acquérir des talents et les connoissances utiles que procurent l’éducation parmi eux, on ne pourroit prendre un moyen plus sur et plus efficace que d’abolir l’usage de la langue Françoise dans nos colléges et ailleurs.[8]

For Patriotes, effective French schools and education was inseparable from the economic and social development of Lower Canada but they feared that this was under threat from the colonial authorities something that was evident from the early nineteenth century:

...13° Les injustes obstacles opposés par un exécutif, ami des abus et de l’ignorance, à la fondation de colléges dotés par des hommes vertueux et désintéressés, pour répondre aux besoins et aux désirs croissants de la population, de recevoir une éducation soignée.[9]

The problem of delivering public services in French when most officials were English-speakers was of particular concern to Patriotes. This was especially the case in the judicial system.

Résolu, -Que c’est l’opinion de ce comité, que par suite de leurs liaisons avec les membres des administrations provinciales et leurs antipathies contre le pays, quelques-uns des dits juges ont, en violation des lois, tenté d’abolir, dans les cours de justice, l’usage de la langue parlée par la majorité des habitants du pays, nécessaire à la libre action des lois et formant partie des usages à eux assurés, de la manière la plus solemnelle, par des actes du droit public et statuts du parlement britannique.[10]

For A. N. Morin, French needed to be maintained as a ‘language of right’ to guarantee equal accessibility to justice already restricted by the remoteness of rural areas and the lack of education of the plaintiffs that made access to the law increasingly inaccessible to the mass of rural French-speakers. In addition, lawyers were obliged to speak English reducing access to the legal profession among French Canadians. In 1791, there were 55 notaries and 17 lawyers; by 1836, this had only risen to 373 and 208 respectively or per capita ratios of 1:1164 in 1791 and 1:950 in 1836.[11] Plaintiffs often did not understand actions initiated by their representatives because they did not understand the language of the procedures.[12]

...quelle doit être la langue juridique d’un pays? La réponse se présente tout bonnement; c’est la langue du peuple que l’on juge. Ici toutefois d’injustes distinctions politiques tendent sans cesse à faire reconnoître en principe que les Canadiens dont neuf sur dix au moins n’entendent que le françois, sont obligés de se servir de la langue angloise dans tous leurs actes civils, lors même qu’il n’est aucune des parties intéressées qui ne l’ignore. Entre les raisons qu’on apporte au soutien de cette doctrine oppressive les principales sont les avantages de l’uniformité, la dépendance où nous sommes de l’Angleterre, la supériorité que doit avoir sur toute autre la langue de l’Empire, celle du Souverain...les journaux anglois...s’efforcent d’insinuer qu’il devroit y avoir dans le pays une classe privilégiée de sujets qui fît la loi aux autres sous le rapport du langage comme de tout le reste.[13]

Patriote claims for the French language were placed in the context of the natural right of the people to protect their cultural heritage, the recognition of their freedom as British subjects to preserve certain French usages and to benefit from services delivered in French language. These rights, they maintained, were guaranteed by the 1791 Constitution.

Les Canadiens anglois de naissance ne sont pas plus étrangers ici que les Canadiens françois; ils ont les mêmes droits que nous, ils sont protégés par les mêmes lois, et soumis aux mêmes usages; ils ont dû considérer avant de se fixer ici, l’ordre des choses qui y étoit établi. Nous ne leur contestons pas la légalité de leur langage; nous voulons seulement défendre celle du nôtre.[14]

Also the Patriote struggle for control of political institutions was grounded in an inclusive social agenda through which the nation could ensure its economic prosperity.

Que nous appelons de tous nos vœux l’union entre les habitans de cette Province de toute croyance et de toute langue, et origine, que pour la défense commune, pour l’honneur et le salut du Pays chacun doit faire le sacrifice de ses préjugés; nous donner la main pour obtenir un gouvernement sage et protecteur qui en faisant renaître l’harmonie fasse en même temps fleurir l’agriculture, le commerce et l’industrie nationale.[15]

The Patriote declarations made clear the urgency of preserving the French language under threat but these documents also testified to the unequivocal desire to see French as well as English recognised in the public life. The claims of liberalism were made clear in Patriote rhetoric especially popular legitimacy, equality before the law and the principle of individual freedom. Language may not have appeared as the primary feature of the Patriote programme that sought to ensure French Canadians control of their governmental apparatus but it was recognised as essential for their economic and cultural revival. It is significant that the links between language and political control remained important for the survival of French Canadian heritage and culture after the failure of the rebellions in the policies adopted by Lafontaine and Morin after 1841 and in the later evolution of the Québécois nationalist movement.

---

[1] Reid, Philippe, ‘L’émergence du nationalisme canadien-français; l’idéologie du Canadien (1806-1842)’, Recherches sociographiques, Vol. xxi, (1980), pages 11-53 provides a good summary of the major issues.

[2] Ibid, Harvey, Louis-Georges, Le Printemps de l’Amérique français: Américanité, anticolonialisme et républicanisme dans le discours politique québecois, 1805-1837.

[3] Bellavance, Marcel, ‘La rébellion de 1837 et les modèles théoriques de l’émergence de la nation et du nationalisme’, Revue d’histoire de l’Amérique française, Vol. 53, (3), (2000), p. 370.

[4] Bédard, Théophile-Pierre, Histoire de cinquante ans (1791-1841): annales parlementaires et politiques du Bas-Canada depuis la Constitution jusqu’à l’Union, (Léger Brousseau), 1869, pp. 348-349.

[5] Ibid, Bernard, Jean-Paul, Assemblées publiques, résolutions et déclarations de 1837-1838, Assemblée de Saint-François-du-Lac, pp. 180-182.

[6] Morin, A. N., Lettre à l’honorable Edward Bowen, Ecuyer, Un des Juges de la Cour du Banc du Roi de Sa Majesté pour le District de Québec, (James Lane), 1825, republished, Quebec, 1968, p. 11.

[7] Dessureault, Christian and Hudon, Christine, ‘Conflits sociaux et élites locales au Bas-Canada: Le clergé, les notables, la paysannerie et le contrôle de la fabrique’, Canadian Historical Review, Vol. 80, (1999), pages 413-439 shows clearly the contested nature of education.

[8] Viger, D. B., Considérations sur les effets qu’ont produit en Canada, la conservation des établissemens du pays, les mœurs, l’éducation, etc. de ses habitans et les conséquences qu’entraîneroient leur décadence par rapport aux intérêts de la Grande Bretagne, (James Brown, Libraire),1809, p. 11.

[9] Ibid, Bédard, Théophile-Pierre, Histoire de cinquante ans (1791-1841): annales parlementaires et politiques du Bas-Canada depuis la Constitution jusqu’à l’Union, p. 359.

[10] Ibid, Bédard, Théophile-Pierre, Histoire de cinquante ans (1791-1841): annales parlementaires et politiques du Bas-Canada depuis la Constitution jusqu’à l’Union, pp. 355-356.

[11] Mackay Julien S., Notaires et patriotes 1837-1838, Septentrion, 2006.

[12] Morin, A. N., Lettre à l’honorable Edward Bowen, Ecuyer, Un des Juges de la Cour du Banc du Roi de Sa Majesté pour le District de Québec, (James Lane), 1825, republished, Quebec, 1968, p. 8.

[13] Ibid, Morin, A. N., Lettre à l’honorable Edward Bowen, Ecuyer, Un des Juges de la Cour du Banc du Roi de Sa Majesté pour le District de Québec, pp. 4-5.

[14] Ibid, Morin, A. N., Lettre à l’honorable Edward Bowen, Ecuyer, Un des Juges de la Cour du Banc du Roi de Sa Majesté pour le District de Québec, p. 14.

[15] Ibid, Bernard, Jean-Paul, Assemblées publiques, résolutions et déclarations de 1837-1838, pp. 47-56, Assemblée de Saint-Scolastique.