THE HOUSING PROBLEM IN THE COUNTRY.

[To THE EDITOR OF THE SPECTATOR."] SIR,—In the Spectator of August 27th Mr. A. H. Clough says that he feels "sure that it is possible to build four-roomed houses in blocks for very little over £100 apiece, and to make a net 4 or 4! per cent. on the outlay." He adds that he could show several districts where this is done.

It would be kind and advantageous to many interested people if Mr. Clough would furnish a few details. The subject of cottage- building is one with which I have some acquaintance, both from personal experience of this class of property, and through exten- sive investigations and inquiries which I have made on the matter

in the majority of the English counties. Personally, I have, however, never yet found decent cottages containing four rooms, with the necessary outside accessories, that were built of any permanent material, such as brick or cement, for "very little over £100."

I think that the cheapest dwellings of the sort which I can remember are those erected by the late Lord Salisbury near

Hatfield,—one-storied buildings in blocks containing living-room, scullery, and three bedrooms (no cottage should be erected to-day with only two bedrooms), and costing £156 per house. I believe, however, that I am right in saying that these cottages were largely built by estate workmen, which of course means a saving in outlay. Any who are concerned in the subject may find a full

account of them, with photograph and ground-plan, on pp. 536 and 537, Vol. I., of my book, "Rural England." I may add that my experience is that, by the time everything is paid for, average cottages with three bedrooms, at the present prices of labour and material, can rarely be erected under £400 a pair.

If I may take the opportunity to say so, this difficult rural housing question is one of the great causes of the exodus to the cities. An educated newly married girl, who perhaps has been servant in a good house, will not go to live in the tumble-down pigsty of a place which perhaps is alone available. So she and her husband migrate to a town, where often enough they are obliged to inhabit one room in a slum at twice the rent they would have to pay for a good cottage and garden in the country, could such a habitation be secured by them. The ills they fly to, indeed, are worse than those they leave behind, for however bad the dwelling in the country, at least here they have the advantage of fresh air and a garden.

Sometimes, however, no cottages whatsoever are available. How can it be otherwise under the conditions ? In favourite neighbourhoods where rich men buy estates for purposes of pleasure, or such small dignity as may still attach to the possession of land, a few cottages are built by them, mostly to be occupied by their gamekeepers or other employes, and looked on in the light of capital outlay of which the interest is payable in pheasants and partridges, or whatever may be the particular object of their desire. But outside of those favoured neighbour- hoods to which people come to spend their wealth—that is, through- out the most of the back stretches of rural England where the houses of gentlemen are few and far between—who is there that can afford in these hard times to build utterly unremunerative dwellings ? Here is an instance of the unprofitable nature of such invest- ments, even when they involve repairs alone. About three years ago I found it necessary to purchase a little strip of land that intersected my own property. On this there had stood, probably for two or three hundred years, a double and a single cottage, of which the latter, becoming uninhabitable, was pulled down some time ago by the late owner, who could not face the expense of its renewal. The double cottage was almost in the same scandalous condition, but two years went by before I could get possession of it, as one of the tenants refused to quit under arrangement. Now I have been obliged to spend quite £100 in making of those two dilapidated shanties one good cottage, con- taining three bedrooms, two sitting-rooms, scullery, &c., all the stud-work fabric being refaced with brick. This dwelling, and

a large garden planted with fruit-trees, I have succeeded with

some difficulty in letting to a man in my own employ for the sum of £6 a year, or under 2s. 4d. a week,—a high rent according to local standards. Add the cost of these repairs to the purchase price of the two cottages and garden land, which together would amount, let us say, to at least £180, and the reader can easily reckon for himself what kind of interest I am likely to get for my money,—if the cottage remains let. Out of these receipts, it must be remembered also, will come the expense of all future repairs, a proportion of agency charges, taxes, &c.

But this example is a favourable one from the landlord's point of view, since to build such a cottage would have cost over .2200,

plus the value of the land on which it stands and of the double garden, and then the return would have been practically nothing at all. Considered in the light of the public interest, moreover,

the net result is that the village accommodation has been de- creased by two houses, since in place of the three bad cottages that formerly stood upon this plot sheltering three families there is now a single good one sheltering one family. The other two families, or their representatives, must go somewhere else. In all the remoter villages these things go on continually ; the cottages become uninhabitable by degrees and scarcely any new "nes are built. It is unnecessary for me to point out how disas- trous is this state of affairs, and how powerfully it assists the depopulation of the countryside. In view of the national character of the issues involved, most people might think that such a question would receive the instant attention of our Governments. But while the time of Parliament is mainly occu- pied with discussions on bitterly contested questions connected with the sale of drink and Irish grievances, or with party recrimi- nations as to whether the Transvaal should or should not employ Chinese labour, there is little hope that it will give attention to dull matters that merely concern the fundamental welfare of the English people.

Yet I believe that there are methods by which this rural housing problem could be solved, or at any rate greatly simpli- fied, and these quite outside the adoption of any of the Protective measures of which the desirability is so much debated.

My letter is already too long, therefore I will only mention one remedy,—the multiplication of small holdings by the means which I have suggested in my work, "Rural England." My experience is that where small holders exist in properly organised communities, or in some instances without such organisation, to a great extent the cottage difficulty vanishes, for the simple reason that by hook or by crook these small holders manage to build their own homes. To expect that without the help of any national borrowing facilities—for in practice there are none—the impoverished owners of land will erect dwellings that return little or no interest, and keep the same in repair, is to expect a vain thing. Moreover, most of them absolutely have not the means to do so, nor if they had could the housing problem, rural or urban, be settled by this kind of philanthropy. Meanwhile our Governments, seeing no party advantage in the matter, do nothing, with results that will be fully apparent to the rising and future generations.

Ditchingham.