10 SEPTEMBER 1932, Page 13

COUNTRYMEN'S COTTAGES

[To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.] SIR,— Sir A. T. Wilson's article on this subject is very interest- ing, but I venture to think that it gives very little assistance towards solving the problem of Rural Housing. He describes a very attractive cottage, but would it be really sound business to build partly of brick, and partly of wood, matchboarding, shavings and thatch ? Would he tell us what his insurance Premiums are ? They are not mentioned in his statement of income. Moreover, does he really think that £1 per house per annum is going to cover the cost of repairs ? If he does, then it is safe to prophesy a sad disillusionment when the thatch begins to need repair, or the time comes for external Painting. His figure of 140 per house for land seems us- necessarily high, unless each house has nearly an acre of land ; and, finally, so far as criticism is concerned, what type of agri- cultural worker (for I assume that he is referring to such countrymen) can afford to pay 7s. 6d. a week rent ?

I have of late years been closely associated with the efforts of a Rural District Council in Norfolk to provide cottages for eountryfolk ; and Sir A. T. Wilson may be interested to know that we are now building cottages in pairs, with 760 sq. ft. floor space, at a contract price of £285. Add the cost of land and legal charges, and the total cost is under £300 for each -house. There are three bedrooms, a very good living room, a fair sized back kitchen, a washhouse under the same roof but entered by a separate door ; and outside, a reasonable distance from the house, earth-closet and coalshed. The houses are built six to the acre on land which varies in cost from 140 to £60 per acre. These houses are not, perhaps, aesthetically so satisfying as those which he describes ; but their appearance is quite pleasing, and they satisfy the people for whom they are intended. The rent varies slightly from village to village, but the general run for this type of house may be taken to be about 3s. 6d. per week, including rates. This, of course, includes State subsidy and local rate aid ; the economic rent of such houses would be about 9s. 6d. per week.

Mr. B. S. Townroe, in a recent letter to the Spectator, pro- phesied that the economy schemes to be presented to Parlia- ment would include the withdrawal of Housing subsidies. The figures given by Sir A. T. Wilson, who, as I have suggested, has much underestimated repair and similar charges, as well as those quoted by me, show how impossible it still is to build cottages to let at an economic rent which an agricultural worker can possibly pay. I hope that whatever decision may be come to so far as urban housing is concerned the Government will not be so shortsighted as to withdraw the subsidy from rural districts. If they do, the result will be that save in a few favoured localities the provision of new cottages for genuine rural workers will inevitably cease.—! am, Sir, &c., BASIL D. REED (Chairman, Docking Rural District Council), Syderstone Rectory, King's Lynn, Norfolk.