[To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.] SIR,—I do not agree
with Mr. Bossom's proposed solution of " Clearing the Slums." He says that 160 acres of buildings must be pulled down and a population of 60,000 rehoused as near as possible to the present sites in five-storey buildings. He would find sites by roofing the open railway cuts in London and building upon them. Mr. Bossom's scheme, besides being exceedingly expensive, is quite impossible. It is opposed to the whole tendency of the time and against the health and amenities of the community. Roof in the railway cuts by all means—railways will have to be put underground before many years—but leave the new sites as open spaces, gardens and playgrounds; which are much needed in Central London. Accommodation for the displaced inhabitants of the slums in congested areas should be found in garden cities in the suburbs—not in unattractive barracks in isolated colonies, but new cities more on the lines of the St. Helier estate at Morden.
Years ago it was difficult to get slum dwellers to move out of their slums into model dwellings, but as the standard of living rose they became reconciled to the change. It is the same with the change of environment. In the days when movement meant losing touch with friends, with institutions and places of amusement, people shifted with great reluctance. Now no suburb is isolated ; the amenities of life are every- where. Only one thing is wanted—more, cheaper and quicker means of communication. That will come before long, par- ticularly if proposals which are now made for the unification of London traffic are carried out, and if the recommendations in the Minority Report of the Royal Commission on Transport
are adopted. Mr. Bossom's proposals are quite out of date.
41 Rutland Gate, S.W. 7.
[Many letters on this subject have had to be held over.— En. Spectator.]
Previous page
