COMPRA FINANCIADA POR TERCEROS Y MODELOS DE BANCA Compra Financiada por Terceros: Diseño y Estructuración

"An adequate housing stock is an obvious necessity for securing a labour force, while the standard of housing accommodation is a significant determinant of labour productivity."^

1,1. Introduction

Industrialists, manufacturers, company owners and employers all played a prominent role in the provision of housing for workers. When taken on a national scale however, and when compared with speculative urban provision of working class housing, the amount of company built housing in Britain has always been small. Studies of company housing have been patchy and have concentrated for the most part on only some aspects of provision, often reflecting the particular interests of individual authors. Enid Gauldie for instance, in a seminal study, examined company housing in the context of the national provision of working class housing^. She recognised the need for a general history of housing against wlrich local situations could be analysed and better understood. Her work is widely regarded as path-breaking and provided one of the earliest comprehensive histories of the housing of the working class in Britain,

^ Daunton, M.J.,(1983) House and Home in the Victorian City. Working Class Housing 1850-1914. Edward Arnold London, p. 178.

^Gauldie, E., (1984) Cruel Habitations. A History of Working Class Housing 1780-1918. George Allen and Unwin, London.

Gauldie suggests that the tradition of building houses for workers, at least on a large scale, became increasingly uncommon after the 1850s.3 WMle it is undoubtedly true that "large scale" provision declined in the late nineteenth century, this assertion should not be taken to imply that company provision ceased entirely by the mid nineteenth century. Nor should the importance of such housing be underestimated. While always accounting for a small proportion of the national supply, the importance of company housing lies not so much in the quantity or quality of the dwellings themselves, but rather in the social aspects of their provision. Houses are physical structures, designed and built as a result of particular social and economic needs. In the words of Bourne a house is "a physical entity, a social artefact, an economic good, a capital stock, a status symbol and at times a political "hot-potato".^ Houses have both a physical presence and an economic significance and should be studied and interpreted in the context of culture and society.^ Coal-miners houses, during the period of study, were important elements in both the social and physical fabric of the local society. The aspect of housing being examined here is the social behaviour of coal-owners and miners that was embodied in the provision of company housing in the changing cultural and physical environment of late nineteenth and early twentieth century Scotland.

It is argued in tliis thesis that surviving examples of coal company housing in Fife represent relict features of a social order that prevailed from the

^Gauldie, E., Op. cit. p. 188

^Bourne, L.S., (1981) The Geography of Housing. Edward Arnold, London p. 13.

earliest days of industrial exploitation until well into the twentieth century. The power that Scottish coal companies gained through the provision of housing and neighbourhood services (churches, schools, libraries, recreation facilities) for their workers complem ented their role as employers. The provision of housing remained central to managerial policy until (1) the government took over responsibility for working class housing and (2) the management of the coal industry was taken out of private hands. The purpose of this chapter is to present an introductory historical background to the provision of company housing in Britain and to examine in a general and prelim inary m anner the m otivation of employers in investing in such housing. Chapter two follows with a general economic history of the Scottish coal-mining industry and introduces the economic and political factors that influenced coal company housing provision between 1870 and 1930. Chapter three reviews housing legislation relevant to the period of Scottish history being studied, while Chapter four explains how workers houses were erected under mineral leases. These four chapters form the first part of the thesis which is designed to provide the background to a more detailed investigation of company housing provision explored in Parts 11 and 111.

1.2. Industrial ”tied” housing.

It can be argued that the economic welfare of an industrial enterprise was largely determined by the social welfare of the workforce and by good working relations between managers and employers. Financial investment in housing was an investment not only in housing stock, but also in the maintenance of labour productivity tlirough workplace stability. The direct provision of housing by employers helped to sustain a stable and sedentary

workforce. It also guaranteed the replacement of the labour force by encouraging the children of miners to take up employment in the same enterprise as their forebears. Company housing was therefore an important element of social relations of production and continued so as long as productive and skilled labourers remained valuable and useful to the enterprise.

Two factors motivated manufacturers and industrial entrepreneurs in the erection of working class housing. These were (1) economic necessity and (2) the absence of alternative means of provision. Many early industrial enterprises were located in remote areas and in the absence of alternative provision, employers were obliged at least initially to build homes for their workers. Individual landowners commissioned contractors to build houses as cheaply as possible and as close as possible to the workplace. Whether other agencies of housing provision, such as speculative builders, followed the companies into an area frequently depended upon the degree of isolation of the enterprise and whether or not the location attracted other sources of employment and hence increased demand for housing. Employer provision of housing, tended to predominate in areas where a company monopolised the labour market. The provision of housing by employers for a stable and sedentary workforce over a long period of time can accurately be described as "company housing".

Accommodation "tied" to particular jobs predated industrialisation of the late eighteenth century. Prior to industrialisation when manufacturing was a local business and carried out on a small scale, the size of industries, their "undeveloped" nature and the small numbers employed therein, facilitated a close relationsliip between workers and employers. In these circumstances agricultural labourers, migrant workers, textile and colliery workers were

typically provided with dwellings by employers.

But even when rapid industrial expansion occurred in the 1780s as a result of both innovations in machinery design and in the harnessing of sources of power, facilitating the relocation of production and removal of industries from their "cottage base", the practice of direct company provision of houses did not end. From the late eighteenth century new industries were increasingly located adjacent to sources of power; textile mills close to rivers for water power; and iron, steel and shipbuilding close to coal seams for furnace and steam power. The proliferation of industries in such locations, often some distance away from existing centres of population, compelled companies to provide housing for the workforce on a much larger scale than before. Workers had to be lured from towns and villages, and from their crofts, to often relatively inaccessible areas. The guarantee of a house was one means of doing so.

The practice of industrial companies supplying housing for their workers was well established by the 1830s. In 1833, 168 of the 881 large firms that made returns on housing provision to the Factory Commission were providing some housing for their workers. Such provision varied in type from a few rows or squares of houses to whole villages housing thousands of workers and including shops, schools, churches and recreation facilities. Quality also varied, although company housing was generally of a higher standard than that of speculative builders. The houses were built to attract suitable workers and were not at this stage of the nineteenth century generally expected to show an economic return on capital investment.

1,3. '^Harmonious living".

Once industries were well established the motivation of company owners in providing workers houses changed. Employers were no longer just concerned with attracting and maintaining a workforce, but also with the quality of the labourers. A preoccupation with the quality of the workforce influenced the scale and type of housing provision. "Company towns" in the form of planned, high amenity, villages were an added inducement to attract high quality skilled workers and to motivate them to excel at their work. Such plamied settlements were designed;

"not only to ensure to the employer an efficient and contented labour force, but to point the way towards a new relationship between capital and labour and the creation of a new kind of physical environment in which men and machines could live harmoniously together." ^

One of the earliest ventures at harmonious living was at New Lanark in Scotland. Tliis entirely new village was built on the banks of the Clyde river in 1785 to accommodate cotton mill workers. By 1794 the mill was the largest in Scotland and the village eventually housed 2500 people. New Lanark is probably best known for the work of Robert Owen who became general manager of the firm in 1800. It was generally believed at the time that the working man was a brutish creature who had to be "moralized lest civilization be trampled beneath the weight of his barbarous boot".^ Owen developed his ideas of a utopian society and conducted his social experiments in the village, funded by the profits from the mill. He aimed to

^Burnett, J., (1978) A Social History of Housing 1850-1970, David Charles, Newton Abbot, p. 176.

^Englander, D., (1983) Landlord and Tenant in Urban Britain 1838-1913.

provide the correct social environment in which the characters of the workers would be improved. Diligent work practices were an important aspect of good social conduct and were instilled in the workers from the earliest age. The use of the "silent monitor" as a means of regulating the productivity of the youngest workers was undoubtedly a means of ensuring social control. The monitor consisted of a block of different colours which hung from the machines worked by children. Each colour represented grades of moral behaviour from poor to excellent and the monitors were hung in different directions depending upon the childrens' output.

The social experiment conducted at New Lanark was primarily concerned with productivity and discipline. Welfare needs of the workers and their families were nonetheless catered for. In doing so however the company maintained productivity and ensured workplace discipline.

But, New Lanark was an exception, early housing provision was by its very nature generally unplanned. Employers built factories and houses according to economic requirements and workers moved into the area, attracted by jobs and accommodation. These houses differed little from the traditional farm labourers cottages and were generally packed tightly together in rows. By the middle of the nineteenth century larger schemes of company housing were being constructed involving the planning of whole communities. Edward Ackroyd, a Halifax worsted manufacturer built model villages at Copley (1849-53) and at Ackroyden (1859). These settlements are often regarded as the forerumiers of the garden city.® Ackroyd recognised a causal relationsliip between good quality housing and the better health and "moral welfare" of the workers. As at New Lanark moral welfare was associated ®Burnett, J., op. cit. p. 177.

with diligence at work. Ackroyd however also capitalised on the voting rights of people in possession of a forty shilling freehold by providing his workers with just such a freehold in exchange for their support at elections. Price's Patent Candle Company, makers of "fine candles since 1830", built Bromborough Pool on the Wirral Peninsula for its workers in 1853. This development of less than a hundred dwellings is of interest in that the houses were of a very liigh standard for the day. They were constructed with red brick and semi-detached or in terraces of four, with front and back gardens and sanitary facilities adjoining the houses. The survival of these houses to the present day is a testament to their high quality. They were however erected along traditional lines with a "two up, two down" plan and the layout of the scheme lacked imagination. The houses were erected in straight rows with narrow streets between and no open spaces.

In contrast Saltaire a contemporary development, was much more advanced in terms of the evolution of company housing. Titus Salt, a Bradford alpaca manufacturer built Saltaire around his mill between 1852 and 1862. Salt looked to Italy for architectural inspiration. The village consisted of over eight hundred cottages of different styles to avoid monotony. The houses were built to suit the needs of families of different sizes and of different social status. These dwellings too were of a high standard with good ventilation and drainage. Village amenities included garden allotments, churches, reading room, recreation and sports facilities, public baths and wash house, but no public house. Although house rents gave a return of 4% the public amenities were paid for from Salt's personal funds. A contented, disciplined and productive workforce, rather than direct financial profit, was the return for Iris housing and enviromnental investment.

The next phase of "utopian planning" did not occur until the 1880s and 1890s w ith the building of W.H. Lever's Port Sunlight on the Wirral Peninsula (1888), George Cadbury's Bournville (1893) and New Earswick, built by the Rowntree Quaker family of York. The latter were pioneers of safely enclosed areas and cul-de-sacs and the use of bricks and tiles in construction. These settlements were built as alternatives to high density housing; the dominant form of working class housing and of speculative construction throughout Britain at the time. They combined town and country living in a rural setting.

At Port Sunlight the company built semi-detached houses or groups of four and six separated by open spaces and curving roads in order to avoid uniformity of style. The workers lived in near idyllic settings and worked in the adjacent soap factory. The whole scheme was based on profit sharing to give the workers a stake in their own output and rents were below commercial levels.

Bournville was similar in design and layout but was more than a company town. It was built as an ideal alternative community, providing houses for other than company employees. By 1912 there were one thousand dwellings in the village and returns of over 4% were re-invested in further housing development.

Ideas of ideal or utopian communities culminated in 1898 with the publication of Ebenezer Howard's book "Tomorrow-A Peaceful Path to Real Reform" which was reprinted in 1902 as "Garden Cities of Tomorrow".^ ^Howard, Sir. E., (1902) Garden Cities of Tomorrow. Edited with a preface by F.J. Osborn, Faber and Faber, London, 1945.

Howard's aim was to introduce new and original ideas on the combination of rural and urban living with all the advantages of both. He aimed to produce a selection of ideal plans for dwellings suitable to particular locations with the provision of open spaces and garden plots integral to each. His ideal settlement was a town-country magnet drawing from the countryside and cities everything deemed most attractive in both, while discarding all of their drawbacks.

Howard's work was followed by that of Unwin who published a pamphlet in 1912 entitled "Notiling Gained by Overcrowding: or How the Garden City Type of Development may Benefit both Owner and Occupier". He was the first to stipulate twelve houses as the maximum per acre, a figure which greatly influenced govenmient and local authority plamiing in pre- and post World War I Britain. A pressure group, the Garden City Association, was formed to commence work on the world's first garden city at Letchworth in Hertfordshire. However there was little public enthusiasm for private ventures such as Letchworth as it was believed that Garden Cities attracted "frivolous" r e c r u i t s .I t was not until the 1940s that the government was forced through urban overcrowding and war damage, to recognise the necessity for town and country planning. The "new towns" that followed drew upon many of the ideas of the Garden City Movement.

The examples of company housing given above are the exceptions to the rule rather than the norm. They were developments on a large scale, built by family firms each infused with a clear ideology; particularly in relation to the "moral welfare" of their workers. As examples of exceptional housing

i^Hardy, D., (1991) "Garden of Urban Delight: How to Build More Housing W ithout Depleting the Countryside or Creating Urban Blight", in The Times Higher Education Supplement, 19. 07. 1991, p. 16.

schemes erected by extraordinary people they have attracted considerable attention from historians of working class housing.

Though exceptional, the examples given are nonetheless both instructive and important because of their influence on future generations of architects and town planners and as illustrations of the evolution in managerial practice. Throughout the nineteenth century the managerial policy of companies such as Cadbury, Lever and Price, moved from an initial position of primary concern with obtaining and maintaining a workforce to an often philanthropic and altruistic interest in the welfare of employees and a recognition of responsibility towards the workers. In the examples of company housing provision given above, genuine concern for the welfare of the workforce was undoubtedly a motivating factor in leading employers to build, yet the driving force in the background was all the wliile a desire for increased productivity and output. The ultimate motive was to maintain an efficient workforce, through generating good moral character and thereby ensuring diligent work practice.

1.4. Pre-industrial relations of production and miners' housing

In contrast to the examples given above the more usual response to the need for company housing was pragmatic and piecemeal, with little regard for standard of accommodation or design.^^ In the coal-mining industry throughout Britain coal-owners traditionally provided accommodation for their colliers, even prior to large scale industrialisation of the late eighteenth century.

^^Melling, J. (1981) "Employers, Industrial Housing and the Evolution of Company Welfare Policies in Britains Heavy Industry: West Scotland 1870- 1920", International Review of Social History, 26 p. 256.

In Scotland workers In coal mines and salt-works were "astricted" for life to their occupation by enactment of the Scottish Parliament in 1606,^^ 1641^® and 1661^4, This legislation which was introduced to reduce vagrancy conferred upon employers powers to virtually enslave the unemployed. For