The increasing tendency to carry on manufacturing as well as commercial operations for small profits on large outlays will probably occasion the subject of the rents of labourers’ tenements in manufacturing districts to be more closely considered as part of the cost of production than it has hitherto been. The whole of the consequences cannot distinctly be foreseen, further than that it will probably occasion a reduction of high ground-rents, or the abandonment of particular districts which are now the seats of some descriptions of manufacture. In the course of an examination of the condition of the working population of Macclesfield, which I was requested to aid, it was complained that much work was put out to a rural district at a few miles distance from the town. On inquiring as to the cause, it was answered, that the weavers in the rural district were enabled to do the work at a reduced price, but at the same real wages in consequence of reduced rents. The following examination, however, displays the element indicated:—
Mr. Shatwell, relieving officer, examined—
“What is the common amount of rent paid by weavers in Macclesfield and the adjacent districts?—A weaver cannot get, in Macclesfield, a proper house for his loom, with due lights, for less than 10l. a-year. In Hazel Grove and other places, he may get them for 2l. or 3l. less—for about 7l.—with a small garden attached, worth at least 20s. a-year more.
“What difference in price do you think would induce a manufacturer to send goods to Hazel Grove in preference to Macclesfield?—A farthing a yard, as that difference might make the difference in his profit.
“How many yards will a weaver weave in the week?—They calculate that a good weaver will weave 12 yards a-day, or an average of 60 yards a-week.
“Since 1s. 3d. a-week, or a farthing a yard, will make the difference in profit, will not the difference in rent enable the weaver to make that difference in price and yet obtain the same net amount of wages?—Precisely so.
“So that a manufacturer who employs 1000 hands at a low-rented place, 3l. or 4l. a-year cheaper, such as Hazel Grove, if he obtain the difference of rent as profit, will obtain a profit of 3,000l. or 4,000l. per annum?—Certainly.
“The cost of building and building materials being nearly the same in Macclesfield and such a place as Hazel Grove, does not the difference in rent consist chiefly in the difference of ground-rent?—Yes.”
If in all instances, as in the last, better as well as cheaper residences, with gardens attached, were likely to be the result of the commercial operation to the workmen, the change were, of course, to be desired. But it is to be feared that it may often be otherwise than a competition of comforts, unless timely security be taken against its being otherwise by appropriate legislative measures, which indeed were necessary for the due protection of the ratepayers against the pecuniary consequences of the disease and destitution undoubtedly occasioned by such tenements as are thus described by Mr. Mott:—
“An immense number of the small houses occupied by the poorer classes in the suburbs of Manchester are of the most superficial character; they are built by the members of building clubs, and other individuals, and new cottages are erected with a rapidity that astonishes persons who are unacquainted with their flimsy structure. They have certainly avoided the objectionable mode of forming underground dwellings, but have run into the opposite extreme, having neither cellar nor foundation. The walls are only half brick thick, or what the bricklayers call ‘brick noggin,’ and the whole of the materials are slight and unfit for the purpose. I have been told of a man who had built a row of these houses; and on visiting them one morning after a storm, found the whole of them levelled with the ground; and in another part of Manchester, a place with houses even of a better order has obtained the appellation of ‘Pickpocket-row,’ from the known insecure and unsubstantial nature of the buildings. I recollect a bricklayer near London complaining loudly of having to risk his credit by building a house with nine-inch walls, and declared it would be like ‘Jack Straw’s House,’ neither ‘wind nor water tight:’ his astonishment would have been great had he been told that thousands of houses occupied by the labouring classes are erected with walls of 4½ inch thickness. The chief rents differ materially according to the situation, but are in all cases high; and thus arises the inducement to pack the houses so close. They are built back to back, without ventilation or drainage; and, like a honeycomb, every particle of space is occupied. Double rows of these houses form courts, with, perhaps, a pump at one end and a privy at the other, common to the occupants of about twenty houses.”