Bd 
 
 r- 
 
THREE YEARS’ WORK 
 
 ON THE 
 
 LONDON COUNTY COUNCIL 
 
 A Letter to the Electors of Deptford 
 
 BY- 
 
 C/iainiian of the Technical lulucation Board. 
 Printed and Published by T. May, 138, Tanners Hill, Deptford, S.E. 
 

THE WORK 
 
 OF THE 
 
 LONDON COUNTY COUNCIL: 
 
 A LETTER TO THE ELECTORS OF DEPTFORD 
 
 BY 
 
 SII>NEY WEBE, EE.E., 
 
 ONE OF THE REPRESENTATIVES OF DEPTFORD ON THE COUNCIL, AND 
 CHAIRMAN OF THE TECHNICAL EDUCATION BOARD.* 
 
 To THE Electors of Deptford, 
 
 Three years ago you chose me, together with Mr. Key¬ 
 lock, to represent Deptford on the London County 
 Council. The time is close at hand when you will again 
 have to choose your representatives, and I shall then ask 
 you to renew your confidence in me and let me continue 
 
 • (Member of the Appeal Committee, 1892-3 ; Establishment Commit¬ 
 tee, 1892-3 ; Finance Committee, 1893-5 ; General Purposes Committee, 
 1892-5; Local Government and Taxation Committee, 1892-5; (Vice- 
 Chairman, 1892-4); Parliamentary Committee, 1892-5; Public Health 
 and Housing Committee, 1892-3 ; Rivers Committee, 1894-5 i Water Com¬ 
 mittee, 1892-5 ; and of the Special Committees on London Government, 
 1894-5 : Technical Education (Chairman), 1892-3 ; and Thames Conser¬ 
 vancy, 1893-4 ; Chairman of the Technical Education Board, 1893-5). 
 
 b 
 
2 
 
 the work which you gave me to do. But before we 
 actually come to the excitement of the election contest, I 
 want to report to you what kind of work it is that the 
 Council has been doing, so that you may the better realise 
 how far your representatives have deseiwed the confidence 
 which you plac^ in them. 
 
 And, first, let me say a word as to the amount of time 
 that it takes to be a County Councillor. During the past 
 three years I have spent nearly every afternoon, except 
 Saturdays, on the Council’s business, and not unfrequently 
 a part of the morning also. I must have attended betw’een 
 800 and 1,000 meetings of one sort or another. With 
 the exception of the brief holiday times, I do not think I 
 have ever got off with less than 20 hours Council work in 
 a week, whilst it has sometimes run to twice that amount. 
 We have a very proper rule forbidding both the represen¬ 
 tatives of a constituency to serve on the same committee. 
 I have, therefore, necessarily left to my colleague, 
 Mr. Keylock, with whom I have always acted har¬ 
 moniously, the imj)ortantsubjects of Parks and Asylums. 
 The committees on which I have myself served are 
 stated on the first page. 
 
 Probably most of you have read from time to time the 
 newspaper reports of the Council’s work, but it unfor¬ 
 tunately happens that, under the conditions of newspaper 
 existence, the journalist’s account of tlie Council’s pro¬ 
 ceedings is almost certain to give a false view of its 
 activity. A tart epigram by John Burns, or a reck¬ 
 less accusation against the Fire Brigade or Works Com¬ 
 mittee, makes better “ coj^y ” than the dry record of 
 administrative work presented week by week, to be, in 
 most cases, absolutely ignored by the reporters. 
 
 Let us take, as a sample, the proceedings of a single 
 week. The reader of the Times or the Daily Chronicle 
 (the daily papers giving the fullest reports of the Council) 
 had his attention drawn to between six and nine points 
 which cropped up at the Tuesday meeting. The agenda- 
 paper for that meeting, which is about of average length, 
 is now before me. It consists of thirty-one pages of 
 foolscap print, containing the recommendations of twenty- 
 eight committees, upon which the Council is invited to pa.ss 
 
3 
 
 no fewer than 12S separate resolutions. These vary in 
 importance from financial transactions involving hundreds 
 of thousands of pounds, or issues of policy affecting a 
 whole department, down to the appointment of an extra 
 clerk or the sanctioning of a sky-sign. They concern 
 every branch of Loudon’s municipal government, from 
 water-supply to weights and measures, from tunnelling 
 the Thames to technical education, from cricket-pitches 
 to taxation. On all these subjects, moreover, there are 
 numerous paragraphs reporting the progress of works 
 already ordered by the Council, or describing action taken 
 as to which no resolution is required. 
 
 “ London Week by Week.” 
 
 This survey of “ London Week by Week ” it is, literally 
 as long as one volume of an ordinary novel, which is 
 delivered to every Councillor on Saturday night, and 
 which forms the business of the ensuing Tuesday’s meet¬ 
 ing. Critics appalled at the length of the agenda have 
 .sometimes suggested that the Council keeps too much in 
 its own hands, and, by not delegating greater ix)wers to 
 its committees, compels much of its work to be done 
 twice over. This, however, is not the fact. When a 
 committee is in the hands of a competent chairman and 
 enjoys the confidence of the Council, its work is habitually 
 left unchallenged, and it often happens that, for many 
 weeks in succession, not a single criticism or objection is 
 made about it in Council. When, however, a committee 
 elects an injudicious chairman, or commits itself in any 
 way—when, indeed, anything in its department goes 
 wrong fiom any cause whatsoever—a feeling of uneasi¬ 
 ness spreads among the other members of the Council. 
 Every line of the reports of that committee is then 
 scrutinised, and critics of all kinds, friendly or hostile, 
 spring to their feet on Tuesday afternoon. Possibly the 
 'U'isest go quietly to the committee itself and get their 
 criticisms made where they can be properly sihed and 
 considered. But there are always enough of those who 
 prefer to move amendments to specific recommendations, 
 even when their amendments express rather their general 
 distrust of the committee’s wisdom than any reasoned 
 
4 
 
 dissent from the particular proposal. Hence it is not only 
 the newspaper reports of the Council’.s proceedings that 
 are misleading. Even the visitor in the Strangers’ 
 Gallery who listens to the debates is apt to carry away an 
 altogether false impression unless he studies the agenda- 
 paper more than the speeches. He will hear nothing 
 whatever about the nineteen-twentieths of tlie work which 
 is progressing so smoothly and so successfully that even 
 the most carping critics of the Opposition Party can find 
 nothing to say about it. Nearly the whole meeting, on 
 the other hand, will be taken up with the tiny fraction 
 momentarily labouring with some of the manifold diffi¬ 
 culties which beset (he reformer’s path. 
 
 How the County Council does its work. 
 
 But the weekly public meeting of the Council com¬ 
 prises, it need scarcely be said, only a small part of its 
 work. To prepare the weekly agenda there are, on an 
 average, forty meetings of committees or sub-committees 
 filling up every liour of the daytime, from ten or eleven 
 on Monday morning to five or six on Friday evening, and 
 often terminating with a “ vieM- ” or inspection of a park, 
 a sewer, or a slaughter-house on Saturday morning. I 
 need hardly remind you that a member who does not dili¬ 
 gently attend his committee meetings is of practically no 
 use, even if he does make speeches on Tuesday afternoons. 
 
 The work done by these committees falls into two 
 classes. Whole sections of administration, indeed, such 
 as asylums, industrial schools, and technical education, 
 are delegated en bloc to particular committees, and are 
 heard of in Council only by quartei’ly or annual reports, 
 which usually go through without a single word of com¬ 
 ment. Even where no such express and complete 
 delegation has taken place, the great bulk of the work of 
 administration goes on quietly m the committee room, 
 and is never heard of outside. The Fire Brigade Com¬ 
 mittee, for instance, has a brief report in the Council’s 
 agenda every week, with perhaps a dozen proposals of one 
 kind or another. But these are merely the residuum out 
 of a committee agenda which habitually contains over a 
 hundred separate items, nearly all of which the committee 
 
<lecides on its own responsibility. For the week to which 
 I am referring, when 128 resolutions were submitted to 
 the Council, no fewer than UOO separate items came before 
 committees and sub-committees, who spent, in the 
 aggregate, over bO hours in dealing with tliis business. It 
 is, I suppose, inevitable that these i)0() items dealt with 
 in committee; the thirty-one pages of agenda containing 
 128 proposals laid before the Council; and the bO hours 
 spent during the week in the steady grind of the commit- 
 tee-room, should make far less impression on the mind of 
 the average citizen than the half-a-dozen speeches, often 
 on insignificant details, which are reported on the Tues¬ 
 day afternoon. Yet it is not on those speeches, but on 
 the unseen and unrecorded work which I have described, 
 that the good government of London depends. 
 
 The Management of the Asylums. 
 
 The very multifariousness of the Council’s work makes 
 any exposition of it within the limits of a letter an almost 
 impossible task. There is no literary artifice by which the 
 reader can be given, for instance, any idea of the patient, 
 silentdevotionof the Asylums Committee, which never gets 
 into the papers at all. The annual report of this committee, 
 one of the most important of all, makes, by itself, a 
 volume of 147 foolscap pages, in which are summarised 
 the results of 181 sittings, of ten distinct sub-committees, 
 mostly meeting at the several asylums. Week after week 
 the members of these sub-committees journey out to 
 Cane Hill or Clay bury, Han well or Banstead, to go 
 through the thousand-and-one details involved in tlie 
 management of five colossal institutions, the admission 
 of over 3,000 lunatics every year (of whom one or two 
 come from Deptford every week), the careful scrutiny of 
 those fit to be restored to the world, the vigilant investi¬ 
 gation of every complaint oi; accident. 
 
 Duties of similar, though less onerous character, fall 
 upon the Industrial and Keformatory Schools Committee, 
 which conducts schools at Feltham and Maybury, where 
 <)00 boys, rescued from premature vice or crime, are 
 boarded, lodged, clothed, educated and started out in the 
 world. Ten or a dozen of these boys belong to Deptford. 
 
G 
 
 Here, again, the committee is practically supreme, it 
 being the rarest possible occurrence for even a question 
 to be asked in Council as to their patiently-laborious 
 work. 
 
 The Prohibition of Slum-making. 
 
 Ko less difficult is it to convey to the average citizen 
 any conception of the enormous amount and importance 
 of the work done by the Building Act Committee. It is 
 no exaggeration to say that it is to the past neglect in this 
 department, more than to any other cause, that we owe 
 the existence of London’s slums and rookeries, with all 
 their evil outcome of intemperance, disease and crime. 
 London has already spent millions in clearing out the 
 worst of these plague-spots. But until the other day 
 slum-making was still permitted by the law, as we know 
 to our cost in Deptford with regard to some of the narrow 
 passages off the High Street and elsewhere. Under the 
 vigilant scrutiny of the Building Act Committee, with its- 
 weekly agenda containing over a hundred separate cases, 
 an ever-tighter grasp is being kept on the jerry-builder 
 and the house-farmer. And during the session of 1894, 
 with a dead-lift effort that hardly anyone appreciates, the 
 Council carried through Parliament its long-desired new 
 Building Act,which, though sadly weakened in committee, 
 constitutes one of the most important triumphs for 
 London’s progress that this generation has seen. I venture 
 to say that if the Council had won no other victory 
 against those who take advantage of London’s weaknes& 
 and London’s poverty than this new Building Act, it 
 would have amply deserved the gratitude of London’s 
 citizens. 
 
 Re-housing London’s Poor. 
 
 Equal gratitude is due to the Public Health and 
 Housing Committee for its unceasing, patient struggle to 
 deal with the slums which past neglect has created. With 
 380,973 persons registered at the census as living in one- 
 roomed homes, and no fewer than 828,941 in the officiallv 
 recognised overcrowded condition of two or more to a 
 room, with over 30,000 men and women nightly destitute 
 
7 
 
 of any otlier abode than the common lodging house or 
 tlie casual ward, the problem of re-housing London’s 
 poor is the most gigantic that the world lias ever 
 seen. But a valiant effort has been made. Tlie 
 Council’s common lodging house at Shelton Street, 
 Dr-ury Lane, has become a model for the world, and there 
 will shortly be another established in Deptford itself. 
 Whole colonies of working-class dwellings are rising up 
 in l^ethnal Green and elsewhere, whilst ten acres of the 
 Millbank Prison site have been secured for the same 
 purpose. Here in Deptford the Hughes Fields area is 
 rapidly getting covered with healthy homes, whilst the 
 horrid Hill Lane tenements are at last closed and on the 
 point of being replaced by decent places for men and 
 women to live in. Still greater triumphs, which can never 
 be recounted, have been won in the improvement of sani¬ 
 tary administration all over London. Here the Council 
 has no direct power, but, by quietly and persistently 
 pegging away ” at the vestries, the standard of sanita¬ 
 tion in every corner of London has, in the last five years, 
 been considerably raised. Deptford is one of the districts 
 which has .received special attention, and it is satis¬ 
 factory to find from the Medical Ollicer’s report that, whilst 
 much still remains to be done, an attempt has been made 
 to deal with the most serious deficiencies. Two pieces of 
 statistical evidence are typical of much that is incapable of 
 reduction to figures. ddie enforcement of the public 
 health laws in a crowded city depends, in the main, on 
 the number of sanitary inspectors. These officers are 
 appointed by the parochial authorities. When the Council 
 came into e.^istence, there were, in all London, only about 
 100 such inspectors. Under tlie Council’s patient pressure 
 the number has been doubled, and to-day there are ‘219 at 
 work. No less important is the provision of a constant 
 water supply, instead of an intermittently filled and 
 usually foul cistern. In March, 1889, only 428,5(57 houses 
 out of 748,773 in the Metropolitan water companies’ 
 districts enjoyed this boon. In March last the number 
 had risen to (518,187. Of all the houses in London 78’7 
 percent, are now on constant supply, over 100,000 having 
 been added in the past three years. 
 
8 
 
 A House and a Garden of his own for the London 
 Workman. 
 
 But I do not myself believe that we shall ever solve the 
 l)roblem of the decent housing of the London poor, or 
 succeed in getting areally healthy city until there are 
 l)etter and cheaper means of communication between the 
 centre and the suburbs. I cannot regard as satisfactory 
 the great blocks of dwellings in which the wage-earners 
 must live, if they are to live in the centre of London at 
 all. I want to spread the population so that each family 
 may have a little house and garden of its own. We have 
 made the first step to this by deciding to take over the 
 Tramways. The Moderate Party declared that this was 
 sheer plunder of the shareholders. But even the House 
 of Lords decided against them. This action of the Pro¬ 
 gressive Party has put at least a million pounds sterling 
 mto the pocket of the London ratepayer, which the 
 Moderates tried hard to present, as a free gift, to the tram¬ 
 way shareholders. But I am even more interested in it 
 from the point of view of its enabling the Council, by-and- 
 by, so to control and extend the tramway service as to make 
 it much more easy than it now is for men and women to live 
 in the open suburbs. 
 
 Parks Committee. 
 
 The most popular of all the departments of the Council’s 
 work is undoubtedly that of the Parks Committee, on 
 which Mr. Keylock has served. In no department is the 
 comparison with the work of the Metropolitan Board of 
 Works more striking. The following interesting statistics 
 show that during the five and three-quarter years of the 
 Council’s administration, a new open space has been 
 secured, on an average, every two months. Every week 
 that the Council has lived it has added between three and 
 four acres to London’s breathing-grounds and playing- 
 fields. 
 
9 
 
 London's Open Spaces undey the Metropolitan Board of Worhs. 
 
 Year ending 
 31st Dec. 
 
 N umber of 
 
 sei)aratc 
 Open Spaces. 
 
 Acreage. 
 
 Annual 
 
 IJxiKjndinire. 
 
 Permanent 
 Out-door Staff. 
 
 1884* 
 
 31 ! 5 
 
 1808 ! 436 
 
 £ 1 £ 
 
 21,851 1 18,301 
 
 95 
 
 ( 122 
 
 1885* 
 
 2 1 5 
 
 1834 i 436 
 
 23,222 j 18,301 
 
 100 
 
 j 122 
 
 l886* 
 
 33 i 5 
 
 1856 1 436 
 
 17.573 1 18.301 
 
 100 
 
 1 122 
 
 1887 
 
 42 
 
 2,506 
 
 40.305 
 
 
 238 
 
 1888 
 
 43 
 
 2.578 
 
 42.396 
 
 
 278 
 
 Total in-, 
 (crease in| 
 ;four years 
 ;(not count- j 
 
 7 
 
 334 
 
 2.244 
 
 
 61 
 
 ling) the f 
 ;p a r k s 
 Itransferr’d 
 jin 1877 ..) 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 *The five parks transferred from the Office of Works in 1887 are 
 separately stated for 1884-86. 
 
 London's Open Spaces under the County Council. 
 
 Year ending 
 31st March. 
 
 Number of 
 
 separate 
 Open Spaces. 
 
 Acreage. 
 
 Annual 
 
 Expenditure. 
 
 Permanent 
 Out-door Staff". 
 
 
 
 
 £ 
 
 
 i8go 
 
 48 
 
 2.985 
 
 52.751 
 
 400 
 
 1891 
 
 60 
 
 3.007 
 
 58,900 
 
 438 
 
 1892 
 
 64 
 
 3.112 
 
 67.249 
 
 548 
 
 1893 
 
 67 
 
 3.228 
 
 82,992 
 
 608 
 
 ; 1894 
 
 73 
 
 3.594 
 
 87.496 
 
 650 
 
 • Dec. 1894 
 
 75 
 
 3.647 
 
 *99.965 
 
 670 
 
 Total in-'\ 
 
 
 
 
 
 crease in 
 
 
 
 
 
 six years 1 
 from Dec. ( 
 
 32 
 
 1,069 • 
 
 57.569 
 
 401 I 
 
 31, 1888 to 
 Dec. 1894 J 
 Averag e \ 
 annua) in¬ 
 crease dur- 1 
 ing last" 
 
 1? 
 
 83 i 
 
 561 
 
 I 5 i j 
 
 four years 
 of M.B.W.j 
 
 
 
 
 
 Averag e\ 
 ■annual in- 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■creasedur- I 
 ing first f 
 six years of 1 
 
 7 
 
 178^ 
 
 9.594* 
 
 661 j 
 
 L.C.C. j 
 
 
 
 
 
 • Estimate. 
 
10 
 
 Here, again, Heptford has received special attention. 
 The South-Eastern district of London has, indeed, 
 profited considerably by the Council’s si.x years’ generous 
 dealing in open spaces. Besides improving Soutluvark 
 Park and the Woolwich Commons, the Council has 
 acquired, at a heavy expense, Bostall A\oods, Maryon 
 Park, Peckham Kye Park, and additional land at the 
 Ladywell llecreation Ground. Brockley and Platchain 
 gain the Hilly Fields and Telegraph Hill, now' being 
 carefully laid out. 
 
 Deptford Park. 
 
 Finally, thanks to a quite exceptionally generous con¬ 
 tribution from the Council, amounting to no less than 
 £24,000, 17 acres of land by Lower Load have been 
 purchased from Mr. Evelyn, and Deptford w'ill soon have 
 a park for its very own. 
 
 But the vigour, intelligence and ingenuity of the 
 Council’s park administration have been even greater than 
 its success in adding to the open space area. By the won¬ 
 derfully liberal provision of cricket pitches, football 
 giounds, tennis-courts and gymnasia for girls as well as 
 for boys : by the supply of h-ee public conveniences for 
 both sexes; by the very successful regulation of the re¬ 
 freshment tariffs; by the abolition of the charge for chairs; 
 and, above all, by the plentiful supply of music in the sum¬ 
 mer months by the Council’s owm uniformed band, the use 
 and j)opularity of the Council’s parks among the masses 
 has enormously increased. Other classes are no less loud 
 in their praise. Bank clerks are not usually veiy 
 “ advanced ” in their political views, but I have been 
 more than once thanked in City banking houses by en¬ 
 thusiastic skaters for the care taken by the Council to 
 promote the greatest possible enjoyment of the ice. The 
 Council, in short, by common consent, has proved itself 
 a wise and successful administrator of London’s treasure 
 in open spaces, and, though there is nothing for which 
 money is more liberally voted, it has all been accomplish¬ 
 ed at an infinitesimal extra cost. The increase of charge 
 in the six years does not amount to a rate of a half-penny 
 in the pound, and comes almost exactly to threepence per 
 head per annum on the whole population. Once in four 
 
11 
 
 months every Londoner is invited, in effect, to “ put a, 
 penny in the slot” of the Council’s money box, and to 
 obtain, in return, nicer walks for his wife and himself, 
 more playin" fields for the babies, cricket and football for 
 his boys, a free gymnasium for his girls, and music for 
 the family party. 
 
 How the County Council has protected us against fire. 
 
 Second only to the Parks for vigorous growth and suc¬ 
 cessful administration, the Council may be proud of the 
 record of its Fire Brigade. Oddly enough, it is just in 
 this department that the Council has been, ever since the 
 retirement of Sir Eyre Massey Shaw, most bitterly attack¬ 
 ed. Many persons suppose that the Council’s quarrel 
 with that distinguished diner-out was due to his insistence, 
 against ignorant and meddlesome opposition, on the 
 efficiency of his department. It is time that the truth 
 should be known. Under Captain Shaw’s regime the 
 Fire Brigade failed altogether to keep pace with the grow¬ 
 ing needs of London ; the Metropolitan Board of Works, 
 engaged in a futile struggle with the insurance companies, 
 allowed their expenditure on the Fire Biigade amid a 
 rapidly growing population positively to decline; the 
 Superintendent acquiesced, year after year, in an inade¬ 
 quacy which was a standing danger to the Metropolis ; 
 and under his lax rule, moreover, there grew up a system 
 of officers accepting presents from contractors and under¬ 
 taking work for private employers, such as no diligent 
 administrator would have endured and no vigilant com¬ 
 mittee would have permitted. South East London, and 
 Deptford in particular, specially suffered from neglect. 
 The rapidly growing districts were left without, practically 
 any protection from fire in their own neighbourhoods. 
 The new houses on the Brockley and Dulwich slopes, the 
 quickly developing Manor of Hatcham, and the large 
 new estates in Peckham and Bermondsey were specially 
 in danger. It was high time that a change was made. 
 How great has been the progress since Sir Eyre Massey 
 Shaw threw up his place in disgust at the Council’s 
 innovations, the following table will show : 
 
12 
 
 The Metropolitan Fire Brigade wider the Board of Works. 
 
 Vear ending 31 st Dec. 
 
 Author¬ 
 
 ised 
 
 Staff 
 
 Land 
 
 Fire 
 
 Engine 
 
 Stati’ns 
 
 Hose 
 
 Stati’ns 
 
 Fire 
 
 Escape 
 
 Stati'ns 
 
 Annual 1 
 Cost 
 
 1884 
 
 672 
 
 55 
 
 23 
 
 127 
 
 119,937 ^ 
 
 1885 
 
 672 
 
 55 
 
 26 
 
 127 
 
 ” 7.«77 : 
 
 1886 
 
 672 
 
 55 i 
 
 2C} 
 
 127 
 
 ”5.360 : 
 
 1887 
 
 674 
 
 55 1 
 
 27 
 
 127 
 
 ”2,697 
 
 1888 
 
 674 
 
 55 i 
 
 ! 
 
 27 
 
 127 
 
 ”9.460 
 
 Total increase in four! 
 
 
 0 ! 
 
 4 
 
 0 
 
 f decrease 1 
 
 years .. .. ) 
 
 
 j 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 477 i 
 
 The Metropolitan Fire Brigade wider the County Council. 
 
 Year ending 31 st March. 
 
 
 Author¬ 
 
 ised 
 
 Stafi. 
 
 Fire 
 
 Engine 
 
 Stati'ns 
 
 Hose 
 
 Cart 
 
 Stati'ns 
 
 Fire 
 
 F 2 scape 
 Stat’ns 
 
 Annual Cost. 
 
 1890 
 
 
 790 
 
 55 
 
 27 
 
 146 
 
 £ 
 
 120,722 
 
 1891 
 
 
 822 
 
 55 
 
 52 
 
 179 
 
 122,395 
 
 1892 
 
 
 825 
 
 55 
 
 51 
 
 179 
 
 128,906 
 
 1893 
 
 
 825 
 
 55 
 
 52 
 
 170 
 
 128,815 
 
 1894 
 
 
 846 
 
 56 
 
 53 
 
 180 
 
 143.000 
 
 Dec. 1894 
 
 
 909 
 
 57 
 
 58 
 
 198 
 
 *M 9 . 75 o 
 
 Increase in six years'! 
 (from Dec. 1888 to 
 
 1 
 
 r 
 
 135 
 
 2 
 
 31 
 
 71 
 
 30,290 
 
 Dec. 1894) • • • • J 
 
 Average increase dur-j 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 ing four years under 
 
 1 
 
 i 
 
 0 
 
 I 
 
 0 
 
 f decrease 
 
 1 ” 9 i 
 
 M.B.W. J 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 Average increase in six ] 
 
 1 
 
 22 J 
 
 
 
 I16 
 
 
 years under L.C.C. j 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 
 6 
 
 5.054 
 
 Estimate. 
 
13 
 
 A large share of this increase (including both the new 
 Fire Engine Stations) has come to South East London- 
 The new station at New Cross, a splendid piece of build¬ 
 ing work, represents a great additional protection against 
 fire for all Deptford. 
 
 Along with this increase has gone a no less satisfactory- 
 growth in the supply of those ingenious but expensive 
 mechanical contrivances which enable the fireman’s hose 
 to be affixed directly to the high-pressure water-mains. 
 When the Council came into existence there were only 
 8807 of these “ hydrants” in all London. At the present 
 time there are 18,711, nearly one-tenth of which are in the 
 district of the Kent Water Company. The result of all 
 this increased efficiency is strikingly demonstrated in the 
 statistics of fires. The total number of outbreaks, which 
 no fire brigade can diminish, goes steadily up. In 1884 
 there were every day six outbreaks : in 1898, nearly nine. 
 But the proportion of these outbreaks which are allowed 
 to reach any considerable dimensions has, under the 
 Council’s rule, steadily fallen. In the five years between 
 1884 and 1888, when Captain Shaw and the Metropolitan 
 Board of Works were in power, seventy-two out of every 
 1000 fires grew to such an extent as to be classified as 
 “ serious.” Between 1889 and 1893, the corresponding 
 portion was only sixty; a reduction of no less than IG 
 per cent. Ten years ago one-eleventh of the outbreaks 
 became “ serious ”; to day the proportion is one-twentieth. 
 
 Purchase of the Water Companies. 
 
 But the protection of London from fire can never attain 
 perfection so long as four distinct authorities jostle each 
 other at every outbreak. The Council’s fire brigade has 
 to secure the co-operation, not only of the Home-Secre¬ 
 tary’s police and of the insurance companies’ “ London 
 Salvage Corps,” but also of the eight competing water 
 companies. This brings us to a further problem. For 
 over two years the Council’s Water Committee has been 
 quietly grappling with its colossal task, the difficulties of 
 which cannot all be publicly stated, and are consequently 
 not realised by impatient reformers outside. Now, at last 
 after much anxious inquiry and deliberation, the com- 
 
14 
 
 niittee sees its labours near fruition in the presentation to 
 Parliament, of eightBillsfortbepurchaseof the water com¬ 
 panies’ undertakings, on terms equitable alike to the 
 shareholders and the public. During the next few months 
 the battle will be fought in the committee-room of the 
 House of Commons, against all the forensic talent and 
 expert energy which wealth can enrol in the defence of 
 monopoly rights. But the Council has^ no intention of 
 putting its head helplessly in the lion s mouth. The 
 water companies have been beaten before, and^may, in a 
 democratic Parliament, be beaten again. The Thames is 
 not the only, nor even the best, source of London’s supply, 
 and when the time comes the Water Committee ^yill 
 show that its prolonged investigations for the protection 
 of the ratepayers have not been thrown away. 
 
 Some other Committees. 
 
 I must pass over with a mere mention some of the 
 other committees, whose work, though often less exciting, 
 is no less onerous and important. The Parliamentary Com¬ 
 mittee, where we have daily and hourly to struggle to 
 safeguard London’s interests against the railway and 
 ground landlord monopolists; the Bridges Committee, 
 with its colossal engineering experiment of driving a 
 tunnel under the Thames in compressed air, a great boon 
 to Deptford and Greenwich, now, I am glad to say, more 
 than half completed; the Improvements Committee, 
 struggling with its scanty resources to cope with London’s 
 ever growing traffic ; the Thames Conservancy (now the 
 Kivers) Committee which has won for London the right 
 to representation on the Thames Conservancy Board, and 
 incidentally revolutionised that anomalous body ; the 
 Main Drainage Committee, which has purified the river 
 itself; the Corporate Property Committee, managing the 
 Council’s estates, worth over two millions, and keeping up 
 a vigilant scrutiny of all charitable endowments ; the 
 Finance Committee, whose administration, praised even 
 by the City and the purists at the Treasury, leaves not a 
 single point for criticism in the Council’s financial transac¬ 
 tions, and has carried Metropolitan stock up to within a 
 few points of Consols ; the Local Government and Taxa- 
 
15 
 
 tion Coiumittee, fighting incessantly to secure a uniform 
 basis of valuation for London, and converting even 
 the local assessment committees to its views ; the Public 
 Control Committee, wielding a heterogeneous collection 
 of municipal powers over baby-farms and coal-supply, 
 shop hours and petroleum ; the Theatres Committee main¬ 
 taining the safety and decency of our amusements ; the 
 Highways Committee, whose battle for the tramways has 
 put at least a million sterling into the pockets of the 
 London ratepayer; the General Purposes Committee— 
 half revising Cabinet, half “ maid of all work ” to the 
 others—all these, not to speak of special committees for 
 particular purposes, take their part in the great organisa¬ 
 tion by which London rules its corporate life. 
 
 Technical Education. 
 
 If it be asked what new thing the present Council has 
 done, apart from extending the first Council’s work, I 
 think we may with some confidence refer to the starting 
 of its department of Technical Education. The circum¬ 
 stances of London differ so much from tliose of other 
 cities and counties, the difficulties and complications of 
 its educational problems are so great, the chaos of unco¬ 
 ordinated authorities is so bewildering, that the first 
 Council may well be excused for not immediately adding 
 Technical Education to all its othei duties. But the 
 second Council grappled with the problem in its very 
 first summer. Having been, from the outset,’ Chairinan 
 of the Special Committee and then of the Technical 
 Education Board, to which the Council has delegated its 
 educational functions, I am disqualified from expressing 
 any opinion as to the success of this new departure. But 
 I think it will be admitted that we have made good use 
 of our time. The Technical Education Board, which 
 carries on this part of the Council’s ^yqrk has already 
 established a comprehensive “ scholarship ladder from 
 the School Board right up to the highest technical college, 
 the best art schools, and the university ; it has done much 
 bv its liberal grants and skilled inspection to develop and 
 improve the various “ Polytechnics ” now growing up all 
 over the Metropolis ; under the expert guidance of Dr. 
 
16 
 
 Garnett it has worked a beneficent revolution in the even¬ 
 ing science and technology classes, and made more prac¬ 
 tical the instruction in these subjects given in the public 
 secondary schools, whilst the London Schools of Art are 
 mider its fostering care, springing into new life. By the 
 appointment, as its art advisers, of such expert craftsmen 
 as Mr. George Frampton, A.R.A., and Mr. William 
 Lethaby, a distinguished sculptor and a no less dis¬ 
 tinguished architect, the Board has shown how thoroughly 
 it is alive to the need for a thorough reorganisation of the 
 
 arts and crafts ” side, and we need not now despair of 
 London one day possessing a Municipal Art School to 
 rival that of Birmingham. Nor have the women and 
 girls been forgotten. Besides sharing in all the preceding 
 advantages, they enjoy a special department of their own^ 
 The Board has set up three “ Schools of Domestic 
 Economy” (shortly to be increased to five) w’hich intercept 
 the maidens of thirteen who would otherwise be leaving 
 school to “ take a little place ”; it has started at Battersea 
 a Domestic Economy Training School, which is already 
 turning out skilled teachers accustomed to the house¬ 
 keeping of the London poor ; and, by a permanent staff 
 of qualified instructors in cookery, dressmaking, laundry 
 work and hygiene, it has given thousands of lessons in 
 these subjects to groups of working women in all parts of 
 London, who are too old or too poor, too liard worked or 
 too apathetic to take advantage of any existing institu¬ 
 tion. 
 
 Deptford has Done Well. 
 
 Nothing has given me greater pleasure in my work than 
 the very honourable place which Deptford has taken in 
 this branch. Deptford’s proportion of the 721 Junior 
 County Scholarships already awarded should have been 
 about 17, but Deptford boys and girls have gained no 
 fewer than 45. I hardly thought that a Deptford school 
 would have had a chance in our first Intermediate 
 Scholarship Examination, as only 50 of these valuable 
 prizes were given for all London. But Addey’s School 
 ^hich has received this year over 4^*500 aid from the 
 Board), succeeded in winning one of the 35 for bovs in 
 
17 
 
 competition with much richer and larger schools from all 
 parts of London, and two Deptford girls were successful 
 among 15 from all London. Finally, one of the 
 very valuable Senior Scholarships, of which only five 
 were given, would certainly have gone to the son of a 
 respected resident of Deptford, who stood in the 
 very first rank among the competitors, had he not 
 in the meantime been awarded a more valuable 
 scholarship from another source. All this reflects great 
 credit on our local schools. Besides John Addey’s, of 
 which I have the honour of being a governor, the Board 
 has liberally aided the Aske and Loan Schools, with a view 
 to making the science and art teaching more practical and 
 efficient. And I was glad to see that a Deptford 
 student gained one of the Board’s first Art Scholar¬ 
 ships, wliilst another Deptford man carried ofif one 
 of the 17 Artisan Art Scholarships. In science, too, 
 Deptford has stood well. The two series of “pioneer” 
 lectures given at Sayes Court were among the most 
 successful of our experiments, and I cherish the 
 hope that they will lead at no distant date to the estab¬ 
 lishment, in some form or another, of a permanent 
 Technical Institute in North Deptford. Finally, in the 
 domain of Domestic Economy Deptford has at last 
 claimed its share, and is now receiving, I am glad to say, 
 5 lessons a week in cookery and dressmaking by our 
 own salaried teachers. 
 
 “ Trade Union Wages.” 
 
 But the branch of the Council’s work which has 
 attracted the greatest interest has undoubtedly been its 
 labour policy and its establishment of a separate Works 
 Committee. Here the present Council has, in the short 
 space of under three years, done much to settle, by actual 
 experience, some of the most difficult problems of public 
 administration. 
 
 Let us take first what is known as the “ Fair Wages 
 Movement,” which was, for several years, constantly made 
 a ground of ridicule and denunciation by the Council’s 
 critics. Seldom has a policy so bitterly abused been 
 so quickly and triumphantly successful. After prolonged 
 
18 
 
 discussion, repeated at intervals durin^^ four years, it lias> 
 become settled policy to pay, in each trade, the reco^mised 
 trade union rate of wages, and in no case less than (id. an 
 hour to adult men, or 18s. a week to adult women. At 
 first this was thought a dreadful business. Many persons 
 unfamiliar with the actual practice of industrial life 
 imagined that the common phrase, “ Trade union wages,”' 
 involved something quite new in wage adjustments, and 
 meant just whatever the trade unions might choose to 
 ask for. What was proposed, and what has been done, 
 is the insertion, in the Council’s own standard list of 
 wages of the rates proved, after exhaustive inquiry, to be 
 actually recognised and adopted by the leading employers 
 in each particular trade within the London district. In 
 the whole of the building trades, for instance, which com¬ 
 prise three-fourths of the Council’s work, the trade union 
 rates of wages were found embodied in an elaborate formal 
 treaty concluded between the London Master Builders" 
 Association and the London Building Trades’ Federation. 
 
 With regard to unskilled labour the case is otherwise. 
 Here, in most cases, no generally recognised trade union 
 rate exists. The Council, fortified by a unanimous vote 
 of the House of Commons to the same effect, has taken 
 the position that it is undesirable, whatever the com- 
 jDetition, that any of its employees should receive less than 
 the minimum required for efficient and decent existence. 
 Seeing that Mr. Charles Booth places the actual “ povert}^ 
 line ” in London at regular earnings of 21s. per week, it 
 cannot be said that the Council’s “ moral minimum ” of 
 24s. for men and 18s. for women errs on the side of 
 luxury or extravagance. I wish the Admiralty (whom we 
 have induced to raise the minimum wage in the Victual¬ 
 ling Yard from 17s. to 20s.) would follow the Council’s 
 example. I am convinced that it would result in a great 
 improvement in North Deptford. 
 
 A Wise and Economical Policy. 
 
 The principle involved in this policy is easily stated. 
 Public offices may be filled in one or two ways. We may, 
 on the one hand, practically put the places up to auction, 
 taking those candidates who offer to do the work for the 
 
19 
 
 lowest wage. Or, on the other hand, we may first fix the 
 emolnments, and then pick the best of the candidates 
 coming forward on those terms. When we want brain¬ 
 workers of any kind, every one agrees that the latter 
 policy is the only safe one. Wc do not appoint as a judge 
 the lawyer who offers to take the place at the lowest rate. 
 No one would think of inviting compejtitive tenders from 
 engineers or doctors as to the price at which they would fill a 
 vacant post. In all these cases we have learnt, by long and 
 painful experience, that there is so much" difference 
 between competence and incompetence, that we do not 
 dream of seeking to save money by taking the candidate 
 who offers his services at the lowest rate. Unfortunately, 
 many worthy people who realise this aspect of brainwork, 
 because they belong themselves to the brainworking class, 
 are unconcious that it applies no less forcibly to mechani¬ 
 cal labour. They will pay any price for a good architect, 
 but are apt to regard bricklayers and masons as all 
 equally “ common workmen.” The consequence is that, 
 ow’ing to the extraordinary ignorance of the middle and 
 upper class about the actual life of the handicraft trades, 
 it has gradually become accepted as good business that, 
 though you must take all possible trouble in choosing your 
 manager, it is safe and right to buy wage-labour at the 
 lowest market rates. But, as a matter of fact, there is as 
 great a relative difference between one painter or plasterer 
 and another, as there is between one architect or manager 
 and another. If the pressure of competition is shifted 
 from the plane of quality to the plane of cheapness, all 
 economic experience tells us that the I’esult is incom- 
 •petency, scamped work, the steady demoralisation of the 
 craftsman, and all the degradation of sweating. When a 
 man engages a coachman or a gardener, he understands 
 this well enough, and never for a moment thinks of hiring 
 the cheapest who presents himself. Even the sharpest 
 pressed employer does not entrust expensive machinery to 
 the mechanic who offers to take the least wages. The 
 London County Council, realising it more vividly thp 
 some bodies less in touch with the actual facts of industrial 
 life, applies the principle all round. Whether the post to 
 he filled be that of an architect or a carpenter, the wage to 
 
20 
 
 be paid is first fixed at a rate sufficient to attract the best 
 class of men in the particular occupation. Then the most 
 competent candidate that can be found is chosen. Com¬ 
 petition among the candidates works no less keenly than 
 before ; but it is competition tending not to reduce the 
 price, thereby lowering the standard of life throughout the 
 nation, but to enhance efficiency, and thus really to lessen 
 the cost of production. 
 
 Raising the Standard of Life. 
 
 With regard to the lowlier grades of labour a further 
 consideration enters in. It may be economically permis¬ 
 sible, under the present organisation of industry, for a 
 private employer to ]>ay wages upon which, as he perfectly 
 well knows, it is impokible for the worker to maintain 
 himself or herself in efiiciency. I^ut when a Board of 
 of Poor Law Guardians finds itself rescuing from starva¬ 
 tion, out of the Poor Bate, women actually employed by 
 one of its own contractors to make up workhouse clothing 
 at wages insufficient to keep body and soul together, even 
 the most rigorous economist would admit that something 
 was wrong. The London County Council, responsible as 
 it it is for the health of the people of London, declines to 
 use its position as an employer deliberately to degrade that 
 health by paying wages obviously and flagrantly insufficient 
 for maintenance, even if competition drives down rates to 
 that pitch. 
 
 It must equally be put to the credit of the present Coun¬ 
 cil that it has settled the “ Fair Wages ” question for its 
 contractors as well as for itself. Many town councils up 
 and down the country are still labouring with this issue, 
 which London has at last got rid of. All firms tendering 
 for the Council’s work are required to specify the wages 
 they pay for each particular craft. If the work is to be 
 executed within the London district, it is an eas)' matter 
 to see whether these rates correspond with those in the 
 Council’s Standard List. If the work is to be done else¬ 
 where, it is found, in practice, quite possible to ascertain, 
 by inquiry of the proper local officers of the associations 
 of employers on the one hand and the trade unions on the 
 other, whether the proposed rates are really those current 
 
21 
 
 ill the district. Finas accusin^r themselves of payiiifj; lessr 
 than these rates are informed of the fact, as a reason why 
 their tenders are not accepted, and have, therefore, fail 
 opportunity of correcting any injustice. This system 
 works smoothly and well. The good contractors fall easily 
 into line with it. and most of the minority of Councillors 
 who honestly believed it to be impossible of execution, 
 now recognise that they were mistaken. Here, again the 
 key-note of the Council’s policy is, not the abolition of 
 competition, but the shifting of its plane from mere chea])- 
 ness to that of industrial efficiency. The speeding up of 
 machinery, the better organisation of labour, the greater 
 competency of manager, clerk or craftsman, are all stimu- 
 livted and encouraged by the deliberate closing-up to the 
 contractor of less legitimate means of making profit. Just 
 as the Factory Acts, the Mines Kegulation Acts, and the 
 Education Acts “ rule out ” of industrial competition the 
 cheapness brought about by the overwork of women and 
 children, or the neglect of sanitary precautions, so the 
 London County Council, representing the people of Lon¬ 
 don, declines to take advantage of any cheapness that is 
 got by merely beating down the standard of life of par¬ 
 ticular sections of the wage earners. And just as the 
 Factory Acts have won their way to economic approval, 
 not merely on humanitarian grounds, but as positively 
 conducive to industrial efficiency, so, too, it may confi¬ 
 dently be predicted, will the now widely-adopted fair wages 
 clauses.* 
 
 The Works Department. 
 
 We come to an altogether different range of criticism 
 when we consider the Councirs determination to dispense 
 wherever possible, with the contractor, and execute its 
 works by engaging a staff of workmen under the supervi¬ 
 sion of its own salaried officers. This has been fiercely 
 attacked as being palpably and obviously opposed to 
 political economy and business experience. It is worth 
 while to place on record the facts. The first case is that 
 
 * Over 150 local governing bodies have adopted some kind ot fair wages 
 clause in their contracts (see H. C. 189. of 1892) ; compare also, the House 
 of Commons’unanimous resolutions of February 13. 1891, and March 6, 
 1893 imposing the principle for Government contracts. 
 
22 
 
 of watering and cleaning the bridges over the Thames, a 
 service which the Metropolitan Board of Works let out to 
 a contractor. The new Council perversely went into 
 calculations which led the members to believe that the 
 contractor was making a very good thing out of the job, 
 and finally to decide upon engaging labour direct. There 
 have now been over three years’ experience of the new 
 system, with the result that, whereas the contractor 
 charged 4s. 7^d. to 4s. l()d.+ per square yard, the work is 
 now done at an average cost of 8s. 2d. a square yard, every¬ 
 thing included. 
 
 This, however, was merely a matter of hiring labour, no 
 constructive work being involved. It is interesting to 
 trace the stages by which the Council \vas driven, by 
 force of circumstances, to its present position of builder. 
 The first piece of actual building executed by the Council 
 was the schoolhouse at Crossness. The architect’s 
 estimate was for ,1^1,800, and tenders were invited in due 
 course. The lowest tender proved to be 4>2,30(). After 
 considerable hesitation the Main Drainage Committee 
 resolved to try to save this large excess over the estimate, 
 and set to work to do the job under its own officers. The 
 result was the completion of the work for less than the 
 architects estimate, and for .£o8() less than the lowest ten¬ 
 der. But the case which finally convinced three out of 
 every four members of the Council of the desirability of 
 executing their own works was the York Koad Sewer. 
 The engineer estimated the cost at T7,0()0, and tenders 
 were invited in the usual manner. Only two were sent in, 
 one for 4:11,588, and the other for All,(>08. The Council 
 determined to do the work itself, with the result that a 
 a net saving of A4,477 was made.! 
 
 How the Contractors tried to Corner the Council. 
 
 This remarkable result naturally created a sensation 
 among the contracting world, and attempts were made to 
 impugn the engineer’s figures. In his crushing reply he 
 pointed out that the contractors had reckoned out their 
 tenders at absurdly high prices in nearly every detail. 
 
 Minutes, June 27th, 1S93, p. 683. 
 
23 
 
 duir‘: 5 in^, for instance, 00s. and 70s. respectively, per cubic 
 yard of brickwork and cement, whereas the work was done 
 at 39s. It is clear from the other particulars "iven, and 
 from facts notorious at the time, that an agreement had 
 been come to by the contractors not to compete with one 
 another for this job, in order to induce the Council to- 
 abandon the fair wages clause. The Council preferred to- 
 abandon the contractor.* 
 
 The outcome was the establishment, in the spring of 
 1893, of a Works Committee to execute works required by 
 other committees in precisely the same manner as a con¬ 
 tractor. The Works Committee has an entirely distinct 
 staff, and keeps its own separate accounts. The committee 
 requiring any work prepares its own estimate, as if tenders 
 were going to be invited, and the ^Vorks Committee is 
 asked whether it is prepared to undertake the work upon 
 that estimate. 
 
 A Net Saving to the Ratepayers. 
 
 Up to the present time the Works Committee has com¬ 
 pleted and rendered accounts for twenty-nine separate jobs, 
 varying from TlOO to TIB,785. Sometimes the expenditure, 
 works out below the estimate, sometimes above. I dare 
 say that we shall hear a great deal about the fact that the 
 New Cross Tire Station—a magnificient specimen of 
 l)ricklayer’s craft, executed under great difficulties—cost 
 somewhat more than the estimate. On tlie other hand 
 the equally excellent foundations for the Hughes Fields- 
 Cottages cost far less than the estimate. In the aggregate 
 the total cost of these twenty-nine works—undertaken at 
 the very outset of a new business, with insufficient plant 
 and under manifold disadvantages—comes to the very 
 satisfactory figure of Tb3,045, against the architect’s and 
 engineer’s detailed and independent prior estimates, 
 amounting to T6G,142. The total result shows therefore 
 a net saving to the ratepayers. 
 
 It is often taken for granted that the Council’s policy of 
 eliminating the contractor is an unparalleled innovation, 
 unknown outside London. A little knowledge of the 
 
 * Minutes, 17th October, 
 
24 
 
 action of local governing bodies elsewhere would prevent 
 this mistake. To take, for instance, the Town Council of 
 Birmingham, which, being run strictly on business 
 principles, is held up by Mr. Chamberlain as a pattern and 
 a model to London. It is, of course, unnecessary to 
 remind the reader that Binningham has municipalised its 
 water and its gas, which are in London still left to private 
 ^mterprise. What is not so well known is that the Town 
 Council of Birmingham is by no ineans enamoured of the 
 •contractor, and that it dispenses with him whenever it can. 
 The Public Works Committee, which looks after the 
 thoroughfares, and the Health Committee, which is re¬ 
 sponsible for sanitation, have not only entirely eliminated 
 the contractor from the cleaning and repairing of the 
 streets and the removal of the refuse, but even from the 
 laying down of granite paving and flagging, once a most 
 profitable item of his business. The Gas Committee is 
 not content with employing hundreds of men to make gas, 
 but also keeps its own staff of carpenters, bricklayers, 
 blacksmiths, tinmen, painters, fitters, ^tc., to execute its 
 numerous works. The Improvements Committee, like 
 the Estates Committee, has its own carpenters and fitters, 
 bricklayers and paper hangers, plasterers and zincworkers* 
 whilst the Water Committee, besides a regular staff of 
 mechanics of all kinds, is now actually engaged in con¬ 
 structing several huge dams and reservoirs near Rhayader, 
 two tunnels and various water towers and syphons, 
 together with workmen’s dwellings to accommodate a 
 thousand people, stables, stores, workshops, a public hall 
 and recreation room, a school, and two hospitals— 
 all without the intervention of a contractor. “ The 
 construction of all the buildings on the works is 
 being carried out by the workmen of the Corporation, 
 under the superintendence of the resident engineer and 
 his assistant. The timber and other material is being 
 purchased by tender. This method,” reports the Water 
 Committee, ” of using material supplied by contract, and 
 constructing by the direct employees of the Corporation, the 
 
 • Return of Hours of Labour. Wages. &c. Appendix to Birmingham 
 General Purposes Committee’s Report, July 25 ( 1893). 
 
25 
 
 Committee coiiHider, under the circumstances of the case, 
 to be the most economical, as well as calculated to secure 
 the best results.” But this is not all. The Water Com¬ 
 mittee, finding that the village would have beer, has 
 decided also in this matter to dispense with any entrepren¬ 
 eur, and has “ resolved that a canteen shall be established 
 in the village ” out of the capital of the Birmingham 
 citizens, and “ that the person managing it shall have no 
 interest whatever in the quantity sold.” f 
 
 How the Contractors did the Work. 
 
 And if we turn to Liverpool we learn that “ almost all 
 the city engineer’s work is done by men directly employed 
 
 by the Corporation.The construction of 
 
 sewmrs is now' done entirely by the Corporation themselves. 
 
 . . . . They had such a cruel experience of doing the 
 
 work of sew^ering by contractors that they have given it 
 up.” * It appears that in the old days, when the con¬ 
 tractor agreed and charged for two courses of brickwork, 
 no amount of inspection sufficed to prevent him putting 
 in one only. “ What happened w-as this, that whenever 
 the inspector came round, or the clerk of the works, to 
 w’atch the contractors, they found the two rings of brick- 
 w'ork going on very well; as soon as the inspector went 
 away .... the second ring of brickw'ork w'as left 
 
 out .... and so the sewer got w'eak. 
 
 You could trace the visits of the inspector by the double 
 rings ” which were found here and there at intervals when 
 the sewers were subsequently uncovered for repairs.! 
 
 It is, therefore, no wonder that, when the Liverpool 
 Town Council undertook its great Vyrnw'y dam and water¬ 
 works, this, like its sewerage, scavengering, and cleaning, 
 W'as done by directly employed labour. 
 
 Nor is it in municipal boroughs alone that we see the 
 change in policy. Nothing was more common a few years 
 
 t Report of the Birmingham Water Committee, presented February 6, 
 1894. 
 
 * Evidence of the Deputy Town Clerk of Liverpool before the Unifi¬ 
 cation of London Commission,” p. 328 of c. 7493-1- 
 
 t Ib d. p. 328. 
 
26 
 
 ago than for higliway authorities to get their roads kein 
 in order by contractors. An interesting return obtained m 
 1892 by the County Surveyors’ Society shows that tliis 
 practice has been almost entirely abandoned in favour ef 
 •direct employment of labour by the county surveyor. 
 Only in one or two counties out of thirty-five furnishing par¬ 
 ticulars does the old custom linger. The county surveyor 
 oi Gloucestershire indignantly denied an allegation that 
 he favoured the contract system. “It does not commend 
 itself to me in any way,” he writes, “ and encourages a 
 low form of sweating. iSIy own experience of road-con¬ 
 tracting is that it does very well for five years, then the 
 roads go to pieces, and you have to spend all your previous 
 savings to put them to rights.’’* 
 
 When we thus find even rural districts giving up the 
 •contractor, it ceases to be surprising that the Town Coun- 
 •cil of Manchester now manufactures its own bass-brooms, 
 ■or even that the ultra-conservative Commissioners of Sewers 
 •of the City of London actually set the County Council an 
 example by manufacturing their own waggons, harness, 
 and horse shoes, all, as they proudly declare, “ by their 
 •own staft'.’’§ The superiority of direct municipal employ¬ 
 ment, under salaried supervision, to the system of letting 
 out works to contractors has, in fact, been slowly borne 
 in on the best municipal authorities all over the country 
 by their own administrative experience, quite irrespective, 
 •of social or political theories. 
 
 All this time the impatient ratepayer, ha)-d pressed on 
 •all sides, may perhaps have been thinking ruefully of the 
 heavy burden which the Council’s vigorous activity must 
 have laid on his shoulders. I have no doubt, indeed, that 
 :at the coming election we shall hear a great many reck¬ 
 less assertions about the rise in the Council’s rat('. 
 Nothing is easier than to point out that the Council’s pre- 
 •cept for 1894-0 has been for Is. 2d. in the pound, whilst 
 the last precept of the Metropolitan Board of Works in 
 
 t *■ Particulars of Management of Main Roads in England and VVale.s," 
 a report copied from the County Surveyors' Society, by Mr. Heslop’ 
 •County Surveyor for Norfolk. See Builder, .March 19 and 26, 1892. 
 
 Statement of the Commissioners of Sewers, presented to the Roval 
 •Commission on London Unification, p. 171 of c. 7493 ii. 
 
27 
 
 18S8-9 was only for 10 l-Od. But these two figures can 
 110 more be fairly placed in comparison than the house¬ 
 keeping budget of a lone woman with that of the mother 
 of a large and growing family. The Council’s precept in¬ 
 cludes not only the old charges of the Metropolitan Board 
 of Works, but also several other rates which used formerly 
 to be levied in other ways. The Deptford ratepayer used, 
 for instance, to pay the County Justices’ Bate, which, in 
 1888-9, the last year of its separate existence, came, for 
 Kent, to 4d. in the pound. In Middlesex it was l'25d., and 
 in Surrey l’375d. in the pound. This is now included in 
 the Council’s precept. Spread overall London, instead of 
 over the three counties, these charges come to T73d. in 
 the pound, so that the Deptford ratepayer (outside the 
 Manor of Hatcham) saves over twopence farthing in the 
 jwund by paying to the London County Council, instead 
 of, as formerly, to the Justices of Kent. 
 
 How Deptford has had its Rates Reduced. 
 
 Then there are the portions of the old Boor Kate and 
 General Vestry Kate which have been, for the sake of 
 greater efficiency and better equalisation of the burden, 
 placed on the broad shoulders of the County Councih 
 These items, which the'Council actually pays out to the 
 local Vestries and Boards of Guardians, and which do not 
 form part of the Council’s own expenditure at all, amount 
 to 3'72d. of the Council’s precept. But Deptford gets 
 more than an average share. The Council pays over this 
 year to the Greenwich Board of Guardians (who act for 
 the parish of Deptford) an amount equal to 5'39d. in the 
 pound of the parish rates, besides •07d. in the pound to 
 the Greenwich District Board of Works. If we add these 
 grants (average 3’72d.), and the old County Justices’Kate 
 (average l‘73d.) to the last precept of the Metropolitan 
 Board'of Works (lOlGd.), we shall see that, instead of 
 14d. representing an increased charge on the London rate¬ 
 payer, there is a positive decrease of I'Gld. (over three 
 halfpence) in the pound. This paradoxical result is due, 
 of course, to the operation of Mr. Goschen’s exchequer 
 contribution arrangements, by which the County Council 
 was made the recipient of the national subvention in aid 
 
•28 
 
 of the rates, and directed to contribute a certain part of it 
 to the local authorities. The Council’s contributions were, 
 by Mr. Bitchie’s praiseworthy ingenuity, made so as to 
 operate unequally as between different parishes in such a way 
 that the poorer di.stricts benefit, whilst the richer-lose by 
 the change. The result is that in Deptford, as in the 
 majority of the London parishes, the net demand of the 
 County Council is/rtr than wan formerlif paid to the 
 Metropolitan Board of Works and the County Justices, 
 mid it has positicely decreased during the six years of the 
 Council's existence. I well remember the sui-prise of the 
 gentlemen who, at the last election, were chosen to oppose 
 me in the “Moderate” interest, on finding that the 
 Council, instead of increasing the rates, had, in Deptford, 
 actually lowered them. In 1889-90, the last year for which 
 the Metropolitan Board of Works framed the Estimate, 
 the total rates in Deptford amounted to (3s. in the pound. 
 Since then the Deptford rates have, in spite of an increase 
 in the parish expenditure, never been higher than (5s., and 
 have usually been lower. Here are the figures up to date :— 
 Total Rates in the pound levied in the Parish of St. Paul, 
 Deptford, in each of the years 1889-90 to 1893-1 inclusive. 
 
 1889-90 
 
 1890-91 
 
 1891-92 
 
 1892-93 
 
 1893-94 
 
 Os. Od. 
 
 5s. lOd. 
 
 5s. lOd. 
 
 5s. 8d. 
 
 Os. Od. 
 
 I am glad to think that the Council has now secured ji 
 further reduction of the burden for the Deptford rate¬ 
 payers. By dint of very great pressure on the Govern¬ 
 ment and Parliament, we were able to get the Equalisation 
 of Bates Act passed last session, under which the Council 
 is now already beginning to levy .b‘228,000 per annum on 
 the richer City and West End parishes, in order to pay it 
 over to the poorer ones. Deptford’s share of this sum, 
 half of which will be payable this very quarter, is I;7,443 
 a year, equal to a further reduction in the Deptford rates 
 of no less than 3 3-5d. in the pound. 
 
•29 
 
 Rates Lower by Ninepence-halfpenny in the Pound. 
 
 As far as Deptford is concei-ned, tlierefore, the County 
 Oouncil, far from increasin^^ the rates, has positively 
 lowered them. If there had been no County Council and 
 no Progressive majority, and if things had gone on just as 
 they were in 1888-9, the Deptfoi-d ratepayer would have 
 been paying to the Metropolitan Board of Works and 
 the Justices of Kent and SuiTey at least a farthing 
 in tlie pound more than he now pays to the County 
 Council, whilst the Greenwich Board of Guardians 
 iind the Greenwich District floard would have to 
 do without the very handsome subsidy of .^^d. in 
 the pound which they already receive from the 
 County Council, and the further subsidy of 3 3-5d. in the 
 pound which they will receive under the Equalisation of 
 Hates Act. The total result to the Deptford ratepayer is, 
 therefore, that he will this year he paying altogether 9^d. 
 in the pound less than he would have done had the 
 Council not come into existence, and had none of these 
 ■changes been made. In the (,’ity and the West End, 
 where the ratepayer formerly got off with 3s. (kl. to 4s. in 
 the pound for all his rates (as against 5s. (5d. to 6s. in 
 ])eptford), he has now to pay 6d. to Is. more than he 
 formerly did. I think you will now easily understand why 
 the City and West J^nd hate the County Council so 
 fiercely, arid if gentlemen come to Deptford to denounce 
 the Progressive Party, I hope you will remember that they 
 probably live in rich parishes which have had to pay more, 
 in order that fleptford and othe)- ])Oor parishes might pay 
 less. 
 
 I do not mean that the Council spends less money than 
 the Metropolitan Board of Woj ks, although (by better dis¬ 
 tribution of the burden) it costs less to Deptford. On the 
 whole, taking the average throughout London, the 
 Council’s net demand on the London ratepayer has, in the 
 six years of its existence, risen by Dd. in the pound, every¬ 
 thing included. This increase will, I suppose, he regarded 
 with different eyes by different classes. To me, I confess, 
 it is a standing marvel how so much can have been done 
 fo)- so little. A halfpenny for the Parks Committee, a 
 halfpenny for the Technical Educ-ation Board, a farthing 
 
30 
 
 for tlie increase in the Fire Brigade, and another farthing 
 to cover the growing activities of the Public Health, Main 
 Drainage, and other coinniittees—this is the price, which 
 London, as a whole, is asked to pay for the beneficent 
 revolution which has taken place in every department of 
 its municipal life between 1889 and 1895. 
 
 What the Council has to Show for the Money. 
 
 In those six years over 1,000 acres have been added to its 
 open spaces, over 20 per cent to its fire-watch ; a vast, 
 though incalculable, advance has been made in its sanita¬ 
 tion ; the Thames has been so far purified that whitebait 
 is onc(. more caught where sewage lately floated up and 
 down with every tide; great strides have been taken to¬ 
 wards the better housing of the London poor; one huge 
 common lodging-house has been open for the homeless 
 men, and every slum landlord is complaining at the'expen- 
 diture to which he is now put for improvements and 
 repairs. The reign of the contractor, with its “ rings 
 and “ knock-outs,” has been brought to an end, and trade 
 union wages, with a “moral minimum,” have been estab¬ 
 lished in every department of the Council’s service. Nor 
 has the Council stayed its hand in those improvements in 
 the means of communication which are among the first 
 needs of a growing city. The gigantic engineering 
 experiment of a new Thames Tunnel, begun in 1890, is 
 already more than half completed, whilst innumerable 
 minor street improvements has been carried out. Finally, 
 during the last eighteen months, 800 of our most promis¬ 
 ing boys and girls have been started up the “ Scholarship 
 Ladder ” of the Technical Education Board, and thou¬ 
 sands of their elder brothers and sisters have been swept 
 into evening classes. For all this the total cost of London 
 come to Ijd. in the pound, and this is paid entirely 
 hy the richer parishes. 
 
 When I asked for your votes three years ago, it was on 
 the ground that something could be done by the Council 
 to raise the standard of life among the most down-trodden 
 of our fellow citizens. I have tried in these pages to report 
 the work that has been done for the improvement of 
 London—done amid many difficulties by much anxious 
 
thou^^bt and care. It is not so nmcli as I could have 
 wished, but it is a beginning. We have sought to make 
 London a brighter and a healthier, and, therefore, a 
 soberer and a happier city. It is now for the electors* to 
 say whether we are to go on with our task. 
 
 SIDNEY WEBB. 
 
“A MASTERLY PIECE OF WORK — Times. 
 
 Now Ready, Post 8yo. 574 pp,, cloth, with Coloured Map, 18s. 
 THE 
 
 Mistorg of ^rade iSlnionism.^ 
 
 BY 
 
 'SIDNEY AND BEATRICE WEBB. 
 
 ADVERTISEMENT. 
 
 ''F'HIS work, the result of three years’ special investigation, describes the 
 i- growth and development of the Trade Union Movement in the 
 United Kingdom from 1700 down to the present day. Founded almost 
 entirely upon material hitherto unpublished, it is not a mere chronicle of 
 Trade Union organisation or record of strikes, but gives, in effect, the 
 political history ol the English working-class during the last 150 years. 
 The opening chapter describes the handicraftsman in the toils of the 
 industrial revolution, striving vainly to retain the mediaeval regulation of 
 his standard of life. In subsequent chapters the Place Manuscripts and 
 the Archives of the Privy Council and the Home Office enable the 
 authors to picture the struggles of the early Trade Unionists against the 
 Combination Laws, and the remarkable Parliamentary manipulation 
 which led to their repeal. The private records of the various societies, 
 together with contemporary pamphlets and working-class newspapers 
 furnish a graphic account of the hitherto undescribed outburst of "New 
 Unionism” of 1830-34, with its revolutionary aims and subsequent 
 Chartist entanglements. In the course of the narrative we see the inter¬ 
 vention in Trade Union history of Francis Place, Joseph Hu.me, J K. 
 McCulloch, Nassau Senior, William the Fourth, Lord Melbourne, 
 Robert Owen, Fergus O’Connor, Thomas Slingsby Duncombe, John 
 Bright, John Stuart Mill, the Christian Socialists, the Positivists, and 
 many living politicians. The hidden influence of Trade Unionism on 
 English politics is traced from point to point, new light being incidentally 
 thrown upon the defeat of Mr. Gladstone’s Government in 1874. A 
 detailed analysis is given of the economic and political causes which have, 
 since 1880, transformed Trade Unionism from an Individualist to a 
 Collectivist force. The final chapter describes the Trade Union world of 
 to-day in all its varied features, including a realistic sketch of Trade Union 
 life by a Trade Union Secretary, and a classified census founded on the 
 authors’ investigations into a thousand separate unions in all parts of the 
 country. A colored map represents the percentage which the Trade 
 Unionists bear to the population of each county. A bibliography of Trade 
 Union Literature is appended 
 
 LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO., LONDON and NEW YORK 
 
 Theo. May, Trade Union Printer, 138 Tanner’s Hill, Deptford, S.E