The first plan to which I would call attention is that which has made more sensation than perhaps any other: I allude to the Waterlow plan, of which I have given a plate. The first fault I venture to point out in this design is the narrow external staircase up which a piece of furniture of moderate size cannot be taken; thereby compelling the tenants to use a hoist at the back at great trouble and inconvenience. The next objection is the great loss of space in the passages. Again, a serious objection to this design is to be found in the shape of the rooms, which I venture to think no architect would defend, and therefore it is only necessary to explain to the lay reader that one great secret of good planning is to devise square or oblong rooms. They are cheaper to build, and give the best accommodation. A still greater objection is one which does not at first strike the eye so forcibly; it is that the living-rooms are (from the shape of the walls) dark and cheerless. The tenants say that the sun scarcely ever shines on their rooms even in summer, for more than a short time. My objections to these houses are confirmed by others. Take for instance the opinion of Mr. Paterson, a member of the council of a Working Man's Club and Mechanics' Institution, who says: Taking the plans of Mr. Alderman Waterlow's buildings, in the wings there was one square room well lighted' and that is a bedroom, but in the centre of the block the rooms were badly shaped, deficient in light, and a large space was occupied by passages.' I may remark I should not have spoken so fully about

6

these buildings except from finding there is an impression abroad that these plans are perfect. I will next allude to the Lumsden dwellings, Glasgow, to show that these things are not better managed in Scotland. If the reader will kindly look at the plan (which is a copy of that supplied to the Transactions of the Royal Institute of British Architects, by Mr. Wyatt Papworth), he will see that the two bedrooms have no windows, and their only light appears to be derived from the difference in height of the partition and the ceilings, namely two feet, and the scullery and watercloset are also lighted and ventilated in the same way. The unhealthiness of such an arrangement is so apparent as to require no comment.

But enough of this unpleasant task of criticising separate plans; the rest of the chapter I shall devote to the more general defects of the existing town model lodging-houses, at least of those with which I am acquainted, and I may mention I have paid a special visit to Mr. Twining's Economic Museum at Twickenham, to see if he had plans of any I had not seen. I did not succeed in finding any but those with which I was already familiar, but I spent a pleasant afternoon in his interesting collection, which is well worth a visit, as the 'Builder' pointed out a short time since.*

The first considerable fault is the great unpleasantness arising from the use of the external staircase. The objection of not being able to get into the street

Since writing the above, I regret to have to record the fact of the destruction by fire of this Museum.

or leave any one set of rooms without passing neighbours and strangers shoulder to shoulder is very great, especially to women, as it deprives their actions of that privacy which the English so much covet. To this, in wet weather, or when the stairs are washed, is added the unpleasantness which must attend the descent of stairs by females. The external staircase also necessitates the external landing, whence a close view is too often obtained into some of the rooms of each occupant. The external landing or balcony also darkens the rooms. Another objection to the existing model lodging-houses is the absence of freedom. Mr. Spencer Bell says, speaking on this subject : They (the English lower classes) had a decided objection to those large and formally-conducted establishments where, as they considered, they were constantly under a supervision which was irksome to them.' Mr. T. Chatfeild Clarke also stated that what the poor require is a comfortable house, not in a block of buildings. There was a certain amount of prejudice against these immense blocks of buildings; a great one on the part of respectable parents against the promiscuous mixing together of large numbers of children during their playhours, by which they sometimes become contaminated; being beyond the parental influence and control. He believed the poor preferred to live in smaller classes of houses.'

6

Let me next quote the opinion of the Secretary to the 'Operatives' Building Company' (from the sessional papers of the Royal Institute of British Architects of