Substitution of a standard of superficial area for one of cubic capacity in small houses / by John Honeyman.

  • John Honeyman
Date:
[1890]
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Substitution of a standard of superficial area for one of cubic capacity in small houses / by John Honeyman. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The University of Glasgow Library. The original may be consulted at The University of Glasgow Library.

    3/10 page 3
    growing tendency to ignore such considerations, and I avail myself of the opportunity of addressing such an influential body as this to direct special attention to their importance. Hitherto there has been only one way of securing space for the occupants of houses—namely, by prescribing a certain number of cubic feet for each ; and I desire to suggest another, which I hope to show you is in many respects preferable—namely, to prescribe a certain number of superficial feet of floor area. The object of such specific rules, of course, is to prevent over- crowding, probably the worst of sanitary evils—an evil which is not by any means confined to our large cities, but one which our county councils must soon deal with as well as our civic authori- ties It is not seriously contended by any one that 300 or even 500 cubic feet is enough for an adult, for say the working man's ei^ht hours' sleep. Yet cases have been recorded in Glasgow where each adult had only 86 cubic feet. Now, it is evident that, whether 400 feet be a sufficient quantity or not, a house of 1,200 cubic feet capacity is much more likely to be a healthy dwelling if inhabited by only 3 adults, than if it is inhabited by 14; and the object of a standard is simply to give local authorities a ready means of effecting such a change. Overcrowding, in fact, must be dealt with summarily, by some rule of easy application. It is a nuisance which most directly affects the wellbeing of those who create it; but its evil effects are not confined to them. It must therefore be put down as a social offence; and this legal definition of space is merely an instrument to this end, perfectly serviceable if judiciously used; but inasmuch as the limitation is quite empirical, it is not judicious to apply the rule rigidly in all cases without regard to circumstances. It is reasonable that, in either case, as we have no exact scientific basis for our rule, we should allow it a little elasticity, and that we should adopt the rule which, even if rigidly enforced, would allow the greatest amount of freedom. Now, the chief merit of the rule I have suggested, as distinguished from the existing rule, is that it allows more freedom of action to those who have to turn expensives sites to account in providing dwellings for the poor. To that extent it is more beneficial to the poor on economic grounds, the importance of which I have already insisted upon. It would also give us more freedom in dealing with existing property—another gain to the poor in the same direction. Some people seem to think that you may, by harassing legislation, diminish the existing supply of houses, and hinder any prudent man from building new ones, without grievous injury to the poor themselves. If such persons are not guilty of such folly their conduct belies them, and is incomprehensible. You cannot, by these or by any other justi- fiable means; get for the poor more than they are able to pay for; and 1 was glad to hear that the Lord Provost of Perth, at all events, is not one of those foolish civic persons who seem to think
    digitised image 1
    digitised image 2
    digitised image 3