The London Journal

Volume 24 No.1 1999

ABSTRACTS

PAUL LAXTON, The Evidence of Richard Horwood's Maps for Residential Building in London 1799-1819 (pp. 1-22)

This paper examines the ways in which Richard Horwood's maps of London can be used to examine the pattern of residential housebuilding in London between 1799 and 1819. It discusses the nature of the cartographic evidence and suggests lines of research on the relationship between population growth and movement, the supply of residential accommodation, and the social consequences of crowding. It compares the pattern of housebuilding derived from the cartographic evidence with that from the census. The emphasis is on the potential and pitfalls of the maps for an analysis of this kind.



PETER CLAUS, Languages of Citizenship in the City of London 1848-1867 (pp. 23-37)

It is unsatisfactory to view the City of London solely through the lens of econimic history or to focus exclusively on the Corporation as a unit of local government. Instead, the City, politically at any rate, is analysed as one. From this premise, questions flow regarding the changing nature of City politics from its parochail moment at mid-century, very much a site of participatory democracy, to the late 1860s and beyond when it emeged as Conservatism's first parish. As the City lost its resident population, it left the Corporation open to charges that it was no longer useful, that it was run by a clique and that it remained unrepresentative. The response before 1848 had been to 'encourage' wholesalers and retailers to become Freemen of the City. After 1848, the Corporation began the incremental introduction of rate paying as the basis of the franchise - a measure finally introduced in full in 1867. The larger point made is that by establishing property as the basis of citizenship those connected to financial institutions came to have a deciseive say in the affairs of the Corporation. Finally, it is suggested that the Corporation should not be seen by historians as a superannuated local authority, a 'curious survival', robbed by its fleeing population of anything but symbolic power. On the contrary it flourished, not just as an authoritative voice of the financial City but also as a national institution, reaching out to a wider constituency in London and beyond.



PETER MALPASS, Continuity and Change in Philanthropic Housing Organisations: the Octavia Hill Housing Trust and the Guinness Trust (pp. 38-57)

In the last twenty-five years housing associations have come to play a greater part in accommodating Londoners than in other parts of the country. In the nineteenth century, too, various forms of philanthropic and semi-philanthropic housing organisations were concentrated in London. This paper is concerned with the nature of the putative links between these Victorian housing organisations and modern housing associations. Much has been written about housing reform in London in the nineteenth century, and the origins of housing associations are generally seen to lie in the Victorian period, but the existing literature tends to take for granted the links between them rather than making them explicit. In fact very few of today's active housing associations can trace their origins directly back to before the First World War. Two such organisations are the Guinness Trust and the Octavia Hill Housing Trust, each of which represents a distinct tradition in voluntary housing. The paper draws on detailed archive research on these two trusts to illustrate how voluntary housing organisations survived, developed and changed in the period up to the watershed legislation represented by the Housing Act, 1974.



KEN YOUNG, Re-reading Robson on the Government of London (pp. 58-67)

It is sixty years since William Robson's The Government and Misgovernment of London was published. This paper re-examines Robson's argument, noting how the structure of the book needs to be interpreted as setting out a programme for reforming the government of the Greater London metropolitan area. For Robson, failure to establish a unified Greater London administration was a fundmental weakness in the government of the city. His distinctive contribution was to address the problem of metropolitan growth as an administrative expert with an acute sense of the problems of inter-governmental relations. Whilst acknowledging administrative fragmentation, Robson nevertheless failed to appreciate the significance of political forces that underlay this state of affairs. His recommendations were purely administrative and lacked nay sense of the way politics might impede or motivate such machinery. Reactions to the book were as polarised as the text itself was polarising. The outbreak of the Second World War halted any movement for reform. After the War, new ways of understanding the problems of metropolitan gorwth emerged, notably those of American scholars. However, none of this new political analysis engaged Robson's attention, despite its direct relevance to the governance of the metropolis.

Contents List of Vol. 24 No. 1
London Journal Home Page
CMH Home Page
HISTORYHome Page