^{page 413 note 1} I wish to thank Dr. H. J. Dyos for critically reading this paper.

^{page 413 note 2} Harrison, Royden, The Land and Labour League, in: Bulletin of the International Institute for Social History, Amsterdam, Vol. VIII (1953), Part. 3.Google Scholar

^{page 414 note 1} The Radical Programme, in: Fortnightly Review, XXXVIII (1885), pp. 123–35.Google Scholar This should be contrasted with the traditional programme of “free trade in land” put forward by John Kay, brother of Kay Shuttleworth and Liberal M.P. for Salford until his death in 1878, G. C. Brodrick, the leading writer of the Cobden Club and the economist Thorold Rogers.

^{page 414 note 2} Bradlaugh, Charles, The Land, the People and the Coming Struggle (1872?), p. 3.Google Scholar

^{page 414 note 3} This is basely noticed, for example, in the account of the land question in Lynd, H. M., England in the Eighteen Eighties (1945).Google Scholar

^{page 414 note 4} Leaseholds Enfranchisement (1883), p. 3.Google Scholar

^{page 415 note 1} “Freehold may have comprised about a third of the residential property in London in the last quarter of the nineteenth century, but the proportion of homes which were occupied by their owners was much smaller than this”. For the evidence on which this statement is based and an analysis of the development of building estates in one part of London, see Dyos, H. J., Suburb, Victorian. A Study of the growth of Camberwell (Leicester, 1961), pp. 85–113.Google Scholar

^{page 415 note 2} See, for example, Wallace, A., Land Nationalisation (1906), pp. 116 et seq.Google Scholar

^{page 415 note 3} Some London radicals actively supported the Society for the preservation of Commons and Open Spaces. Even Punch made a typically barbed jest during 1884 at the expense of landowners by imagining the accumulation of property taken to its ultimate term in a hundred years time with one Noble Duke the perpetual ground landlord of the entire kingdom. The Survival of the Fittest, in: Punch, , 12 04, 1884, pp. 170–1.Google Scholar

^{page 415 note 4} Quoted Bauer, C., Modern Housing (1935), p. 25.Google Scholar See the calculation of Sydney Webb given in evidence before the Select Committee on Town Holdings, Parl. Papers, 1890 (341), XVIII.Google Scholar For the land organisations set up to campaign specifically for the taxation of land values see Verinder, F., The Great Problem of our Great Towns (1908).Google Scholar

^{page 416 note 1} For opinion on leasehold building in the eighteenth century, see George, M. D., London Life in the Eighteenth Century (1925), p. 76Google Scholar. For an example of professional opinion in the early nineteenth century, see Noble, J., The Professional Practice of Architects (1836), pp. 92, 95.Google Scholar By the 1850's the Builder was the main vehicle for attacks on leaseholds: X (1852), pp. 693–4, XV (1857), p. 220 and XVI (1858), p. 551. The quotation is from the Builder, XIV (1856), p. 599.Google Scholar

^{page 417 note 1} Scratchley, A., Treatise on the Enfranchisement and Improvement of Copyhold, Life-leasehold and Church Property etc., (3rd ed., 1854), p. 2Google Scholar. Also Select Committee on the Enfranchisement of Copyholds, Parl. Papers, 1851 (550), XIIIGoogle Scholar; Select Committee on Church Leases, Parl. Papers, 1837 (692), IX.Google Scholar

^{page 417 note 2} Leasehold Tenures and Frail Structures, in: Builder, VI(1848), pp. 616–7 and VII(1849), pp. 39–40, 87–8.Google Scholar

^{page 417 note 3} Would Leasehold Enfranchisement Be Advantageous? (1885), p. 23. This is the printed version of a paper read before the Congress of the Association for the Promotion of Social Science, Birmingham, September, 1884. Emmett's first article on leaseholds appeared in the Quarterly Review (1872) under the titles: The State of English Architecture, and The Hope of English Architecture. These were followed by The Ethics of Urban Leaseholds, in: British Quarterly Review (04, 1879).Google Scholar

^{page 418 note 1} The provisions of the annual enfranchisement Bills altered over the years. The earliest one aimed at giving the tenants of leasehold property an option to buy the remainder of a building or repairing lease, provided twenty years of the term was outstanding, at a price to be decided by the judge of a County Court.

^{page 418 note 2} For a general complaint against the actions of ground landlords and some cases of hardship collected when a special investigation for the Times was carried through, see Banfield, F., Great Landlords of London (1888).Google Scholar

^{page 418 note 3} He also promoted a special Bill on behalf of dissenters whose chapels stood on leasehold land.

^{page 418 note 4} This fear was clearly stated by Stubbs, C. W., The Land and the Labourers (1884), p. 24.Google Scholar

^{page 418 note 5} Hansard, , 3rd Series, CCLXXXVI (19 03, 1884), p. 241–6.Google ScholarFortnightly Review, XXXV (05, 1884), p. 700.Google Scholar

^{page 419 note 1} Minutes of Evidence, Select Committee on Town Holdings, Parl. Papers, 1887 (260) XIII [9242–46, 9252–86].Google Scholar

^{page 419 note 2} Broadhurst, Henry M.P., The Story of His Life, Told by Himself (1901), p. 143.Google Scholar

^{page 419 note 3} Hansard, , 3rd Series, CCLXXXVI (19 03, 1884), p. 216.Google Scholar

^{page 419 note 4} The Enfranchisement of Urban Leaseholders, in: Fortnightly Review, XXXV (1884), pp. 345–6.Google Scholar

^{page 419 note 5} Supplementary Report, Royal Commission on the Housing of the Working Classes, Parl. Papers, 1884–1885 [C. 4402–1], XXX, vol. 11.Google Scholar

The signatories included Cardinal Manning and Charles Dilke. See, C. Dilke and F. Proctor, Papers on the Leasehold System (1886?).

^{page 420 note 1} Hansard, , 3rd Series, CCCXXXV, (1 05 1889), p. 899.Google ScholarBroadhurst, H., The Enfranchisement of Urban Leaseholders, op. cit., p. 394.Google Scholar

^{page 420 note 2} Hole, J., The Homes of the Working Classes (1866), pp. 84–6.Google ScholarPrice, J. Seymour, From Queen to Queen, The Centenary Story of the Temperance Permanent Building Society, 1854–1912 (1954), pp. 12–19.Google ScholarSirBellman, Harold, Bricks, and Mortals, . A Study of the Building Society Movement and the Story of the Abbey National Building Society, 1849–1949 (1949).Google Scholar

^{page 420 note 3} The main source for the work of this Association is the annual reports, 1883/4–1894 (1st–11th Reports with gaps). Its full programme is given at appendix 1, Select Committee on Town Holdings, Parl. Papers, 1887, op. cit.Google Scholar

^{page 421 note 1} Report, Select Committee on Town Holdings, Parl. Papers, 1889 (251), XV.Google ScholarReport, Land Enquiry Committee, 11, Urban (1914), p. 34.Google Scholar For an account of the growth of the leasehold system from its beginnings in the fourteenth century, see chapter 1 of my Thesis, M. A., The Use of Short-term Building and Repairing Leases … in the nineteenth century (Leicester, 1961).Google Scholar

^{page 421 note 2} Pollard, S., A History of Labour in Sheffield (Sheffield), 1959, pp. 101–2.Google Scholar

^{page 422 note 1} I.e. The Bitter Cry of Outcast London (1883).Google Scholar The main sources for this paragraph are: Hughes, J. T., Landlordism in Wales (1887)Google Scholar; Select Committee on Town Holdings, Parl. Papers, 1888 (313), XXIIGoogle Scholar [evidence from representatives of English provincial towns]; Royal Commission on the Housing of the Working Classes, op. cit., [evidence Vivian from Camborne]; Rogers, J. E. Thorold, The Laws of Settlement and Primogeniture, National Association for the Promotion of the Social Sciences, Transactions (1864), p. 124Google Scholar; John T. Emmett, Would Leasehold Enfranchisement be Advantageous? and J. S. Rubinstein, On the Same, ibid. (1864), and First Report, L. E. A., (1883–4), p. 2.

^{page 422 note 2} First Annual Report, ibid., pp. 7–8. The speech of W. H. Levirton was given to the Incorporated Law Society (1884). The newspapers and periodicals used included the Echo (Evans), Pall Mall Gazette and Fortnightly Review (Broadhurst), Nonconformist (Emmett) and Birmingham Daily Post (Jesse Collings).

^{page 422 note 3} This Select Committee was concerned not only with leaseholds but also with the taxation of ground rents.

^{page 422 note 4} Harrison printed most of his researches: A Paper on Leasehold Enfranchisement … Read before the British Association at Bath (1888). Also Select Committee on Town Holdings, 1887, op. cit.Google Scholar, – especially QQ. 4006–9 and the Report, 1889, op. cit., para. 105.Google Scholar

^{page 423 note 1} H. Evans, The Doom of the Leasehold System (1885) and his reports on the Select Committee on Town Holdings published by the Association in 1887 and 1888, The Case Aganist Leaseholds, Parts I and II (1889).

^{page 423 note 2} During 1890 alone 49 petitions were presented to Parliament.

^{page 423 note 3} Report, L. E. A. (02, 1891), p. 17.Google Scholar

^{page 423 note 4} A variety of professional opinion was expressed at the meetings of surveyors in 1884 and later. See, for example, R. W. Mann, The Enfranchisement of Urban Leases, and Howard Martin, Recent Proposals for Leasehold Enfranchisement, The Surveyors' Institution, Transactions, XVII (1884–5). Professional opinion was also represented before the Select Committee on Town Holdings, 1887 and 1888, op. cit. See also Perks, F.. Leasehold Enfranchisement (1894)Google Scholar and Tarn, A. W., Prize Essay, The Enfranchisement of Leaseholds etc. (1893).Google Scholar

^{page 424 note 1} James, C. A., Leaseholds and Legislation (1890), p. 25.Google Scholar

^{page 424 note 2} Builder, XLIV (1883), p. 700.Google Scholar

^{page 424 note 3} Broadhurst, H., op. cit., p. 352.Google Scholar

^{page 425 note 1} Underbill, A., Leaseholds Enfranchisement (1887)Google Scholar; Becken, G., Freehold Disfranchisement (1887)Google Scholar; Eiloart, C. J. G., Leasehold Aggrandisement (1885)Google Scholar; and Lee, T. Grosvenor, The Programme of the Free Land League (1885), p. 13.Google Scholar

^{page 425 note 2} There is much entertaining illustration of this in the unusual study by Ausubel, H., In Hard Times. Reformers among the Late Victorians (Columbia University Press, New York, 1960).Google Scholar

^{page 425 note 3} Hon. Secs. Report, The North and West London Branch (1893)Google Scholar, press reports at the back. Lawson, H. L. W., Hansard, 3rd Series, CCCXXXV (1 05 1889), p. 904.Google ScholarFabian Tract No. 22, The Truth About Leaseholds Enfranchisement (1890).Google Scholar

^{page 426 note 1} The Functions of Wealth, in: Contemporary Review, No. 41 (1882), pp. 195–210Google Scholar, quoted Lynd, , op. cit., pp. 75–6.Google Scholar See also, Self-Help v. State-Help. The Liberty and Property Defence League: Its Origin, Objects and Inaugural Meeting (1882)Google Scholar; Bramwell, Lord, Leasehold Enfranchisement (1887?), p. 7 and Nationalisation of Land (ed. 6, 1890).Google Scholar

^{page 426 note 2} Church Commissioners, Memorandum, File No. 62230, Part 2; Select Committee on Town Holdings, 1887, op. cit., QQ. 3821–3 and Return No. 21Google Scholar; Victoria County History, Durham, 11 (1907), pp. 257–8Google Scholar; Copy of Circular issued by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners to their Metropolitan Lessees, Parl. Papers, 1893–1894 (99), LXVII.Google Scholar

^{page 426 note 3} Lazarus, H., An Illustration of the Rise and Spread of Slumland etc. (1892).Google Scholar This included a virulent attack on the “tainted” sources of Church rents and was a foretaste of similar polemics during the 1920's and 1930's. Cf. Currie, C. W., The Church of England and her slum ground rents (1930).Google Scholar

^{page 427 note 1} For the work of Octavia Hill on Church estates at Southwark (1889) and Walworth (1903), see E. S. Oury, (ed.), Octavia Hill. Letters to Fellow Workers, 1864–1911 (1933). The policy of the Ecclesiastical Commission was outlined in their pamphlet, Housing of the Working Classes. London Estates (1906) and also by G. Middleton, The Church and Housing. Work of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners (1934).

^{page 427 note 2} Spectator, 4 05, 1889.Google Scholar Howard Evans claimed all changes as triumphs for the Association, Echo, 6 07, 1888.Google Scholar In one case at least this was hardly just. Cf. Special Committee on the Corporation Leaseholds of Liverpool, Report and Evidence (1887–1888).Google Scholar

^{page 427 note 3} Annual Reports, L.E.A. (1894–1895).Google ScholarHarrison, C., Reform of the Land Laws and its rejection by the House of Landlords (1891).Google Scholar

^{page 428 note 1} Annual Register (1888), p. 229.Google Scholar

^{page 428 note 2} Times, 17 02, 1892 and Saturday Review, 20 02 1892.Google Scholar

^{page 428 note 3} For a detailed analysis of the economic interests of Liberal M.P.'s see Thomas, J. Alun, The House of Commons (Cardiff, 1939), p. 14.Google Scholar

^{page 428 note 4} Reported by a journalist Tim Bobbin in Peoples Popular Penny Edition (1892?).Google Scholar

^{page 429 note 1} Speech at the National Liberal Club in 1887.Google Scholar

^{page 429 note 2} Report of the Annual Meeting of Members, L.E.A. (10 02, 1891), p. 12.Google Scholar

^{page 429 note 3} Haldane, Lord, Hansard, , 3rd Series, CCCLII (29 04 1891), pp. 1700–10.Google Scholar

^{page 429 note 4} Collins, E. A., Leasehold Enfranchisement (1913), pp. 3, 8Google Scholar; Surveyors' Institute, Transactions, Urban Land Problems, XL (1908) and XLVIII (1915).Google Scholar

^{page 430 note 1} George, D. Lloyd, The Urban Land Problem, The Case of Town Tenants (1913)Google Scholar and Leaseholds-housing (1913)Google Scholar; Churchill, Randolph S., Lord Derby, King of Lancashire (1959), p. 110.Google Scholar

^{page 430 note 2} Some improvements were made by the Law of Property Act, 1925 and a minor victory won with the Places of Worship (Enfranchisement) Act, 1920. For discussions on the present day position see, Leasehold Committee, Parl. Papers, 1950, Cmd. 7982, XIIGoogle Scholar; P.E.P. Report No. 338, The Future of Leasehold (1952)Google Scholar; Fabian pamphlet No. 180, Leasehold Enfranchisement (1956).Google Scholar