Skip to main content

Slavery and the Origins of Social Housing

Social housing slavery

The horrific death of George Floyd in May 2020 and the subsequent Black Lives Matter movement shone a spotlight on systemic discrimination within organisations. Since then many have been examining their roots to identify whether they are founded on racism. Social housing has that same responsibility, and it may help us understand why racial discrimination persists in current activities and practices. 

The Transtlantic Slave Trade saw 12 - 12.5 million people transported from central and west Africa to the Americas where they were put to work growing crops such as sugar, cocoa, coffee, cotton and tobacco. As property, the people were considered merchandise or units of labour, and were sold at markets with other goods and services. 

These crops generated vast wealth for many traders in Europe, and from 1769 to 1853 Britain dominated. After the Slavery Abolition Act of 1833 the following decades saw slave trading gradually reduce. How could this atrocious period in our history be connected to the original social housing tenants? What is the connection between the Transatlantic Slave Trade and those early pioneers, Joseph Rowntree, William Sutton, George Peabody, Lord Shaftesbury and John Cadbury? 

The Joseph Rowntree Housing Trust has its origins in a grocery business established in York by Joseph Rowntree Senior in 1822. Among other things, the businesses sold commodities of empire which are likely to have been produced by enslaved or unfree workers. The Rowntree Company benefited from colonial indenture, a system of bonded labour in which European imperial powers recruited people from India and Southeast Asia to work on plantations in the Caribbean and West Africa and in the 1890s. Rowntree & Co. purchased several plantations in the British West Indies on the islands of Dominica, Jamaica, and Trinidad. In April 2021, the Rowntree Society issued a statement exploring their links with the Transatlantic Slave Trade. 

William Sutton, born in 1833, left a £1.5m fortune in his will (which would be worth £197m today) to provide much needed housing for those who couldn’t afford it. His wealth grew from the UKs first parcel delivery service but in the 1880s he also created two companies that traded in tea, coffee and tobacco from the Americas. The William Sutton Housing Trust built some of the country’s first housing estates, such as the Sutton Estate in Chelsea, London. By 1939 the Trust was providing homes for 32,000 people. The William Sutton Housing Trust is now part of the Clarion Group. 

George Peabody was a wealthy American financier and philanthropist who was born in Massachusetts in 1795. His early career was in the shipping and banking industries and he established a successful business in Baltimore, Maryland, which was then a slave state. Peabody's business dealings with slave owners and slave traders have led many historians to conclude that he was directly involved in the slave trade. 

In 1837, Peabody moved to London. He continued to be involved in banking and finance and became one of the wealthiest men in Britain. Peabody also became a major philanthropist, donating large sums of money to educational and charitable institutions. In March 1862 the Peabody Trust was set up with £150,000. He increased this to £350,000, before his death in 1869, with a further £150,000 in his will. By 1914 it had built 6,400 homes. 

The 7th Earl of Shaftesbury’s family had a history of involvement in the slave trade. His grandfather, the 5th Earl of Shaftesbury, was a slave owner, and his father, the 4th Earl of Shaftesbury, inherited a number of plantations in the West Indies that were worked by slaves. The 7th Earl, Lord Shaftesbury, was a hugely successful social reformer of nineteenth century England. His deep compassion for the poor was legendary, as were his tireless campaigns to limit factory hours, stop the use of boys as chimney sweeps and children in coal mines, and to develop universal education. In 2007, Shaftesbury Housing Society became part of Sanctuary Housing. 

The Cadbury family was a wealthy Quaker family from Birmingham, England. They made their fortune in the chocolate industry. The chocolate they produced was made with sugar and cocoa produced on plantations in the Caribbean, where slaves were forced to work. In 1900, they created Bournville Village Trust that went on to build 400 homes. 

The Cadbury family was aware of the cruelty of slavery, and they spoke out against it. In 1824, the family's patriarch, John Cadbury, joined the Society for the Abolition of the Slave Trade. The family also donated money to organisations that were working to abolish slavery. Slave labour was being used on plantations in the Gulf of Guinea, off West Africa. Yet it wasn’t until 1908 that William Cadbury had located an alternative source for cocoa supplies and announced a boycott on slave-grown cocoa from São Tomé and Príncipe, allowing them to maintain their chocolate production. 

In recent years, the Cadbury family has acknowledged its involvement in the slave trade. In 2015, the family issued a statement apologising for its role in the trade. 

These originators of social housing transferred the wealth generated from their business activities to their home country where some was used to benefit the poor. Today, where those assets are still held by the landlord, they remain as security for present day loans. Whether involvement in the Transatlantic Slave Trade reflect in todays attitudes and practices is debatable. The legacy of these philanthropic housing providers is a reminder that slavery is not just a historical issue. It is a legacy that continues to shape the world today. We must continue to fight for racial justice and to ensure that the horrors of slavery are never forgotten. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

How to issue a bond: nine tips for housing associations

Make time This path is so well trodden it is difficult to see over the sides of the trench. The legal documentation has developed over many years so there is virtually no opportunity to change it. In addition, investors need to know heir investment is secure and so satisfactory title must be demonstrated. Depending on the type of organisation and the quality of your records, this can be inordinately difficult. There is no shortcut, so start early. Do your homework The financial world is just that, a different world. Investors will know more about you than you do about them. Most are knowledgeable about housing associations and what they do not know, their in-house analysts will discover. Any credit rating (and Moody’s dominates the market) will be used to verify their analysis and may give comfort that their understanding is correct. And comfort gives confidence. Confidence can lead to a lower rate of interest – but don’t bank on it. Learn the language Coupons aren’t supermarket money-

The Threat to Rural Housing

 

Time catches up with Eric Pickles

  Eric Pickles has been in the news again. He’s a busy man. Almost exactly a decade before his reappearance, I attended ‘Herefordshire 2020: A Vision for the County’, a half day conference in Hereford. It was a brave attempt to demonstrate how the private and public sectors could work together for a positive future. The star of the show was the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, who gave a bizarre and disturbing performance . The theme of Eric Pickles’ speech was that we need to get away from the central control of policy; we need to deregulate and stop the tick box mentality where there are regulations for everything. Make government officials with clipboards get a sense of perspective. On entering his department, he proudly told us, he gave his civil servants his three priorities; localism, localism and localism. “Localism will support growth and growth will support localism”. His confidence grew. To a Parish Councillor trying to achieve change he chided, “Stop

Housing associations should freeze their rents now – or face tenant strikes

  Housing association tenants are more likely to be suffering from social isolation, threats to employment and exposure to Covid-19 in poorly paid jobs. Few realise that they’re also facing a rent hike. This Monday, social landlords increased their rents by 2.7%. Little wonder that pressure is growing to suspend rent payments to ease financial pressures. In countries implementing a lockdown, those renting their home are becoming more vocal on the possibility of rent strikes. Pressure is mounting across the globe and there are demands in Boston and New York in the US, South Australia and Canada . In the UK, rent strikes are being discussed in numerous major cities, notably in Islington in the capital. In Cheltenham, estate agents shop windows have been graffitied with slogans such as “Can’t Pay? Don’t”. One area where there is a greater degree of influence over rents is in housing associations. Following nearly 50 years of subsidy, these are wealthy organisations. In England, their

Fixed term tenancies

Housing policy has travelled a long way from post war Britain. The modern approach was described by Housing Minister, Aneurin Bevan. When announcing major investment in building social housing he said he wanted to see places, “ ...where the doctor, the grocer, the butcher and the farm labourer all lived in the same street. I believe that is essential for the full life of a citizen... to see the living tapestry of a mixed community.” Today, housing policy has regained its Victorian ethos; a tool used to divide. A scalpel is being applied to the ligaments that bind community. Where there is harmony, they bring discord. The gap between the haves and the have nots, the deserving and the undeserving poor, is growing wider. For individuals, that divide is increasingly difficult to breach.   Remember 2016. It is not just the year that for the first time the state permanently stopped subsidising the building of social rented housing, it is also the year that the undeserving were chased out of

Shared Ownership - a housing market fix?

Shared Ownership has given homes to around 180,000 families and it’s claimed that it offers a third way, an opportunity to house many more at a lower cost, another tenure that broadens the landlord offer. Some housing association websites go further and claim “It’s about getting your foot on the housing ladder. It’s a great alternative to renting and perfect if you can’t afford to buy a house outright.” Really? Whilst housing associations like selling them, the experiences of the occupiers can be quite different. Higher entry costs, administrative charges, rents rising annually, plus the responsibility for all repairs can mean the worst of all worlds. Why do increasing numbers feel trapped in the tenure?   “It’s a step on the ladder” , yet Cambridge University found ( 2012 ) that over 12 years only 27,908 had staircased to 100%, and in many rural areas freehold ownership is expressly prohibited. They concluded that many shared owners simply cannot afford to buy their property in full,

Strategic Planning

  We are preparing our new corporate plan. With the end of the next Parliament likely to be in 2020, what is going to be different? What will have changed irrevocably; fundamental shifts that will transform how we view our world. With the Chancellor announcing that another £25bn of cuts is needed in the first two years after the election, there are four key trends that are evident.  Public services are being dismembered. Assets are being transferred into the private sector rapidly and that is likely to be accelerated after the next election. At the end of 2013, 3,670 schools had become Academy schools. There are no national figures available, but the Local Authority accounts in the county where we work show that school buildings to the value of £40m have been transferred so far. In 2014, 56% of English secondary schools were academies. Primary schools, 11% and growing. In January 2014, it was estimated that 70% of contracts being awarded by the NHS were going to private companies.  As

This Ole House

Published in Inside Housing: https://www.insidehousing.co.uk/comment/this-ole-house-42273  

Opinion: Labour won’t deliver 300,000 new homes

Following the debate about how many houses are needed in the UK, industry-expert Peter Brown directs our attention to a topic this argument could be overshadowing. The debate around how many new homes are  needed  misjudges the big issue – a new Labour government will struggle to increase housing completions for sale and for rent. Public services are failing, satisfaction rates are at record lows and waiting lists are soaring. Focusing on hospitals, schools and the courts,  the IPPR  claimed that public services won’t return to acceptable levels of quality until the 2030s and that the post-election government will inherit one of the most challenging contexts of any government since the Second World War. In October, at the Labour Party conference Keir Starmer’s pledged 1.5 million homes over the next parliament and conference was  told  that a Labour government will “deliver the biggest boost in affordable and social housing for a generation”. Yet despite a chronic housing shortage, a n