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

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, t...

Our Housing Crisis: a tale of broken trust

Complaints to the Housing Ombudsman are on an inexorable rise , revealing a festering issue at the core of housing organisations. These repeated failures have seeped into the national consciousness, catching the attention of both the media and concerned citizens. Even politicians, typically ensnared in their own agendas, have been forced to take notice. We yearn for housing to be a central theme during this general election - a #planforhousing that couldn’t be ignored. And the public? Well, they’ve noticed too. Over the past few years, a relentless stream of reports has flooded in, painting a grim picture of subpar living conditions. In this financial year alone, the Housing Ombudsman has censured 48 social housing organisations with the allegation of severe maladministration. The Secretary of State has taken notice, penning stern letters to each offender. But this crisis didn’t emerge overnight. Yes, factors like right-to-buy policies, chronic underfunding, aging housing stock, and th...

Rents Hit Record Highs - it's time for controls

  It’s time for an informed debate on rent controls.  The laissez-faire, competitive market approach in the privately rented sector has demonstrably failed - as average private rents in Britain have climbed to record highs, renters are suffering and excessively high rents create a drain on the economy. Property website Rightmove has said that in May this year, the typical advertised rent outside London reached a record £1,316 a calendar month. In London it was £2,652 a month – almost three times the £894 asked for in north-east England. Rightmove said the average advertised rent outside London in May was an inflation-busting 7% higher than a year earlier. This leads those in the property industry with a vested interest to argue for an increase in supply. But it’s economically illiterate to believe that simply adding more privately rented housing will bring rents down. We need to look seriously at rent controls. Rent control policies vary widely across European countries, with ...

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 fu...

Storm clouds are looming over Britain’s housing market

  Government intervention has inflated house prices to unsustainable levels; a crash is now predicted - and those on lowest incomes will suffer. The Conservative ideological obsession with home ownership, and antipathy to social housing, blinds them to the need for a balanced housing market that supports the needs of both the poorest and of business. Help to Buy was exposed in June 2019 by the National Audit Office (NAO) and excoriated on Left Foot Forward. It’s worth repeating some of that analysis again, Around three-fifths of those using Help to Buy could have bought a property without it, over 8,000 of those using the scheme had household incomes over £100,000 and more than 20,000 had incomes over £80,000. 1 in 5 of those using Help to Buy aren’t even first-time buyers. It’s boosted the profits of Britain’s biggest property developers. And of course since then, the scheme has been extended to 31st March next year. The NAO noted then that the government had indicated that it ...

8 facts you need to know about welfare reform

  8 facts you need to know about welfare reform This blog is simple. It gives facts that contradict commonly held and repeated views. It debunks the myths that we hear regularly. Print it out and keep it near you. MYTH 1. Keeping the rise in benefits to only 1% is fair because it hits shirkers, not workers. Fact: 60% of the reduction falls on in-work households. Why? Because the 1% rise - which equates to a real-terms cut - affects universal benefits like child benefit and tax credits like child tax credit. MYTH 2. Spending on benefits for those out of work is out of control. Fact: the majority of all welfare spending is on pensioners - 53%. Also, benefits for those out of work is less than a quarter of the total welfare budget. Second, on average, between 2000 and 2010, welfare spending grew annually, in real terms, by only 1.75% - compared to 5.5% in the 1950s and 1960s, and 3% in the 1980s. Third, benefit spending in 2011-12 accounted for 10.4% of GDP, lower than the mid-80s ...

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 ...

A National Scandal: Empty Homes and the Housing Crisis

Everyone deserves a safe and secure place to call home. Yet in England today, a growing number of people struggle to access this basic need. While hundreds of thousands of properties sit empty, the housing crisis deepens. A Growing Problem, a Missed Opportunity But there's a glimmer of hope. Studies show that repurposing empty properties could create up to 40,000 affordable homes within four years. It wouldn't solve everything, but it would offer a lifeline to countless individuals on the brink of homelessness. This is a wasted opportunity. No one should face homelessness when solutions exist. Families with children are crammed into single rooms, forced to prepare for work in drafty cars, or uprooted from jobs and support networks due to a lack of affordable options. The government's inaction on empty properties is unacceptable. Long-term empty homes, vacant for over six months, have skyrocketed to over 248,000 – a 24% increase in just six years. This coincides with recor...

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, “...

Who is Gagging Tenants?

Khan is right - Tory voter ID plans gag the poorest. But it’s not just in London. Here's what we can do about it ' On New Years’ Eve, Sadiq Kahn warned that a new wave of hard right populism could see Susan Hall in London’s City Hall. And the new requirement for voter identification at the ballot box might accelerate this trend. He’s right, but it’s not just London that is affected.  The voter identification requirements deliberately make it more difficult for those who traditionally support Labour, to vote.  After the 2019 General Election, IPSOS estimated how voters voted. Their results came as no surprise, Labour had a 43 point lead among voters aged 18-24, but the biggest change was among 35-54 year olds, who saw a three point rise in the Conservatives’ vote share and 11 point fall for Labour. There was a gender gap, with the Conservatives ahead of Labour by 15 points among men, and by nine points among women. Among BME voters, Labour led the Conservatives by 64% to 20%...