The Hoiislmi of the Agricultural Labourer. 25 



logic of necessity to live in their best room and not to preserve 

 it as a museum for chairs on which they do not wish to sit 

 and for ornaments which they do not see, except perhaps on 

 Sunday afternoons." 



This solution of the difficulty is not one that can commend 

 itself to those whom it most intimately concerns ; and it can 

 hardly be doubted that if it be adopted it will prove to be an 

 aggravation rather than a mitigation of the evil it is intended 

 to remedy, for it is certain that families may frequently be 

 seen living in sculleries which are mei-e passages, even smaller 

 and less comfortable than those shown on the plans accom- 

 panying the Departmental Committee's Report. One some- 

 times hears the labourer accused of " living like a pig " in his 

 small scullery, and it is not recognised that if he does so it is 

 very probably because he wishes to be sure that at least one 

 room in his house shall not resemble a pigsty. It seems 

 unreasonable to assume that he does not best know how to 

 make use of the rooms provided for him with a view to his 

 own comfort and convenience, and rather unfair to employ the 

 logic of necessity to prevent him from living as he chooses. It 

 is very much open to doubt if any real reform can be effected 

 in the labourer's mode of living by ignoring his sentiments and 

 endeavouring to compel him to adapt his wants to an arbitrary 

 type of plan, and it might be a wiser course to recognise his 

 wishes and requirements, and to design cottages to meet them 

 as far as possible, as is necessarily done for other classes of 

 householders. 



When, on account of the exti'a cost, the provision of three 

 rooms on the ground floor is out of the question, the agricul- 

 tural labourer's requirements would probably best be met by 

 combining the scullery and kitchen in one large room and 

 providing a small parlour instead of a separate scullery. 



It is o])jected to this type of plan that when space is so 

 limited the provision of a parlour to be used only as a sort 

 of household museum would be bad economy, and that the 

 desire for it, being only a form of snobbishness, should be 

 discouraged. No doubt to a certain extent this is perfectly 

 true ; but it has been seen that the desire for the parlour is 

 imperative, and it is better economy to have the small room 

 set apart for this i)urpose than the large one ; and it has also 

 been urged with every appearance of truth that the parlour 

 does serve a useful purpose in marking a certain standard 

 of living to be kept up, and that the snobbishness which 

 demands it is not altogether bad in its results, in that it impels 

 a man to take a greater pride in having his home clean and 

 tidy, increases his self-respect, and stimulates his ambition. 

 However this may be, it seems to be a matter which might 



