A letter was published in the Hastings and St Leonards Observer in its 23 December 1911 issue. It included this passage:
Many more visitors come to the town now than did during what we call the palmy days, but they come at a different part of the year, and mainly do not occupy the same class of houses nor spend, per head, so much money. And however much we may welcome an improved summer season, we cannot afford to lose our winter one.
The author then referred to the lure of ‘Continental facilities’, and the absence of modern accommodation on the sea front. He continued about the houses:
Too many stories above, too much basement below, no ground in front, insufficient hall, no bathrooms, etc. make it a very difficult task. But an increasing number of empty houses on the Front, whilst those in other parts are filling up, must assure owners that some steps are urgently necessary.
If the owners could be got together, could a joint plan of action be agreed on ?
A strong man, a Decimus Burton, would still be required.
Is he yet born ?
The correspondent was Dr George Godfrey Gray, a town councillor. In the 1911 census he was at 35 Wellington Square, age 57, a barrister at law, with wife Marion and 5-year-old daughter Marion Lilian, all born in Hastings, and a governess and housemaid.
The same issue had comments on the letter, in the regular Flotsam and Jetsam column. It included this very interesting passage:
Quite recently I was talking to a gentleman who knows a good deal about house property in this town. Whilst agreeing that Hastings suffers by the lack of up-to-date residences, especially on the Front, this gentleman took the view that the conversion or re-building of houses is a very expensive undertaking on which few owners care to embark. He quoted an instance. Two houses on the Front were purchased 20 years ago for £4,000 each, and at that time were let for £200 a year each. In the course of time they became empty. Recently the owner secured an estimate for converting the two houses into three self-contained flats, and of the probable rent that would be obtained for them. The estimate was £3,500 for the alteration, and £410 a year for rent. The latter is perhaps a rosy estimate, but even if it were realised the return on the capital invested would only be 3 ½ per cent. Is this sufficient inducement for an owner, bearing in mind that the income is uncertain, whereas investments can be made in Stocks realising a bigger interest and certain income ? There is, of course, another side to the question: the owner of out-of-date property cannot expect to realise its original value if he sells, and it may, therefore, be more profitable for him to convert or even rebuild it.
The calculation offered suggests a total investment of about £11700 to secure £410 annually at a 3.5% rate on the capital, down from the original 5% return. This would be the original purchase price of £8,000 plus the £3,500. It would mean that the original £400 income would even, on ‘rosy’ figures, have gone up by just £10 in twenty years. According to ChatGPT, although there was low inflation during 1892-1912, wages stagnated so much that there was a reduction in the purchasing power of most workers.
A flurry of letters on the subject followed. For example, in the 6 January 1912 edition there was a letter by ‘An officer’s widow’ complaining that she had had to give up on the idea of settling on the Front of the town as the rents asked for were too high. She was ‘appalled’, and had to return home ‘disconsolate’. An interesting editorial comment followed in brackets, which said
It should be pointed out that rents have been lowered very considerably in Hastings and St Leonards during the last two or three years.
In the 13 January 1912 edition there was a long letter by J.J. Boutwood, preceded by the title ‘How Hastings may prosper’ and an invitation for more correspondence on the subject. Boutwood said that there was demand for modern houses at moderate rates. The town had many bad, empty properties. There was much potential building land that was unused. Ground rent charged to the leaseholders by freeholders was attacked, as there was no incentive for the freeholders to improve the properties. His main points were the lack of modern houses, dear land and high rates, and he believed the remedy was a land value tax (otherwise known as site valuation tax). This would mean, broadly, that instead of modest houses in valuable areas being lightly taxed they would be more heavily taxed to reflect the value of the actual land, rather than of what was standing there. The idea was to encourage owners to either sell up or to redevelop more intensively.
The author was John Josiah Boutwood. In the 1911 census he was at 17 Laton Road, Hastings, age 50, Secretary of a drapery company, with both he and his wife Elizabeth born in Luton.
The same edition had an editorial on the subject. A problem was absentee landlords, and rates were too high. It also stated ‘First, there is a great demand for modern houses at moderate rentals in Hastings and St Leonards; second, at present this demand cannot be met.’
Again in the same edition, there were many other letters. Comments were that the rot had set in with trams on the seafront upsetting potential visitors [they were introduced in 1905]. It was the only town in England with trams along the entire seafront, hence empty houses on the seafront, as many disliked the noise and distraction. There were over one thousand empty houses in the town, rents were low but the houses were in poor repair. Rents were 15-20% lower than other towns on their seafront. Hastings had a reputation for being too cheap.
Letters kept on coming in over many weeks. A land value tax was denounced as socialist. Some argued for modern flats, stating that more recently built resorts such as Bexhill and Bournemouth were more attractive. One correspondent suggesting building houses on what is now the recreational areas at Falaise [purchased by the Council from the Briscos to be used by the public]. Another correspondent argued that having a homeopath as the town’s Medical Officer must have put potential visitors off. He had resigned two decades before ! This was Charles Thomas Knox-Shaw, about whom I have written in A medical scandal: the appointment of Charles Thomas Knox-Shaw as Hastings’ Medical Officer of Health, 1881. Foreign places were more desirable. House prices were lower than before. There was a lack of repairs by landlords, leading to dilapidation, and hence low sale prices. Charles Frowd, who ran a dairy business at 21 Kings Road, suggested that the town emulate Hove, by combining houses with a single entrance and a lift.
In the 27th January edition Boutwood replied in a long, rambling letter to his critics, basically restating his premises.
The conversion of houses into flats was only a trickle at this time, but became much more frequent from about the end of World War I. Major factors included, surely, the high cost of wages of servants (who had found that they could find better conditions and wages in other jobs) and the beginning of high inflation, which particularly hit those on fixed incomes such as annuities. The result was that formerly well-off families could often no longer afford, or did not want, large, tall houses. Auction details at the time often stated that there were low reserve prices because of distress sales.