1. Source 2 reveals that the living conditions of Bradford in the 1840's were horrendous.
Most people in the mid 19th century suffered from poor living conditions and over crowdedness.The author of this source James Deanston describes the main streets as being "narrow and confined" he also states " in many places the moisture from the dungsteads of the upper houses drained into the houses beneath". Immediately this source portrays the sanitation of the main streets of Bradford to be filthy. This obviously means that the living condition of people would be very poor, so it is no wonder many people suffered constant ill health, fever was therefore inevitable.However James Deanston does describe the general state of some of the streets as being "respectable". This shows that not all of the streets in Bradford suffered from poor living conditions.
This means that the middle class people were not suffering too badly. The streets inhabited by the working class were however completely different. James Deanston describes the streets of the working class as having "poor paving". He goes on to say how "dung heaps, pools of slop water and filth could be seen all over as well as many open privies".
This clearly indicates the level of filth in the working class. Clean water was also very rare among the working class this meant that many people suffered from the deadly epidemic called cholera.The living condition of Bradford was also very over crowded. At the top of this source it say's there were 7,240 houses with a population of 132,164 people. This means that there were approximately 18-19 people living in a house (which were very small) this consequently led to disease spreading rapidly among the population. James Deanston also describes the main sewage of the town to be poor.
Water carriers who brought the water on carts and donkeys supplied much of the water in Bradford. The water was very expensive and not many people could afford it, it was also very damaging to health.James Deanston in 1840 stated, "Taking the general condition of Bradford, I am obliged to call it the filthiest town I have ever visited". Although these were the conditions the majority of people in Bradford lived in, there were the middle-class people who were considerably better off, living in less crowded areas and suffering much less illness to those of the working class.2.
The source in question, number 6 is by a man named Angus Reach, who visited Manchester and described the poor living conditions he found in an area called Angel Meadow.I believe this source would be useful to a historian studying the living conditions of Bradford in the mid 19th century. The reason for this is that like Bradford, Manchester was an industrial town and in view of the fact that both towns were not so far apart it is safe to say a historian would find similar conditions.I also consider this source to be useful to a historian studying Bradford in the mid 19th century because a historian would not focus on one town alone. Rather on a group of towns the reason being, how would a historian know that Bradford was the filthiest town in England if he had no other town to contrast it to. Also a historian could confirm whether Bradford was in fact the filthiest town in England or a false image of the town that individuals had shaped.
Also a historian would want to know about the various neighbouring towns of Bradford in addition to Bradford itself. Subsequently a historian studying Manchester could formulate a fairly accurate speculation on what the living conditions of Bradford were like. Also both towns living conditions could be contrasted.Ultimately I believe that Bradford as well as Manchester both suffered identical poor and unsanitary living conditions. Both towns suffered from overcrowdedness and both towns grew quickly at similar times for similar motives e.g.
employment rate was high and many people were looking for jobs.3. The visit to Saltaire was a moderately useful as to comparing the living conditions with Bradford in the mid 19th century, even though I was comparing it 1and a half century later. The reasons being you could clearly observe that it would be a great deal healthier place to reside in than Bradford.
All the houses in Saltaire had a garden; also the streets were very wide. The houses were also larger than those of Bradford. All the houses had windows to let light swell as air through.Sources 1-7 were also exceptionally useful to compare the living conditions with Bradford in the mid 19th century, I would even go as far as to say they were much more useful than the actual visit to Saltaire. The reason being because people who had experienced first hand the living conditions of Bradford in the mid 19th century wrote the sources, whilst we could only make assumptions with our visit to Saltaire. Subsequently overtime many things could have changed.
Sources 1-7 portray that the sanitation of Bradford was filthy, unhealthy and the city was extremely overcrowded. Furthermore the sources portrayed that Bradford did not have a proper drainage system, and had poor paving and narrow streets. Also since Bradford was an industrial town it also added to the effect of pollution causing people to suffer from miasma, the evidence of this can be seen in source 3.Source 7 was particularly useful as it described the facilities and sanitation of Saltaire.
It described all of the houses as being much better made than those of Bradford. Also source 7 states that there was 800 houses that were inhabited 4300 people this means that there were approximately 5 people living in each house. Also Saltaire had many facilities such as a school, which educated 700 pupils, an institute which served as a community centre, The Congregational church and the Methodist chapel. The Sunday school, a fancy baths and a washhouse. Also later there was a park built, subsequently Saltaire was built away from any other factory town so that it would not be congested with the fumes from the factories.Both the sources and visits cannot compensate for being there in the mid 19th century.
The sources while giving an accurate description of what the towns were like do not give the same picture as being there. Also the bathhouses were not present on the visit to Saltaire, for what reason I do not know but this shows the changes that have taken place since the mid 19th century. Consequently on the visit to Saltaire I could not perceive any indication of the drainage system being in process.Lastly there is source 9 which is a depiction of the almshouses.
I believe this picture is highly exaggerated as it was engraved in 1874 and shows the sort of conditions you would find in the present time.4. Using merely the evidence in the village I believe that Titus Salt was a very religious man and built Saltaire mostly for the purpose of making profit.On the visit to Saltaire I became aware of the fact that the mill was built in the centre of Saltaire. I believe this was because he did not want any of his workers to be late, therefore increasing the rate of profit. Furthermore I noticed that there was a church directly opposite the mill.
The reason for this could be that Titus Salt wanted his workers to remember God. This could also be a method of brainwashing his workers to be good Christians, as every time the workers would go home they would see the church.Subsequently in Saltaire I took notice of the fact there were no pubs present. This could be for two major reasons. The first being that again Titus salt being the holy man that he was believed that alcohol should not be drunk.
The second reason being that if his workers were constantly going to the pub, they would get drunk and not be as efficient workers as they would be if they did not get drunk.I perceived there to be two major transport routes in Saltaire the railway and the canal. This would be a good means of transporting mineral deposits to and from the mill. There was also verification that a hospital had once been built this undoubtedly demonstrates that he wanted people in Saltaire to remain healthy.
The reason being he did not want any of his workers to become ill, as this would mean profit loss, however if his workers were healthy (which they were) it would mean more money for him. Also in Saltaire there was large school, which in the mid 19th century housed 700 pupils. This shows that Titus Salt contemplated education to be vital.Whilst on my visit to Saltaire I noticed there were numerous streets named after members of his family.
This demonstrates that he considered his family to be important to him.Titus Salt was in opposition to alcohol and gambling therefore there was nowhere in Saltaire where such things could be done. However Titus Salt built other things to keep his workers entertained such as parks and bathhouses. Again comes in Titus Salts religious believes as he had built the almshouses to care for the disabled and elderly.
Titus Salt was not a man who did something for nothing. Therefore the construction of Saltaire, which he had made to be a paradise in the mid 19th century, he did not want to be forgotten for this act. Therefore he had a statue of himself constructed.Finally I remain with my first assumption that although Titus Salt was religious man he also built Saltaire for the purpose of making profit, which was not seen as a terrible thing in the Victorian times.
