An unmentionable case? George Bernard Shaw and the campaign for public toilets

George Bernard Shaw is well known as a playwright and theatre critic but while living at 29 Fitzroy Square he became active as a local politician. In 1897 he was persuaded to take up an uncontested position on the St Pancras Vestry, one of 42 vestries in London. With the reform of local government in 1899, St Pancras became a metropolitan borough with a population over 200,000, and after being re-elected, Shaw had a new stage on which to promote his reforming principles.

Shaw was constantly aware of the bad housing and deprived conditions most of London’s population was experiencing in the 19th and early 20th century, not least around Fitzroy Square. A major issue he became aware of was the lack of public toilets, particularly for women. London’s population was growing rapidly and women were increasingly employed to work in shops and industries in and around the West End. Many came by bus or frequently walked from North London and surrounding suburbs to their place of work and passed through locations such as Camden Town.

In the consultations about the possible pedestrianisation of Oxford Street from 2017 onwards community groups have frequently pressed the case for new public toilets to meet the needs of the increasing numbers of pedestrians expected to be using the street. The response from Westminster City Council and the London Mayor has so far been that this is not practical nor affordable and, (echoing their Victorian forebears), people will have to use the many bars, pubs and department stores which have publicly accessible toilets.

The debate in the Vestry about the provision of a Ladies’ toilet in Camden Town soon became a cause célèbre which raised questions about women’s right to facilities and the use of public space. There were also moral and social debates which challenged the assumption that women’s place was in the home and therefore provision was not necessary in public places.

The issue came to a head in September 1900 when the Vestry proposed a new Ladies’ toilet at the eastern end of Park Street (renamed Parkway in 1938) at the junction with Camden High Street. A deputation of omnibus proprietors and local residents made the case that a wooden model on the site indicating its size and location showed that the proposed toilet would be an obstacle to passing vehicles and would also adversely affect property values. Shaw was strongly in favour of the facility and argued that “In one day, every omnibus on the Camden Town route, every tradesman’s cart owned within a radius of two miles, and most of the rest of passing vehicles……crashed into that obstruction with just violence enough to produce an accident without damage.” Shaw argued most of these drivers were either paid or under orders to do so.

In an article on the furore, Barbara Penner makes the case that “On a basic level, as the Vestrymen well knew, the presence or absence of a female lavatory on Park Street sent local women a powerful message about their right to occupy and move through the streets of Camden Town”. As she says, cultural notions of privacy, decency and femininity were being challenged.

As the female workforce in London expanded and the middle classes spent more time in shopping and entertainments, pressure grew for much greater provision of public toilets. A breakthrough came with the Great Exhibition in 1850 where public toilets were designed and operated by George Jennings where visitors could “spend a penny”. Over the 141 days of the Exhibition, £2,441 was raised from what was a relatively affluent set of visitors. Many argued that the poor would not be able to afford the cost and would seek relief in other ways. Shaw remarked that a penny was “an absolutely prohibitive charge for a poor woman”.

Writers towards the end of the 19th century bemoaned the lack of toilets for both sexes. Many complained they could only go shopping for half a day before necessity called, while some carried a chamber-pot in their carriage to be used under the then fashionable long dresses, or when needs must, sought relief in quiet alleys and passageways. Increasingly, campaigning organisations took the initiative.

Some objectors to the ladies’ toilet argued that where facilities were provided they were often underused. In July 1897 the Vestry did agree to provide one additional free water-closet in all existing women’s toilets for a trial period of six months, “despite the fear of Mr Fitzroy Doll (architect to the Bedford Estate) that the water supply would be used by flower and watercress girls to freshen up their violets and watercress”. After six months the free places were removed and Shaw was incensed and came out fighting.

Other vestrymen suggested that a “suitable house for use of ladies” might be found as an alternative to the proposed Park Street installation and this caused some mirth and joking amongst the male members as “houses of ill-fame” and prostitution were clearly on their minds. One of Shaw’s biographers suggested they might be thinking of houses of “easy virtue” such as in Warren Street.

From the 1860s a limited number of department stores introduced facilities for women and there were also private companies entering the field. In 1884 the Ladies’ Lavatory Company opened its first toilet at Oxford Circus near Peter Robinson’s. Likewise, the Ladies’ Institute at 19 Langham Place provided a place where women could eat and make use of the facilities. The Ladies’ Sanitary Association also lobbied both Paddington and St Pancras Vestries to provide toilets for women. The first permanent municipal installation in London for both sexes was in Piccadilly Circus in 1889.

Shaw was nobly supported in the Vestry by two female members, Mrs Miall Smith, who was a teacher, political activist and Fabian Society member, and Mrs Lucy Phillimore, a social worker in St Pancras. With the formation of the borough councils, female members were excluded by a determination of the House of Lords until a new Act in 1907 reversed this decision. Following an inquiry by Mrs Miall Smith and a report from the Highways, Sewers and Public Works Committee, the borough agreed in December 1905 to install a women’s toilet on the Park Street site. As Penner concludes “So, with the decision to construct a ladies’ public convenience, the ‘public’ in Camden Town was suddenly expanded to include women….”

The ladies’ toilet in Parkway is now commemorated by a plaque installed by Tracking the Heritage.

The long campaign to provide a women’s toilet in Camden Town illustrates the ways in which Victorian London finally accepted the changing needs of a growing metropolis and was forced to confront the social, physical and political demands of women to claim a legitimate place in the changing urban fabric. In a 1909 essay, Shaw called it the “unmentionable case for women’s suffrage”.

Meanwhile, argument continues about whether the Oxford Street Mayoral Development Corporation will find the funds to provide new toilet facilities on the street. But Wim Wenders’ 2003 film, Perfect Days, indicated how well designed and sanitary toilets might be successfully provided in small spaces such as parks.

Special thanks to Barbara Penner for access to her article listed below:

Sources:

Penner, B. “A world of unmentionable suffering: Women’s public conveniences in Victorian London”. Journal of Design History, vol. 14, no.1. 2001.

Shaw, G.B. “The unmentionable case for women’s suffrage”, The Englishwoman, March 1909, pp. 112–121. In Feminism and the Periodical Press, 1900–1918, Edited by L. Delap, M. DiCenzo & L. Ryan. Routledge, 2005.

Please support The Fitzrovia News. Consider helping us cover our costs by visiting our secure payment page.