The booklet is very interesting; however where railways tried to provide accomodation for their staff in towns the result was usually bad housing, and the company involved probably did right by getting out of this aspect at an early period. Specific companies, railways, mining cos. or whatever, are invariably better at their core operation than peripherals like housing, best left to builders or later the local authority. Having said that, houses proved by railways in remote locations, crossing keepers' cottages etc. were usually of very good quality, and many still survive having been often sold on.Even then though, there was the problem of the house going with the job, the tied cottage in effect. This often worked against the railways when staff declined promotion rather than move from a job with a house to a higher graded job without.
