Question

Why did the population of London City expand over the 19th century

Answer 1

Capital cities are usually the most populous urban centres in a country. They are also likely to be the largest in geographical area and hence transport problems are liable to occur first and to a larger extent in capitals than in any other towns. London in the nineteenth century fitted this model. It was by far the most populous city in Great Britain and its population grew by about 20% every decade, from about 1 million in 1801 to 4 million in 1871 and over 7 million just before WWI1. So although London was much smaller than Tokyo at the beginning of the nineteenth century, in later years, London was the larger city2. As London's population grew, so did the geographical extent of the capital from about 25 square miles in the 1840s to over 100 square miles in 19003. With this growth in population and area, it is not surprising that many of Britain's transport problems appeared first and most acutely in London. Unlike much of the UK's rail network, London's railways were subject to government planning, even if this was more negative than positive in character4.
The Nineteenth Century
In the early nineteenth century, London was still emphatically a walking city. It was small enough in extent for nowhere to be more than a few miles from the centre. People lived close to, or even over, their workplace because working hours were long, wages were low and there was no cheap mass travel. The aristocracy had private carriages, the gentry and merchants could afford hackney carriages, and the middling classes rode horse-drawn omnibuses, but the workers walked.
London's first railway was the London & Greenwich, from London Bridge (opened in 1836) to Greenwich (opened in 1838), only a few miles to the south-east5. The early railways in London, especially to the south and east, catered for short-distance traffic but they were soon followed by the termini for long-distance lines, such as Euston in 1837 for the north and west, and Paddington a year later for the west via Reading, Swindon and Bristol. These latter railways had little impact on mass intra-urban travel. Their fares were too high and they did not really cater for short-distance commuters, being more interested in long-distance, inter-city movement.
Indeed, in many ways the building of railways added to urban congestion rather than easing it, because the railway tracks, stations, goods yards and associated buildings, such as hotels and offices all occupied a considerable acreage of urban land, and the railway companies became among the largest urban land owners. The land they needed was mostly in areas of cheap, working-class slum housing. This made sense for the railways because it was cheaper than fashionable areas, caused less outcry because the inhabitants had no voting rights before 1868, and allowed the railways to claim that they were providing a social service by clearing out unhealthy over-crowded localities.
There was some truth to this claim, but what of the displaced inhabitants? Their numbers were considerable. Dyos estimated that 76,000 people were displaced between 1853 and 1901 by railway schemes in London6. Because these people were mostly poor and worked long hours for low wages, they could afford neither the time nor the money to move very far from their place of work. Consequently, when their existing dwellings were demolished, they moved into nearby accommodation, worsening the overcrowding.
Thus, the construction of the railways in London initially aggravated the housing situation rather than improved it. By contrast, the City of London Corporation opposed the penetration of railways into the City. The Eastern Counties Railway was halted at Shoreditch (later Bishopsgate), and the London & Southampton at Nine Elms. The only exception was the London & Blackwall, which was allowed (at the second attempt) to run into a terminus at Fenchurch Street7. Much of the later expense of building railways in London was incurred by extensions to more convenient termini

Answer 2

$\Large{\textbf{\underline{\underline{Following\;Points\;are:-}}}}$

1. As regarding population it was increased from 1 million to 4 millions as it was harsh condition for the London.

2. As london was known as the city of magnet in response many people migrate to get proper jobs in the industries.

3. The dockyard of London provides the shelter to the workers for living.

4. In London the 5 industries provides large number employment to the workers as the clothing and footwear also the wood and furniture etc.

5. At the time of 1st world war many people join the job which is provided by the newly industries.