THE CONDITION OF THE WORKING CLASSES
§ 1. DISASTROUS EFFECTS OF THE NEW INDUSTRIAL SYSTEM--We have already
seen in various preceding chapters that the condition of the labourers
deteriorated from the time of Elizabeth onwards, but in the middle
of the eighteenth century it had been materially improved owing to
the increase of wealth from the new agriculture and from the general
growth of foreign trade. But then came the great Continental wars and
the Industrial Revolution; and it is a sad but significant fact that,
although the total wealth of the nation vastly increased at the end
of last century and the beginning of this, little of that wealth came
into the hands of the labourers, but went mainly into the hands of
the great landlords and new capitalist manufacturers, or was spent in
the enormous expenses of foreign war. We saw, too, that the labourer
felt far more severely than anyone else the burden of this war, for
taxes had been imposed on almost every article of consumption, while
at the same time the price of wheat had risen enormously. Moreover,
labour was now more than ever dependent on capital, and the individual
labourer was thoroughly under the heel of his employer. This, it will
be remembered, was the result of the system of Assessment of Wages
(p. 107), under which the justices of the peace, including of course
chiefly manufacturers and land-owners, fixed the wages of labour for
their own districts, and fixed them at so low a figure that they had
nearly always to be supplemented out of the rates paid by the general
public. The labourer had no redress, for {188} all combination in the
form now known as Trade Unions was suppressed, and his condition sank
to the lowest depth of poverty and degradation.
§ 2. THE ALLOWANCE SYSTEM OF RELIEF--This state of things was
aggravated by various misfortunes. The latter part of the eighteenth
century was marked by almost chronic scarcity, and after 1790 wheat
was rarely below 50_s._ a quarter, and often double that price. The
famine was enhanced by the restrictions of the Corn Laws; meanwhile,
population was growing with portentous and almost inexplicable
rapidity. The factories employed large numbers of hands, but these
were chiefly children whose parents were often compelled to live upon
the labour of their little ones; and the introduction of machinery
had naturally caused a tremendous dislocation in industry, which
could not be expected to right itself immediately. Poverty was so
widespread that, in 1795, the Berkshire justices, in a now famous
meeting at Speenhamland, near Newbury, declared the old quarter
sessions assessment of wages insufficient, besought employers to give
rates more in proportion to the cost of living, but added that if
employers refused to do this they would make an allowance to every
poor family in accordance with its numbers. This allowance system
succeeded in demoralizing both employers and employed alike, taking the
responsibility of giving decent wages off the shoulders of the farmers,
and putting a premium upon the incontinence and thriftlessness of the
labourers. This method of relief was general from about 1795 to 1834,
in fact until the enactment of the New Poor Law. Employers of labour,
manufacturing as well as agricultural, put down wages in many parts
of the country to what was simply a starvation point, knowing that an
allowance would be made to the labourers, upon the {189} magistrates’
orders, out of the poor rates. The wages actually paid to able-bodied
men were frequently only five or six shillings a week, but relief to
the amount of four, five, six, or seven shillings a week, according to
the size of the man’s family, was given out of the rates. Such a system
could not fail to have a permanently disastrous influence upon the
moral and social condition of those who suffered from it, taking from
them all self-reliance, all hope, all incentives to improving their
position in life. And as a matter of fact its ill-effects, especially
in agricultural districts, are even yet apparent.
§ 3. RESTRICTIONS UPON LABOUR--What made the condition of the labourers
worse still, was the fact that they could neither go from one place to
another to seek work, nor could they combine in industrial partnership
for their mutual interests. The law of settlement effectually prevented
migration of labourers from one parish to another. It began with the
Statute of 1662, which allowed a pauper to obtain relief only from that
parish where he had his settlement, “settlement” being defined as forty
days’ residence without interruption. There were many variations and
complications of this Statute made in ensuing reigns, but it remained
substantively the same till it was mitigated by the Poor Law of 1834.
The law of settlement was further strengthened by what are called
the Combination Laws, which prevented workmen from coming together
to deliberate over their various industrial interests, or to gain
a rise in wages. “We have no Acts of Parliament,” said Adam Smith,
with justice, “against combining to lower the price of work, but many
against combining to raise it.” Elsewhere he describes the inevitable
result of a strike as being “nothing but the punishment or ruin of the
{190} ringleaders.” The workmen had, of course, no political influence:
they could only show their discontent by riots and rick-burnings. Yet
the time of their deliverance was at hand.
I have already referred to the sympathy between the French Revolution
and the Industrial Revolution. The former, it is true, frightened our
statesmen, but it gave courage to the working classes, and made them
hope fiercely for freedom. The latter Revolution concentrated men more
and more closely together in large centres of industry, dissociated
them from their employers, and roused a spirit of antagonism which is
inevitable when both employers and employed alike fail to recognize the
essential identity of their interests. Now, wherever there are large
bodies of men crowded together there is also a rapid spread of new
ideas, new political enthusiasms, and social activities. And in spite
of the lack of the franchise the artisans of our large towns made their
voices heard; fiercely and roughly, no doubt, in riot and uproar, but
they had no other means. There were found some statesmen in Parliament,
chiefly disciples of Adam Smith, who gave articulation to the demands
of labour, and owing to their endeavours the Combination Laws were
repealed in 1824. But the following year proved how insecure was the
position of the labourers without a vote. The employers of labour were
able to induce Parliament in 1825 to stultify itself, by declaring
illegal any _action_ which might result from those deliberations of
workmen which a twelvemonth before they had legalized. But still they
were allowed to deliberate, strange as it may now seem that permission
was needed for this, and their deliberations materially aided in
passing the Reform Bill of 1832. For as soon as a class can make its
voice heard, even though it cannot {191} directly act, other classes
will take that utterance into account.
§ 4. GROWTH OF TRADE UNIONS--But the Reform Bill, though a great step
forward, somewhat belied the hopes that had roused the enthusiasm of
its industrial supporters. The workmen found that, after all, it merely
threw additional power into the hands of the upper and middle classes.
Their own position was hardly improved. Then they had to make their
voice heard again, and urged on by the misery and poverty in which they
were still struggling, they demanded the Charter. The Chartist movement
(1838 to 1848) seems to us at the present time almost ludicrously
moderate in its demands. The vote by ballot, the abolition of property
qualifications for electors, and the payment of parliamentary members
were the main objects of its leaders, though they asked for universal
suffrage as well. Nevertheless people were frightened, especially when
the Chartists wished to present a monster petition at Westminster on
April 10th, 1848, and military and police intervention was called in.
The movement collapsed, and finally died away when the repeal of the
Corn Laws had restored prosperity to the nation. Many have laughed at
the working classes for trying to gain some infinitesimal fraction of
political power. But the working classes are generally acute, and they
saw that this was the ultimate means of material prosperity, nor has
the event failed to justify their belief. In the somewhat quieter times
which followed the collapse of the Chartists, their influence went on
extending, and though the workmen ceased to agitate they were not idle,
but continued steadily organizing themselves in Trade Unions. These
institutions were not, however, recognized by law till a Commission was
appointed, including Sir William Erle, {192} Lord Elcho, and Thomas
Hughes, to inquire into their constitution and objects (February,
1867). Their Report disclosed the existence of intimidation with
occasional outrages--as was natural when the men had no other way of
giving utterance to their wishes. But Trade Unionism triumphed. The
Unions were legalized in 1871, and this Act was further extended and
amended in 1876. The old law of master and servant had passed away, and
employer and employed were now on an equal political footing. It has
remained for the men by silent strength to place themselves on an equal
footing in other respects. Meanwhile the employers entered into a like
combination by forming the National Federation of Employers in 1873,
and the long struggle of the working classes for industrial freedom
did not result in any lessening of the feeling of class antagonism.
But Trade Unions have done much to gain a greater measure of material
prosperity for the working classes, and to give them a larger share
than formerly in the wealth which the workers have helped to create.
When we look back upon the last half-century we can only wonder that
trade unionists have been so moderate in their demands, considering the
misery and poverty amidst which they grew up.
§ 5. THE WORKING CLASSES FIFTY YEARS AGO--For it must continually be
remembered that the condition of the mass of the people in the first
half of this century was one of the deepest depression. Several writers
have commented upon this, and have taken occasion to remark upon the
great progress in the prosperity of the working classes since that
time. It is true they have progressed since then, but it has hardly
been progress so much as a return to the state of things about 1760
or 1770. The fact has been that after the introduction of the new
industrial {193} system the condition of the working classes rapidly
declined; wages were lower and prices were higher; till at length the
lowest depth of poverty was reached about the beginning of the reign
of Queen Victoria. Since then their condition has been gradually
improving, partly owing to the philanthropic labours of men like Lord
Shaftesbury, still more owing to the combined action of working men
themselves. To quote the expression of that celebrated statistician, Mr
Giffen: “it is a matter of history that pauperism was nearly breaking
down the country half-a-century ago. The expenditure on poor-law relief
early in the century and down to 1830–31 was nearly as great at times
as it is now. With half the population in the country that there now
is, the burden of the poor was the same.” The following table will show
the actual figures of English pauperism at a time when the wealth of
the nation was advancing by leaps and bounds. It will be noticed that
the rate was highest in 1818, which was shortly after the close of the
great Continental War, but fell rapidly after 1830, and since 1841 the
rate per head of population has not been much more than six or seven
shillings.
+------+-------------+----------------+----------------+
| Year | Population |Poor Rate raised| Rate per head |
| | | | of Population |
+------+-------------+----------------+----------------+
| | | | _s._ _d._ |
| 1760 | 7,000,000 | £1,250,000 | 3 7 |
| 1784 | 8,000,000 | £2,000,000 | 5 0 |
| 1803 | 9,216,000 | £4,077,000 | 8 11 |
| 1818 | 11,876,000 | £7,870,000 | 13 3 |
| 1820 | 12,046,000 | £7,329,000 | 12 2 |
| 1830 | 13,924,000 | £6,829,000 | 10 9 |
| 1841 | 15,911,757 | £4,760,929 | 5 11¾ |
+------+-------------+---------------------------------+
But the mere figures of pauperism, significant though they are, can
give no idea of the vast amount of misery and degradation which the
majority of the working {194} classes suffered. The tale of their
sufferings may be read in the Blue-books and Reports of the various
Commissions which investigated the state of industrial life in the
factories, mines and workshops between 1833 and 1842; or it may be
read in the burning pages of Engels’ _State of the Working Classes in
England in 1844_, which is little more than a sympathetic résumé of the
facts set forth in official documents. We hear of children and young
people in factories overworked and beaten as if they were slaves; of
diseases and distortions only found in manufacturing districts; of
filthy, wretched homes where people huddle together like wild beasts;
we hear of girls and women working underground in the dark recesses
of the coal-mines, dragging loads of coal in cars in places where no
horses could go, and harnessed and crawling along the subterranean
pathways like beasts of burden. Everywhere we find cruelty and
oppression, and in many cases the workmen were but slaves bound to
fulfil their master’s commands under fear of dismissal and starvation.
Freedom they had in name; freedom to starve and die; but not freedom to
speak, still less to act, as citizens of a free state. They were often
even obliged to buy their food at exorbitant prices out of their scanty
wages at a shop kept by their employer, where it is needless to say
that they paid the highest possible price for the worst possible goods.
This was rendered possible by the system of paying workmen in tickets
or orders upon certain shops. It was called “truck”; and has at length
been condemned by English law (1887).
But though as a matter of fact the sufferings of the working classes
were aggravated by the extortions of employers, and by the partiality
of a legislature which forbade them to take common measures in
self-defence, yet there was one great cause which underlay all these
minor {195} causes, and that was the Continental War which ended in
1815. “Thousands of homes were starved in order to find the means for
the great war, the cost of which was really supported by the labour of
those who toiled on and earned the wealth that was lavished freely--and
at good interest for the lenders--by the Government. The enormous
taxation and the gigantic loans came from the store of accumulated
capital which the employers wrung from the poor wages of labour, or
which the landlords extracted from the growing gains of their tenants.
To outward appearance the strife was waged by armies and generals;
in reality the resources on which the struggle was based were the
stint and starvation of labour, the overtaxed and underfed toils of
childhood, the underpaid and uncertain employment of men.”[53]
[53. Rogers: _Six Centuries of Work and Wages_.]
§ 6. WAGES--And indeed if we examine some of the wages actually paid
at the beginning of this century, and again at the beginning of Queen
Victoria’s reign, we shall find that they were excessively low. The
case of common
+------+---------------------+-----------------------------+
| Year | Weavers’ Wages* | Wheat, per qr.* |
+------+---------------------+-----------------------------+
| 1802 | 13_s._ 10_d._ | 67_s._ |
| 1806 | 10_s._ 6_d._ | 76_s._ |
| 1812 | 6_s._ 4_d._ | 122_s._ |
| 1816 | 5_s._ 2_d._ | 76_s._ |
| 1817 | 4_s._ 3½_d._ | 94_s._ |
| +---------------------+-----------------------------+
| | * From Leone Levi. | * From Porter’s _Progress_. |
+------+---------------------+-----------------------------+
weavers was particularly hard in the years of the great war, and
affords an interesting example of the extortions of the capitalist
manufacturers of the period. For purposes of comparison I give above
the price of wheat and {196} of weekly wages in the same years; for
the price of wheat forms a useful standard by which to gauge the real
value of wages, even when it is not consumed in large quantities. It
will be seen that wages were at their lowest point just after the
conclusion of the war, while, on the other hand, wheat was almost at
famine prices. After this, however, and till 1830 the wages of weavers
rose again, for the new spinning machinery had increased the supply of
yarn at a much greater rate than weavers could be found to weave it,
and hence there was an increased demand for weavers, and they gained
proportionately higher wages, the average for woollen cloth weavers
from 1830–45 being 14_s._ to 17_s._ a week, and for worsted stuff
weavers 11_s._ to 14_s._ a week. But even these rates are miserably low.
The wages of spinners were also very poor, the work being mostly done
by women and children, though when men are employed they get fairly
good pay. The following table will show clearly the various rates, and
it will be seen that here wages sink steadily till 1845, owing to the
rapid production of the new machinery. The women’s
+----------+------------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
| Spinners | 1808–15 | 1815–23 | 1823–30 | 1830–36 | 1836–45 |
+----------+------------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
| Men | 24/ to 26/ | 24/ to 26/ | 24/ to 26/ | 24/ to 26/ | 24/ to 26/ |
| Women | 13/ to 14/ | 13/ to 14/ | 11/ to 12/ | 8/ to 10/ | 7/ to 9/ |
| Children | 4/6 to 5/6 | 4/6 to 5/6 | 4/6 to 5/6 | 4/6 to 5/6 | 4/6 to 5/6 |
+----------+------------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
wages exhibit the fall most markedly, the labour of children being
already affected to some extent by the provisions of the Factory Acts.
As for the agricultural labourer, he too suffered from low wages, the
general average to 1845 being 8_s._ to 10_s._ a week, and generally
nearer the former than the latter figure. In fact the material
condition of the working classes of England was {197} at this time
in the lowest depths of poverty and degradation, and this fact must
always be remembered in comparing the wages of to-day with those of
former times. Some people who ought to know better are very fond of
talking about the “progress of the working classes” in the last seventy
years; and the Jubilees of our late Queen of course afforded ample
opportunity--of which full advantage was taken--for such optimists
to talk statistics. But to compare the wages of labour properly we
must go back more than a hundred years, for seventy years ago the
English workman was passing through a period of misery which we must
devoutly hope, for the sake of the nation at large, will not occur
again. It is interesting to note, though it is impossible here to go
fully into the subject, that in trades where workmen have combined,
since the repeal of the Conspiracy Laws in 1825 and the alteration in
the Act of Settlement,[54] wages have perceptibly risen. Carpenters,
masons, and colliers afford examples of such a rise. But where there
has been no combination it is noteworthy how little wages have risen
in proportion to the increased production of the modern labourer, and
to the higher cost of living, nor does the workman always receive his
due share of the wealth which he helps to create. Of the results of
labour combinations we shall, however, have something to say in the
final chapter of this little book. But there was one class of people
who happened from various causes to obtain a very large share of the
national wealth, and who grew rich and flourished while the working
classes were almost starving. In spite of war abroad and poverty at
home, the rents of the land-owners increased, and the agricultural
interest received a stimulus which has resulted in a very natural
reaction. The rise in rents and the recent {198} depression of modern
agriculture will form the subject of our next chapter.
[54. Page 189, and note 18, p. 251.]