Coalporters are employed in filling the waggons of the merchants at
their respective wharfs, and in conveying and delivering the coal at
the residence of the customers. Their distinguishing dress is a fantail
hat, and an outer garment--half smock-frock and half jacket--heavy
and black with coal-dust: this garment is often left open at the
breast, especially, I am told, on a Monday, when the porter generally
has a clean shirt to display. The narrative I give, will show how the
labour of these men is divided. The men themselves have many terms
for the same employment. The man who drives the waggon I heard styled
indifferently, the “waggoner,” “carman,” or “shooter.” The man who
accompanies him to aid in the delivery of the coals was described
to me as the “trimmer,” “trouncer,” or “pull-back.” There are also
the “scurfs” and the “sifters,” of whom a description will be given
presently. The coalporters form a rude class; not, perhaps, from their
manners being ruder than those of other classes of labourers, whose
labour cannot be specified under the description of “skilled,” (it
is, indeed, but the exertion of animal strength--the work of thew and
muscle), but from their being less educated. I was informed that not
one man in six--the manager in a very large house in the coal-trade
estimated it at but one in eight--could read or write, however
imperfectly. As a body, they have no fellowship or “union” among
themselves, no general sick fund, no organization in rules for their
guidance as an important branch (numerically) of an important traffic;
indeed, as it was described to me by one of the class, “no nothing.”
The coalporters thus present a striking contrast to the coalwhippers,
who, out of means not exceeding those of the porters, have done so much
for the sick among them, and for the instruction of their children.
The number of men belonging to the Benefit Society of Coalwhippers is
436; and there are about 200 coalwhippers belonging to another society,
that was instituted before the new office. There are 200 more in
connexion with other offices. There were 130 sick men relieved by the
Coalwhippers’ Society last year. There were 14 deaths out of the 436
members. Each sick man receives 10_s._ a-week, and on death there is
a payment of 5_l._ a man, and 3_l._ in the case of a wife. The amount
of subscription to the fund is 3_d._ per week under forty years of
age, 4_d._ to fifty, 5_d._ to sixty, and above that, 6_d._ On account
of the want of any organization among the coalporters, it is not easy
to get at their numbers with accuracy. No apprenticeship is necessary
for the coalporter, no instruction even; so long as he can handle a
shovel, or lift a sack of coals with tolerable celerity, he is perfect
in his calling. The concurrent testimony of the best-informed parties,
gave me the number of the porters (exclusive of those known as sifters,
scurfs, or odd men,) as 1500; that is, 1500 employed thus: in large
establishments on “the waterside,” five men are employed as backers and
fillers--two to fill the sacks, and three to carry them on their backs
from the barge to the waggon, (in smaller establishments there are only
two to carry). There are two more then employed to conduct the load
of coal to the residence of the purchaser--the waggoner (or carman),
and the trimmer (or trouncer). Of these the waggoner is considered the
picked man, for he is expected to be able to write his name. Sometimes
he can write nothing else, and more frequently not even so much,
carrying his name on the customer’s ticket ready written; and he has
the care of the horses as driver, and frequently as groom.
At one time, when their earnings were considerable, these coalporters
spent large sums in drink. Now their means are limited, and
their drunkenness is not in excess. The men, as I have said, are
ill-informed. They have all a pre-conceived notion that beer sometimes
in large quantities (one porter said he limited himself to a pint an
hour, when at work), is necessary to them “for support.” Even if facts
were brought conclusively to bear upon the subject to prove that so
much beer, or any allowance of beer, was injurious, it would, I think,
be difficult to convince the porters, for an ignorant man will not part
with a pre-conceived notion. I heard from one man, more intelligent
than his fellows, that a temperance lecturer once went among a body of
the coalporters and talked about “alcohol” and “fermentation,” and the
like, until he was pronounced either mad or a Frenchman.
The question arises, Why is this ignorance allowed to continue, as a
reproach to the men, to their employers, and to the community? Of the
kindness of masters to the men, of discouragement of drunkenness, of
persuasions to the men to care for the education of their children,
I had the gratification of hearing frequently. But of any attempt to
establish schools for the general instruction of the coalporters’
children, of any talk of almshouses for the reception of the worn-out
labourer, of any other provision for his old age, which is always
premature through hard work,--of any movement for the amelioration of
this class, I did not hear. Rude as these porters may be, machines as
they may be accounted, they are the means of wealth to their employers,
and deserve at least some care and regard on their part.
The way in which the barges are unladen to fill the waggons is the
same in the rivers as in the canals. Two men standing in the barge
fill the sacks, and three (or two) carry them along planks, if the
barge be not moored close ashore to the waggon, which is placed as near
the water as possible. In the canals, this work is carried on most
regularly, as the water is not influenced by the tide, and the work
can go on all day long. I will describe, therefore, what I saw in the
City Basin, Regent’s Canal. This canal has been opened about twenty
years. It commences at the Grand Junction at Paddington, and falls
into the Thames above the Limehouse Dock. Its course is circuitous,
and in it are two tunnels--one at Islington, three-quarters of a mile
long; the other at the Harrow Road a quarter of a mile long. If a
merchant in the Regent’s Canal has purchased the cargo of a collier,
such cargo is whipped into the barge. For the conducting of this laden
barge to the Limehouse Basin of the canal, the merchant has to employ
licensed lightermen, members of the Waterman’s Company, as none else
are privileged to work on the river. The canal attained, the barge
is taken into charge by two men, who, not being regular “watermen,”
confine their labours to the canal. These men (a steerer and a driver)
convey the barge,--suppose to the City Basin, Islington, which, as it
is about midway, gives a criterion as to the charge and the time when
other distances are concerned. They go back with an empty barge. Each
of these bargemen has 2_s._ a barge for conveyance to the City Basin.
The conveyance of the loaded barge occupies three hours, sixty-four
tons of coal being an average cargo. Two barges a-day, in fine weather,
can be thus conducted, giving a weekly earning to each man in full work
of 24_s._ This is subject to casualties and deductions, but it is not
my present intention to give the condition of these bargemen. I reserve
this for a future and more fitting occasion. In frosty weather, when
the ice has caused many delays, as much as 6_s._ a-barge per man has
been paid; and, I was told, hard-earned money, too. A barge at such
times has not been got into the City Basin in less than forty-eight
hours. The crowded state of the canal at the wharfs at this time of the
year, gives it the appearance of a crowded thoroughfare, there being
but just room for one vessel to get along.
From the statement with which I was favoured by a house carrying on a
very extensive business, it appears that the average earnings of the
men in their employ was, the year through, upwards of 28_s._ I give the
payments of twelve men regularly employed as the criterion of their
earnings, on the best paid description of coalporters’ labour, for four
weeks at the busiest time:--
December 22 £21 5 5
„ 15 21 17 3
„ 8 22 10 1
November 17 28 8 0
This gives an average of more than 1_l._ 19_s._ per man a-week for this
period; but the slackness of trade in the summer, when coals are in
smaller demand, reduces the average to the amount I have stated. In the
two weeks omitted in the above statement, viz. those ending December
1st and November 24th, fourteen men had to be employed, on account of
the briskness of trade. Their joint earnings were 39_l._ 12_s._ 5_d._
one week, and 33_l._ 6_s._ 7_d._ the other. By this firm each waggoner
is paid 1_l._ a-week, and 6_s._ extra if he “do” 100 tons; that is,
6_s._ between him and the trimmer. For every ton above 100 carried out
by their waggoner and trimmer, 1_d._ extra is paid, and sometimes
130 are carried out, but only at a busy time; 142 have been carried
out, but that only was remembered as the greatest amount at the wharf
in question. For each waggon sent out, the waggoner and the trimmer
together receive 4_d._ for “beer money” from their employers. They
frequently receive money (if not drink) from the customers, and so the
average of 28_s._ and upwards is made up. I saw two waggoners fully
employed, and they fully corroborated this statement. Such payment,
however, is not the rule. Many give the waggoner 21_s._ a-week, and
employ him in doing whatever work may be required. A waggoner at what
he called “poor work,” three or four days a-week, told me he earned
about 13_s._ on the average.
The scurfs are looked upon as, in many respects, the refuse of the
trade. They are the men always hanging about the wharfs, waiting for
any “odd job.” They are generally coalporters who cannot be trusted
with full and regular work, who were described to me as “tonguey, or
drunken,” anxious to get a job just to supply any pressing need, either
for drink or meat, and careless of other consequences. Among them,
however, are coalporters seeking employment, some with good characters.
These scurfs, with the sifters, number, I understand, more than 500;
thus altogether making, with the coalbackers and other classes of
coalporters, a body of more than 2000.
I now come to the following statement, made by a gentleman who for
more than thirty years has been familiar with all matters connected
with the coal-merchants’ trade. “I cannot say,” he began, “that the
condition of the coalporter (not referring to his earnings, but to
his moral and intellectual improvement) is much amended now, for he
is about the same sort of man that he was thirty years ago. There may
be, and I have no doubt is, a greater degree of sobriety, but I fear
chiefly on account of the men’s earnings being now smaller, and their
having less means at their command. Thirty-five years ago, before
the general peace, labourers were scarce, and the coalporters then
had full and ready employment, earning from 2_l._ to 3_l._ a-week. I
have heard a coalporter say that one week he earned 5_l._; indeed, I
have heard several say so. After the peace, the supply of labour for
the coal-trade greatly increased, and the coalporters’ earnings fell
gradually. The men employed in a good establishment thirty years ago,
judging from the payments in our own establishment as a fair criterion,
were in the receipt of nearly 3_l._ a-week on the average. At that
time coal was delivered by the chaldron. A chaldron was composed of
12 sacks containing 36 bushels, and weighing about 25 cwt. (a ton and
a-quarter). For the loading of the waggons a gang of four men, called
‘fillers,’ was, and is, employed. They were paid 1_s._ 4_d._ per
chaldron; that is, 4_d._ per man. This was for measuring the coal,
putting it into sacks, and putting the sacks into the waggon. The men
in this gang had nothing to do with the conveyance of the coal to the
customers. For that purpose two other men were employed; a ‘waggoner,’
and a man known as a ‘trimmer,’ or ‘trouncer,’ who accompanied the
waggoner, and aided him in carrying the sacks from the waggon to the
customers’ coal-cellar, and in arranging the coal when delivered, so
as properly to assort the small with the large, or indeed making any
arrangement with them required by the purchaser. The waggoner and the
trimmer were paid 1_s._ 3_d._ each per chaldron for delivery, but
when the coal had to be carried up or down-stairs any distance, their
charge was an extra shilling--2_s._ 3_d._ Many of the men have at that
time, when work was brisk, filled and delivered fifteen chaldrons day
by day, provided the distance for delivery was not very far. Drink
was sometimes given by the customers to the waggoner and trimmer who
had charge of the coal sent to their houses--perhaps generally given;
and I believe it was always asked for, unless it happened to be given
without asking. At that time I did not know one teetotaler; I do not
know one personally among those parties now. Some took the pledge, but
I believe none kept it. In this establishment we discourage drunkenness
all that we possibly can. In 1832, wages having varied from the time of
the peace until then, a great change took place. Previous to that time
a reduction of 4_d._ per ton had been made in the payment of the men
who filled the waggons (the fillers), but not in that of the waggoner
or the trimmer. The change I allude to was that established by Act of
Parliament, providing for the sale of all coal by the merchant being
by weight instead of by measure. This change, it was believed, would
benefit the public, by ensuring them the full quantity for which they
bargained. I think it has benefited them. Coal was, under the former
system, measured by the bushel, and there were frequently objections as
to the way in which the bushel was filled. Some dealers were accused of
packing the measure, so as to block it up with large pieces of coal,
preventing the full space being filled with the coal. The then Act
provided that the bushel measure should be heaped up with the coal so
as to form a cone six inches above the rim of the measure. When the new
Act came into operation the coalporters were paid 10_d._ a-ton among
the gang of four fillers, and the same to the waggoner and trimmer.
Before two years this became reduced generally to 9_d._ The gang could
load twenty-five tons a-day without extra toil; forty tons, and perhaps
more, have been loaded by a gang: but such labour continued would
exhaust strong men. With extra work there was always extra drink, for
the men fancy that their work requires beer ‘for support.’ My opinion
is that a moderate allowance of good malt liquor, say three pints
a-day when work is going on all day, is of advantage to a coalporter.
In the winter they fancy it necessary to drink gin to warm them. At one
time all the men drank more than now. I estimate the average earnings
of a coalporter fully employed now at 1_l._ a-week. There are far more
employed at present than when I first knew the trade, and the trade
itself has been greatly extended by the new wharfs on the Regent’s
Canal, and up and down the river.”
I had heard from so many quarters that “beer” was a necessity of
the coal-labourers’ work, that finding the coalwhippers the most
intelligent of the whole class, I thought it best to call the men
together, and to take their opinion generally on the subject.
Accordingly I returned to the basketmen’s waiting-room at the
coalwhippers’ office, and, as before, it was soon crowded. There
were eighty present. Wishing to know whether the coalbacker’s
statement already given, that the drinking of beer was a necessity
of hard labour, was a correct one, I put the question to the men
there assembled: “Is the drinking of fermented liquors necessary for
performing hard work? How many present believe that you can work
without beer?” Those who were of opinion that it was necessary for the
performance of their labour, were requested to hold up their hands, and
_four_ out of the eighty did so.
A basketman who had been working at the business for four years, and
for two of those years had been a whipper, and so doing the heaviest
labour, said that in the course of the day he had been one of a gang
who had delivered as many as 189 tons. For this he had required no
drink at all; cocoa was all he had taken. Three men in the room had
likewise done without beer at the heaviest work. One was a coalwhipper,
and had abstained for six years. Some difference of opinion seemed to
exist as to the number in the trade that worked without beer. Some
said 250, others not 150. One man stated that it was impossible to do
without malt liquor. “One shilling a day properly spent in drink would
prolong life full ten years,” he said. This was received with applause.
Many present declared that they had tried to do without beer, and had
injured themselves greatly by the attempt. Out of the eighty present,
fourteen had tried teetotalism, and had thrown it up after a time on
account of its injuring their health. One man, on the other hand, said
he had given the total-abstinence principle a fair trial for seven
months, and had never found himself in such good health before. Another
man stated, that to do a day’s work of ninety-eight turns, three
pints of beer were requisite. All but three believed this. The three
pints were declared to be requisite in winter time, and four pints,
or two pots, were considered to be not too much in a hot summer’s
day. Before the present office was instituted, each man, they told
me, drank half-a-pint of gin and six pots of beer daily. That was the
average--many drank more. Then they could not do their work so well;
they were weaker from not having so much food. The money went for drink
instead of meat. They were always quarrelling on board a ship. Drunken
men could never agree. “A portion of beer is good, but too much is
worse than none at all.” This was the unanimous declaration.
Since this meeting I have been at considerable pains to collect a large
amount of evidence in connexion with this most important question. The
opinion of the most intelligent of the class seems to be, that no kind
of fermented drink is necessary for the performance of the hardest
labour; but I have sought for and obtained the sentiments of all
classes, temperate and intemperate, with the view of fairly discussing
the subject. These statements I must reserve till my next letter. At
present I shall conclude with the following story of the sufferings of
the wife of one of the intemperate class:--
“I have been married nineteen or twenty years. I was married at Penton,
in Oxfordshire. We came to London fifteen years ago. My husband first
worked as a sawyer. For eleven years he was in the coal-trade. He was
in all sorts of work, and for the last six months he was a ‘scurf.’
What he earned all the time I never knew. He gave me what he liked,
sometimes nothing at all. In May last he only gave me 2_s._ 8_d._ for
the whole month, for myself and two children. I buried four children. I
can’t tell how we lived then. I can’t express what we’ve suffered, all
through drink. He gave me twenty years of misery through drink. [This
was repeated four or five times.] Some days that May we had neither
bit nor sup; the water was too bad to drink cold, and I had to live on
water put through a few leaves in the teapot--old leaves. Poor people,
you know, sir, helps poor people; and but for the poor neighbours we
might have been found dead some day. He cared nothing. Many a time I
have gone without bread to give it to the children. Was he ever kind
to them, do you say, sir? No; they trembled when they heard his step;
they were afraid of their very lives, he knocked them about so; drink
made him a savage; drink took the father out of him.” This was said
with a flush and a rapid tone, in strong contrast with the poor woman’s
generally subdued demeanour. She resumed:--“Twenty miserable years
through drink! I’ve often gone to bring him from the public-house, but
he seldom would come. He would abuse me, and would drink more because
I’d gone for him. I’ve often whispered to him that his children was
starving: but I durstn’t say that aloud when his mates was by. We
seldom had a fire. He often beat me. I’ve 9_s._ in pawn now. Since we
came to London I’ve lost 20_l._ in the pawnshop.”
This man had died a fortnight before, having ruptured a blood-vessel.
He lay ill six days. The parish doctor attended him. His comrades
“gathered” for his burial, but the widow had still some funeral
expenses to pay by instalments. The room she and the children occupied
was the same as in the husband’s lifetime. There was about the room a
cold damp smell, arising from bad ventilation and the chilliness of
the weather. Two wretched beds almost filled the place. No article
was worth a penny, nor could a penny have been obtained at a sale or
a pawnshop. The woman was cleanly clad, but looked sadly pinched,
miserable, and feeble. She earns a little as a washerwoman, and did
earn it while her husband lived. She bears an excellent character. Her
repetition of the words, “_twenty years of misery through drink_,” was
very pitiful. I refrained from a prolonged questioning, as it seemed to
excite her in her weak state.