CHAPTER VII.

THE WAGES IN THE RURAL DISTRICTS.

The amphibious character of the peasant, who is at once farmer and

laborer, proves a very important factor in shaping the relations of

Russian economic life.

In Russia we have the case of the so called allotment system on a large

scale. The influence of this system was picturesquely elucidated by

John Stuart Mill when he stated that “it makes the people grow their

own poor rates.”[72] Exactly the same is observed in Russia.

The greater part of the work in agriculture, as well as in industry, is

performed by farmers.[73] With them the earnings from outside labor are

to cover only a part of their expenses, which cannot be provided for

by farming. It is obvious that wages alone must fall below the usual

standard of life.[74]

We have seen how, in the course of the evolution from farmer to wage

worker, the tenant first becomes farm laborer. Accordingly it is

natural to find farm labor prevailing among the local occupations of

the peasants:

_Agriculture. Per cent._ _Trades. Per cent._

Ranenburg 69 31

Dankoff 72 28

The transitional stage between husbandman and help is occupied by

the householder who alternates his own farming with working on the

landlord’s estate. In either case the workman comes with his own horse

and implement.[75]

The relation between employer and employee is, with a very few

exceptions,[76] one of money economy.

Owing to the circumstances above discussed, the farmer is ever in

quest of ready money. In his quality of “peasant proprietor” he enjoys

“the blessing of credit,” that is to say, he is always in debt to the

landlord. Unquestionably, the favor is not granted for the sake of pure

neighborliness. Money is advanced in fall time, or in winter, in reward

for farm work to be performed next summer, and sometimes in a year or

two.[77] The noble descendant of Rurik[78] gains the benefit of 50 per

cent. yearly upon an average on the reduced rate of hire.

Low pay for piece work beats down the workman proper, who has to depend

entirely upon his employment. The wages for day-labor may serve as an

illustration:

BOARD FURNISHED BY THE EMPLOYER.

_Male._ _Female._

_Minimum._ _Maximum._ _Minimum._ _Maximum._

In winter 0.18 0.25 0.12 0.15

In spring and fall 0.25 0.35 .. ..

In summer 0.35 0.70 0.20 0.45

Furthermore, the comparison between agriculture and industry brings

out the fact that skilled labor[79] is paid in the rural districts at

nearly the same rate as farm work.[80] The case is perfectly analogous

to that of agricultural labor. In many of the households in question

there are, besides the artisan, other male members of the family who

carry on their farming.[81] In fall and winter the farmer, who is at

the same time an artisan, would work for any price. A tailor, _e. g._,

travelling around his village, earns in the fall from 1.50 to 2.50 a

week, while boarding with the customer. On the other hand, the maximum

in wages is paid to carpenters, whose trade is carried on in the

summer, so as to preclude competition on the part of the farmer.[82]

Certainly, the maximum of two rubles, say $2.00, a week, and board,

to a skilled carpenter, falls short of the minimum in some civilized

countries. It is in this rate of wages that we must seek the reason for

the slow development of industry in the rural districts.

Indeed, it is but for a small part of the hands who have been “freed”

from farming, that room could be found in local industry:

_Percentage of “horseless.”_ _Households engaged in industry._

Ranenburg 36 9

Dankoff 34 8.5

The ranks of the rural proletarians, who had no working horses with

which to carry on their farming, grew four times as fast as rural

industry, though it might be expected that the latter would have been

fostered by low wages. The example of the quarries in the bailiwick

Ostrokamenskaya, District of Dankoff, can be used to make the matter

plain.

About fifty men are engaged there in breaking stone, and working it

into millstones. Some of them work in small partnerships, and sell the

stone to middle men; some are in the employ of petty contractors.

A rent of 25.00 per head is levied by the owner of the place; the

net income of an independent worker is from 75.00 to 100.00 for the

summer, which is more than the income in any other trade. The hired

workman, however, is paid only from 35.00 to 60.00, the profit of

the entrepreneur amounting to 47-66 per cent. in a season. Where

the product of a man’s semi-annual labor sells for 125 rubles, no

mechanical improvements could make the commodity cheaper. So long

as ten per cent. a month can be made by the petty employer, at a

practically nominal outlay of money, he will successfully compete

with big capitalistic enterprises. Indeed, we see that five men are

about the average number of workers employed in any one concern.[83]

There are, certainly, a few capitalistic concerns: distilleries, sugar

factories, steam flour mills, coal mines. A railway line is crossing

the district, and employs some of the peasants. But here, as elsewhere,

the proletarian is beaten on the labor market by the farmer.

In distilleries a farmer can be got to work in winter merely for mash,

which is used as fodder for his cattle. Money wages naturally oscillate

between the very modest limits of 5.00 and 9.00 a month, out of which

the workingman must board at his own expense. In sugar factories the

wages are between 6 and 8 rubles a month in winter, _i. e._ between

$0.75 and $1.00 a week![84]

It follows from what has been here shown that it is only the farmer who

can get along with the rates paid in rural industry. The peasant who

is unable to farm could hardly eke out an existence. He has the choice

either of becoming a pauper[85] or of leaving his village.

The Economics of the Russian Village · 第 7 / 15 章