Part 86
The only means of determining the total amount of commodities produced, and consequently the quantity of work done in the country, is from official returns, submitted to the Parliament and the public as part of the “revenue” of the kingdom. These afford a broad and accurate basis for the necessary statistics; and to get rid of any speculating or calculating on the subject, I will confine my notice to such commodities; giving, however, further information bearing on the subject, but still derived from official sources, so that there may be no doubt on the matter. The facts in connection with this part of the subject are exhibited in the table given in the next page.
The majority of the articles there specified supply the elements of trade and manufacture in furnishing the materials of our clothing, in all its appliances of decency, comfort, and luxury. The table relates, moreover, to our commerce with other countries--to the ships which find profitable employment, and give such employment to our people, in the aggregate commerce of the nation. Under almost every head, it will be seen, the increase in the means of labour has been more extensive than has the increase in the number of labourers; in some instances the difference is wide indeed.
The annual rate of increase among the population has been ·9 per cent. From 1801 to 1841 the population of the kingdom at the outside cannot be said to have doubled itself. Yet the productions in cotton goods _were not less than ten times greater in 1851 than in 1801_. The increase in the use of wool from 1821 to 1851 was more than sixfold; that of the population, I may repeat, _not_ twofold. In _twenty_ years (1831 to 1851) the hides were more than doubled in amount as a means of production; in _fifty_ years the population has not increased to the same amount. Can any one, then, contend that the labouring population has extended itself at a greater rate than the means of labour, or that the vast mass of surplus labour throughout the country is owing to the working classes having increased more rapidly than the means of employing them?
TABLE SHOWING THE INCREASE IN THE PRODUCTIONS AND COMMERCE OF THE UNITED KINGDOM, FROM 1801-1850.
----------------------------------+----------+----------+-------------+-----------+----------+ | | | Increase | | | | | |and Decrease | |Increase | + denotes increase. | | |per Cent. | |per Cent. | * „ decrease. | 1801. | 1811. | from 1801 | 1821. |from 1811 | | | | to 1811. | |to 1821. | ----------------------------------+----------+----------+-------------+-----------+----------+ Soap in lbs. |55,500,000|80,000,000| + 44 | 97,000,000| + 21 | Cotton „ |56,000,000|92,000,000| + 64 |137,000,000| + 49 | Wool „ | | | | 10,000,000| | Silk „ | 1,000,000| 1,500,000| + 50 | 2,250,000| + 50 | Flax „ | | | | 55,000,000| | Hemp „ | | | | | | Hides „ | | | | | | Official Value of Exports[52] in £|24,500,000|21,750,000| * 11 | 40,250,000| + 85 | Official Value of Imports „| |25,500,000| | 29,750,000| + 17 | Tonnage of Vessels belonging | | | | | | to British Empire | | | | 2,560,203| | Tonnage of Vessels entering | | | | | | Ports | | | | 1,895,000| | ----------------------------------+----------+----------+-------------+-----------+----------+
+-----------+------------+------------+---------+------------+---------+---------+----------- | | Increase | | | | | | | |and Decrease| |Increase | |Increase | Total | Average | | per Cent. | |per Cent.| |per Cent.|Increase | Annual | 1831. | from 1812 | 1841. |from 1831| 1850. |from 1841|per Cent.| Increase | | to 1831. | |to 1841. | |to 1850. | | per Cent. +-----------+------------+------------+---------+-----------+----------+---------+----------- |127,500,000| + 31 |170,500,000 | + 34 |205,000,000 | 20 | 269 | 5·3 |273,000,009| + 99 |437,000,000 | + 60 |664,700,000 | 52 | 1087 | 21·7 | 30,000,000| + 200 | 53,000,000 | + 77 | 72,675,000 | 37 | 627 | 20·9 | 4,250,000| + 89 | 5,000,000 | + 18 | 7,159,000 | 43 | 616 | 12·3 |104,000,000| + 89 |151,000,000 | + 45 |204,000,000 | 35 | 271 | 9·0 | 56,500,000| | 73,000,000 | + 29 |117,447,000 | 61 | 108 | 5·4 | 26,000,000| | 51,000,000 | + 96 | 66,300,000 | 30 | 155 | 7·7 | 60,000,000| + 49 |101,750,000 | + 70 |197,309,000 | 94 | 705 | 14·1 | 48,250,000| + 62 | 62,750,000 | + 30 |100,460,000 | 60 | 294 | 7·3 | | | | | | | | | 2,581,964| + 1 | 3,512,480 | + 36 | 4,232,962 | 21 | 65 | 2·2 | | | | | | | | | 3,241,927| + 71 | 4,652,376 | + 44 | 7,110,476 | 53 | 274 | 9·1 +-----------+------------+------------+---------+------------+---------+---------+-----------
Thus, it is evident, that the means of labour have increased at a more rapid pace than the labouring population. But the increase in “property” of the country, in that which is sometimes called the “staple” property, being the assured possessions of the class of proprietors or capitalists, as well as in the profits, prove that, if the labourers of the country have been hungering for want of employment, at least the wealth of the nation has kept pace with the increase of the people, while the profits of trade have exceeded it.
AMOUNT OF THE PROPERTY AND INCOME OF GREAT BRITAIN.
Property assessed Annual Profits Year. to Property-tax. of Trade. 1815 £60,000,000 £37,000,000 1842 95,250,000 1844 ... 60,000,000 Increase 58 per cent. „ ... 62 per cent. Annual rate of increase 1·7 per cent. 1·7 per cent.
Here, then, we find, that the property assessed to the property tax has increased 35,250,000_l._ in 27 years, from 1815 to 1842, or upwards of 1,000,000_l._ sterling a year; this is at the rate of 1·7 per cent. every year, whereas the population of Great Britain has increased at the rate of only 1·4 per cent. per annum. But the amount of assessment under the property tax, it should be borne in mind, does not represent the full value of the possessions, so that among this class of proprietors there is far greater wealth than the returns show.
As regards the annual profits of trade, the increase between the years 1815 and 1844 has been 23,000,000_l._ in 29 years. This is at the rate of 1·7 per cent. per annum, and the annual increase in the population of Great Britain is only 1·4 per cent. But the amount of the profits of trade is unquestionably greater than appears in the financial tables of the revenue of the country; consequently there is a greater increase of wealth over population than the figures indicate.
The above returns show the following results:--
Increase per Cent. per Ann. Population of the United Kingdom ·9 Productions from 21 to 5 Exports 14 Imports 5 Shipping entering Ports 9 Property 1·7 Profits of trade 1·7
Far, very far indeed then, beyond the increase of the population, has been the increase of the wealth and work of the country.
And now, after this imposing array of wealth, let us contemplate the reverse of the picture: let us inquire if, while we have been increasing in riches and productions far more rapidly than we have been increasing in people and producers--let us inquire, I say, if we have been numerically increasing also in the sad long lists of paupers and criminals. Has our progress in poverty and crime been “_pari passu_,” or been more than commensurate in the rapidity of its strides?
TABLE SHOWING THE NUMBER OF PAUPERS IN ENGLAND AND WALES.[53]
------+-----------------+-------------------+---------------+------------- |Number of |Numerical Increase | | |Paupers relieved,| and Decrease. |Annual Increase|Increase per Years.| Quarters |+ denotes Increase.| and Decrease |Cent. from | ending Lady-day.|* „ Decrease.| per Cent. |1840 to 1848 ------+-----------------+-------------------+---------------+ = 56. 1840 | 1,199,529 | | | Annual 1841 | 1,299,048 | + 99,519 | + 8 | Increase, 1842 | 1,427,187 | + 128,139 | + 10 | 7 per Cent. 1843 | 1,539,490 | + 112,303 | + 8 | 1844 | 1,477,561 | + 938,071 | + 60 | 1845 | 1,470,970 | * 6,591 | * 0·4 | 1846 | 1,332,089 | * 38,881 | * 3 | 1847 | 1,721,350 | + 389,261 | + 29 | 1848 | 1,876,541 | + 155,191 | + 9 | ------+-----------------+-------------------+---------------+-----------
Here, then, we have an increase of 56 per cent. in less than ten years, though the increase of the population of England and Wales, in the same time, was but 13 per cent.; and let it be remembered that the increase of upwards of 650,000 paupers, in nine years, has accrued since the New Poor Law has been in what may be considered full working; a law which many were confident would result in a diminution of pauperism, and which certainly cannot be charged with offering the least encouragement to it. Still in _nine_ years, our poverty increases while our wealth increases, and our paupers grow nearly four times as quick as our people, while the profits on trade nearly double themselves in little more than a quarter of a century.
We now come to the records of criminality:--
TABLE SHOWING THE INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF CRIMINALS IN ENGLAND AND WALES FROM 1805-1850.
----+--------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+--------------- | Annual | | | |Increase | |Average Number| |Decennial| Annual |per Cent.| | of Criminals |Numerical|Increase |Increase | in the | | Committed. |Increase.|per Cent.|per Cent.|43 years.| ----+--------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+--------------- 1805| 4,605 | | | | |Annual Average 1811| 5,375 | 770 | 17 | 2·8 | | Increase 1821| 9,783 | 4408 | 82 | 8·2 | | per Cent., 1831| 15,318 | 5535 | 57 | 5·7 | 504 | 11·7. 1841| 22,305 | 6987 | 46 | 4·6 | | 1850| 27,814 | 5509 | 25 | 3·6 | | ----+--------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------------
From these results--and such figures are facts, and therefore stubborn things--the people cannot be said to have increased beyond the wealth or the means of employing them, for it is evident that _we increase in poverty and crime as we increase in wealth, and in both far beyond our increase in numbers_. The above are the bare facts of the country--it is for the reader to explain them as he pleases.
* * * * *
As yet we have dealt with those causes of casual labour only which may induce a surplusage of labourers without any _decrease taking place in the quantity of work_. We have seen, first, how the number of the unemployed may be increased either by altering the hours, rate, or mode of working, or else by changing the term of hiring, and this while the number of labourers remains the same; and, secondly, we have seen how the same results may ensue from increasing the number of labourers, while the conditions of working and hiring are unaltered. Under both these circumstances, however, the actual quantity of work to be done in the country has been supposed to undergo no change whatever; and at present we have to point out not only how the amount of surplus, and, consequently, of casual labour, in the kingdom, may be increased by _a decrease of the work_, but also how the work itself may be made to decrease. To know the causes of the one we must ascertain the antecedents of the other. What, then, are the circumstances inducing a decrease in the quantity of work? and, consequently, what the circumstances inducing an increase in the amount of surplus and casual labour?
In the first place we may induce a large amount of casual labour _in
## particular districts_, not by decreasing the gross quantity of work
required by the country, but by merely shifting the work into new quarters, and so decreasing the quantity in the ordinary localities. “The west of England,” says Mr. Dodd, in his account of the textile manufactures of Great Britain, “was formerly, and continued to be till a comparatively recent period, the most important clothing district in England. The changes which the woollen manufacture, as respects both localization and mode of management, has been and is now undergoing, are very remarkable. Some years ago the ‘west of England cloths’ were the test of excellence in this manufacture; while the productions of Yorkshire were deemed of a coarser and cheaper character. At present, although the western counties have not deteriorated in their product, the West Riding of Yorkshire has made giant strides, by which equal skill in every department has been attained; while the commercial advantages resulting from coal-mines, from water-power, from canals and railroads, and from vicinage to the eastern port of Hull and the western port of Liverpool, give to the West Riding a power which Gloucestershire and Somersetshire cannot equal. The steam-engine, too, and various machines for facilitating some of the manufacturing processes, have been more readily introduced into the former than into the latter; a circumstance which, even without reference to other points of comparison, is sufficient to account for much of the recent advance in the north.”
Of late years the products of many of the west of England clothing districts have considerably declined. Shepton Mallet, Frome and Trowbridge, for instance, which were at one time the seats of a flourishing manufacture for cloth, have now but little employment for the workmen in those parts; and so with other towns. “At several places in Wiltshire, Somersetshire, and Gloucestershire, and others of the western counties,” says Mr. Thornton, “most of the cottagers, fifty years ago, were weavers, whose chief dependence was their looms, though they worked in the field at harvest time and other busy seasons. By so doing they kept down the wages of agricultural labourers, who had no other employment; and now that they have themselves become dependent upon agriculture, in consequence of the removal of the woollen manufacture from the cottage to the factory” [as well as to the north of England], “these reduced wages have become their own portion also;” or, in other words, since the shifting of the woollen manufacture in these parts, the quantity of casual labour in the cultivation of the land has been augmented.
The same effect takes place, of course, if the work be shifted to the Continent, instead of merely to another part of our own country. This has been the main cause of the misery of the straw-plaiters of Buckinghamshire and Bedfordshire. “During the last war,” says the author before quoted, “there were examples of women (the wives and children of labouring men) earning as much as 22_s._ a week. The profits of this employment have been so much reduced by the competition of Leghorn hats and bonnets, that a straw-plaiter cannot earn much more than 2_s._ 6_d._ in the week.”
But the work of particular localities may not only decrease, and the casual labour, in those parts, increase in the same proportion, by shifting it to other localities (either at home or abroad), even while the gross quantity of work required by the nation remains the same, but the quantity of work may be less than ordinary at _a particular time_, even while the same gross quantity annually required undergoes no change. This is the case in those periodical gluts which arise from over-production, in the cotton and other trades. The manufacturers, in such cases, have been increasing the supplies at a too rapid rate in proportion to the demand of the markets, so that, though there be no decrease in the requirements of the country, there ultimately accrues such a surplus of commodities beyond the wants and means of the people, that the manufacturers are compelled to stop producing until such time as the regular demand carries off the extra supply. And during all this time either the labourers have to work half-time at half-pay, or else they are thrown out of employment altogether.
Thus far we have proceeded in the assumption that the actual quantity of work required by the nation _does not decrease in the aggregate, but only in particular places or at particular times_, owing to a greater quantity than usual being done in other places or at other times[54]. We have still to consider what are the circumstances which tend to _diminish the gross quantity of work required by the country_. To understand these we must know the conditions on which all work depends; these are simply the conditions of demand and supply, and hence to know what it is that regulates the demand for commodities, and what it is that regulates the supply of them, is also to know what it is that regulates the quantity of work required by the nation.
Let me begin with the decrease of work arising from a _decrease of the demand_ for certain commodities. This decrease of demand may proceed from one of three causes:--
1. An increase of cost. 2. A change of taste or fashion. 3. A change of circumstances.
The _increase of cost_ may be brought about either by an increase in the expense of production or by a tax laid upon the article, as in the case of hair-powder, before quoted. Of the _change of taste or fashion_, as a means of decreasing the demand for a certain article of manufacture, and, consequently, of a particular form of labour, many instances have already been given; to these the following may be added:--“In Dorsetshire,” says Mr. Thornton, “the making of wire shirt-buttons (now in a great measure superseded by the use of mother-o’-pearl) once employed great numbers of women and children.” So it has been with the manufacture of metal coat-buttons; the change to silk has impoverished hundreds.
The decrease of work arising from a _change of circumstances_ may be seen in the fluctuations of the iron trade; in the railway excitement the demand for labour in the iron districts was at least tenfold as great as it is at present, and so again with the demand for arms during war time; at such periods the quantity of work in that particular line at Birmingham is necessarily increased, while the contrary effects, of course, ensue immediately the requirements cease, and a large mass of surplus and casual hands is the result. It is the same with the soldiers themselves, as with the gun and sword makers; on the disbanding of certain portions of the army at the conclusion of a war, a vast amount of surplus labourers are poured into the country to compete with those already in work, and either to drag down their weekly earnings, or else, by obtaining _casual_ employment in their stead, to reduce the gross quantity of work accruing to each, and so to render their incomes not only less in amount but less constant and regular. Within the last few weeks no less than 1000 policemen employed during the Exhibition have been discharged, of course with a like result to the labour market.
The circumstances tending to _diminish the supply_ of certain commodities, are--
1. Want of capital. 2. Want of materials. 3. Want of labourers. 4. Want of opportunity.
The _decrease of the quantity of capital_ in a trade may be brought about by several means: it may be produced by a want of security felt among the moneyed classes, as at the time of revolutions, political agitations, commercial depressions, or panics; or it may be produced by a deficiency of enterprise after the bursting of certain commercial “bubbles,” or the decline of particular manias for speculation, as on the cessation of the railway excitement; so, again, it may be brought about by a failure of the ordinary produce of the year, as with bad harvests.
The _decrease of the quantity of materials_, as tending to diminish the supply of certain commodities, may be seen in the failure of the cotton crops, which, of course, deprive the cotton manufacturers of their ordinary quantity of work. The same diminution in the ordinary supply of particular articles ensues when the men engaged in the production of them “strike” either for an advance of wages, or more generally to resist the attempt of some cutting employer to reduce their ordinary earnings; and lastly, a like decrease of work necessarily ensues when the _opportunity of working is changed_. Some kinds of work, as we have already seen, depend on the weather--on either the wind, rain, or temperature; while other kinds can only be pursued at certain seasons of the year, as brick-making, building, and the like; hence, on the cessation of the opportunities for working in these trades, there is necessarily a great decrease in the quantity of work, and consequently a large increase in the amount of surplus and therefore casual labour.
* * * * *
We have now, I believe, exhausted the several causes of that vast national evil--casual labour. We have seen that it depends,
First, upon certain times and seasons, fashions and accidents, which tend to cause a periodical briskness or slackness in different employments;
And secondly, upon the number of surplus labourers in the country.
The circumstances inducing surplus labour we have likewise ascertained to be three.
1. An alteration in the hours, rate, or mode of working, as well as in the mode of hiring.
2. An increase of the hands.
3. A decrease of the work, either in particular places, at particular times, or in the aggregate, owing to a decrease either in the demand or means of supply.
Any one of these causes, it has been demonstrated, must necessarily tend to induce an over supply of labourers and consequently a casualty of labour, for it has been pointed out that an over supply of labourers does not depend _solely_ on an increase of the workers beyond the means of working, but that a decrease of the ordinary quantity of work, or a general increase of the hours or rate of working, or an extension of the system of production, or even a diminution of the term of hiring, will also be attended with the same result--facts which should be borne steadily in mind by all those who would understand the difficulties of the times, and which the “economists” invariably ignore.