|
Friday, August 28, 2009 - 12:05 AM
It is a great fact that the misery of the working masses has not diminished
from 1848 to 1864, and yet this period is unrivaled for the development
of its industry and the growth of its commerce. In 1850 a moderate organ
of the British middle class, of more than average information, predicted
that if the exports and imports of England were to rise 50 per cent, English
pauperism would sink to zero. Alas! On April 7, 1864, the Chancellor of
the Exchequer delighted his parliamentary audience by the statement that
the total import and export of England had grown in 1863 “to 443,955,000
pounds! That astonishing sum about three times the trade of the comparatively
recent epoch of 1843! “With all that, he was eloquent upon “poverty”.
“Think,” he exclaimed, “of those who are on the border of that region,”
upon “wages... not increased”; upon “human life... in nine cases out of
ten but a struggle of existence! “He did not speak of the people of Ireland,
gradually replaced by machinery in the north and by sheepwalks in the south,
though even the sheep in that unhappy country are decreasing, it is true,
not at so rapid a rate as the men. He did not repeat what then had been
just betrayed by the highest representation of the upper ten thousand in
a sudden fit of terror. When garrote panic had reached a certain height
the House of Lords caused an inquiry to be made into, and a report to be
published upon, transportation and penal servitude. Out came the murder
in the bulky Blue Book of 1863 and proved it was, by official facts and
figures, that the worst of the convicted criminals, the penal serfs of
England and Scotland, toiled much less and fared far better than the agricultural
laborers of England and Scotland. But this was not all. When, consequent
upon the Civil War in America, the operatives of Lancashire and Cheshire
were thrown upon the streets, the same House of Lords sent to the manufacturing
districts a physician commissioned to investigate into the smallest possible
amount of carbon and nitrogen, to be administered in the cheapest and plainest
form, which on an average might just suffice to “avert starvation diseases”.
Dr. Smith, the medical deputy, ascertained that 28,000 grains of carbon
and 1,330 grains of nitrogen were the weekly allowance that would keep
an average adult... just over the level of starvation diseases, and he
found furthermore that quantity pretty nearly to agree with the scanty
nourishment to which the pressure of extreme distress had actually reduced
the cotton operatives (1). But now mark! The same
learned doctor was later on again deputed by the medical officer of the
Privy Council to enquire into the nourishment of the poorer laboring classes.
The results of his research are embodied in the “Sixth Report on Public
Health”, published by order of Parliament in the course of the present
year. What did the doctor discover? That the silk weavers, the needlewomen,
the kid glovers, the stock weavers, and so forth, received on an average,
not even the distress pittance of the cotton operatives, not even the amount
of carbon and nitrogen “just sufficient to avert starvation diseases”.
“Moreover: — we quote from the report — “as regards the examined
families of the agricultural population, it appeared that more than a fifth
were with less than the estimated sufficiency of carbonaceous food, that
more than one-third were with less than the estimated sufficiency of nitrogeneous
food, and that in three counties (Berkshire, Oxfordshire, and Somersetshire)
insufficiency of nitrogeneous food was the average diet.”
“It must be remembered,” adds the official report, “that privation of
food is very reluctantly borne, and that, as a rule, great poorness of
diet will only come when other privations have preceded it.... Even cleanliness
will have been found costly or difficult, and if there still be self-respectful
endeavors to maintain it, every such endeavor will represent additional
pangs of hunger.”
“These are painful reflections, especially when it is remembered that
the poverty to which they advert is not the deserved poverty of idleness;
in all cases it is the poverty of working populations. Indeed the work
which obtains the scanty pittance of food is for the most part excessively
prolonged.”
The report brings out the strange and rather unexpected fact:
“That of the division of the United Kingdom,” England, Wales, Scotland,
and Ireland, “the agricultural population of England,” the richest division,
“is considerably the worst fed”; but that even the agricultural laborers
of Berkshire, Oxfordshire, and Somersetshire fare better than great numbers
of skilled indoor operatives of the East of London.
Such are the official statements published by order of Parliament in 1864,
during the millennium of free trade, at a time when the Chancellor of the
Exchequer told the House of Commons that
“the average condition of the British laborer has improved in a degree
we know to be extraordinary and unexampled in the history of any country
or any age.”
Upon these official congratulations jars the dry remark of the official
Public Health Report:
“The public health of a country means the health of its masses, and
the masses will scarcely be healthy unless, to their very base, they be
at least moderately prosperous.”
Dazzled by the “Progress of the Nation” statistics dancing before his eyes,
the Chancellor of the Exchequer exclaims in wild ecstasy:
“From 1842 to 1852, the taxable income of the country increased by
6 per cent; in the eight years from 1853 to 1861, it has increased from
the basis taken in 1853, 20 per cent! The fact is so astonishing to be
almost incredible! ... This intoxicating augmentation of wealth and power,”
adds Mr. Gladstone, “is entirely confined to classes of property.”
If you want to know under what conditions of broken health, tainted morals,
and mental ruin that “intoxicating augmentation of wealth and power...
entirely confined to classes of property” was, and is, being produced by
the classes of labor, look to the picture hung up in the last Public Health
Report of the workshops of tailors, printers, and dressmakers! Compare
the “Report of the Children’s Employment Commission” of 1863, where it
states, for instance, that
“the potters as a class, both men and women, represent a much degenerated
population, both physically and mentally”, that “the unhealthy child is
an unhealthy parent in his turn”, that “a progressive deterioration of
the race must go on”, and that “the degenerescence of the population of
Staffordshire would be even greater were it not for the constant recruiting
from the adjacent country, and the intermarriage with more healthy races.”
Glance at Mr. Tremenheere’s Blue Book of the “Grievances Complained of
by the Journeymen Bakers”! And who has not shuddered at the paradoxic made
by the inspectors of factories, and illustrated by the Registrar General,
that the Lancashire operatives, while put upon the distress pittance of
food, were actually improving in health, because of their temporary exclusion
by the cotton famine from the cotton factory, and the mortality of the
children was decreasing, because their mothers were now at last allowed
to give them, instead of Godrey’s cordial, their own breasts.
Again, reverse the medal! The income and property tax returns laid before
the House of Commons on July 20, 1864, teach us that the persons with yearly
incomes valued by the tax gatherer of 50,000 pounds and upwards had, from
April 5, 1862, to April 5, 1863, been joined by a dozen and one, their
number having increased in that single year from 67 to 80. The same returns
disclose the fact that about 3,000 persons divide among themselves a yearly
income of about 25,000,000 pounds sterling, rather more than the total
revenue doled out annually to the whole mass of the agricultural laborers
of England and Wales. Open the census of 1861 and you will find that the
number of male landed proprietors of England and Wales has decreased from
16,934 in 1851 to 15,066 in 1861, so that the concentration of land had
grown in 10 years 11 per cent. If the concentration of the soil of the
country in a few hands proceeds at the same rate, the land question will
become singularly simplified, as it had become in the Roman Empire when
Nero grinned at the discovery that half of the province of Africa was owned
by six gentlemen.
|