[-57-]
PART II - INDUSTRIAL
CHAPTER I
INVERTEBRATE CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT
IN attempting an analysis of the industrial conditions that prevail in Soho and its environs, one is immediately impressed by the invertebrate character of the district, and by its remarkable deficiency in what I may call local identity.
The population, for the most part, is an ever-shifting one, with a large foreign element in it which has been attracted thither chiefly by the opportunities which the food and dress trades of the West offer to foreign workers; and, in a lesser degree, by the tradition which has made Soho for over two centuries the favourite resort of foreign political refugees. The importance of this foreign element as a factor in the social and industrial life of the district will he seen at once when I mention that it forms over eleven per cent. of the entire population of the district - a proportion which, as the following comparative statement [-58-] will show, is exceeded by but two other districts in London, viz., Whitechapel and St. George's-in-the-East, which are notorious as comprising the English "Ghetto" of the Jews:
Table showing the proportion of foreigners in different districts.
Registration Districts. | Proportion of Foreigners to Total Population. |
Whitechapel | 24% |
St. George's-in-the-East | 16% |
SOHO (St. James and St. Anne) |
11½% |
St. Giles-jn-the-Fields |
5% |
Strand |
4½% |
St. Marylebone |
3% |
St. Pancras | 2½% |
Holborn (including Clerkenwell) |
2½% |
Stepney | 2% |
Bethnal Green |
1 1/3% |
Shoreditch |
1 1/3% |
Poplar |
1% |
St. Olave, Southwark | ¾% |
St. Saviour's |
2/3% |
It is noteworthy, however, that while Whitechapel and St. George's-in-the-East have a larger foreign element than Soho, it is in those districts almost exclusively Jewish; whereas in Soho, and in the West generally, it partakes of a much more general and cosmopolitan character. This may be seen at once by a reference to the analysis of the foreign population of the West which I have given in the Tables at the end of this volume. * [-* See Appendix X.-]
[-59-]
II. Deficiency in Artisan Labour.
Then, again, there is in Soho no large
artisan class, nor, indeed, any predominant class of unskilled workmen, such as
the dock and riverside labourers, and costermongers of the East, or the wharf
labourers and others of the South. The artisan class proper forms only 10.1 per
cent. of the population in Soho, as compared with
35.4 per cent. in Shoreditch
29.8 per cent. in Bethnal Green
13.3 per cent. in Whitechapel, St.
George's-in-the-East and Stepney
26.1 per cent. in Poplar
25.1 per cent. in Battersea.
The most significant industrial fact so far as Soho and the
neighbouring districts are concerned is the remarkable number of persons
employed on dress. In Soho, for example, they represent 24 per cent, of the
population as compared with 2½ per cent. elsewhere in Central London.*
[-* This does not include St. Pancras and St. Marylebone which belong for
registration purposes to North London.-] The remainder of the population
represents a great variety of trades, including building, painting, French
polishing, etc., not one of which (with the possible exception of the
heterogeneous list of workers included under the heading of "lodging and
coffee-house" keepers and employés) employs more than three per cent. of
the population. The neighbouring parish of St. Giles-in-the-Fields (immediately
adjoining Soho) has even less individuality. There the principal trades are
building and road service, not one of which employs more than three per cent. of
[-60-] the population. In another closely adjoining district (a little to the
north of Soho), to which I referred in Part I of this volume, a similar state of
things prevails. There, as in Soho, a large number of persons is employed on
dress, but the occupations of the rest are bewilderingly varied. In a census
which I took last year * [-*1895-] of a number of streets in the immediate
neighbourhood of Fitzroy Square, I discovered some facts which threw a startling
light on the conditions of industrial life in that district. For instance, the
first eighteen persons visited (all of them, save one, heads of families)
represented no fewer than sixteen different trades and occupations. The next
seventeen represented thirteen different trades; a third group of nineteen
persons represented fourteen trades; and a fourth group of ten persons actually
represented ten different occupations or trades. Eighty-eight men who were
visited in one Street represented upwards of forty different occupations!
But the true character of the industrial conditions that
prevail in Soho and the central districts of the West will he seen even more
clearly in the following analysis of the trades of the districts, which I quote
from the latest volume of Mr. Charles Booth's invaluable work.* [-*Life and
Labour of the People, Volume VII-]
The table, it should be noted, refers only to families, the heads
of which are engaged in the trades referred to, and does not include the
total number of persons employed in the trades. It should also be noticed that
the percentages given represent percentages of the entire trade in London
and not of the population of the district.
[-61-]
Table showing the Total Number of Persons (and trade percentages) represented by heads of families engaged in various trades in the Strand, Soho, and St. Giles' districts.
Trade | Total No. of Persons represented by Heads of Families | Percentage of entire trade in London |
Tailors | 8,274 | 9 |
Lodging and Coffee-house Keepers | 3,349 | 7.8 |
Brewers and mineral-water manufacturers | 712 | 5.3 |
Publicans | 2,655 | 4.3 |
Warehousemen and messengers | 3,260 | 4.3 |
Trimmings, artificial flowers, etc | 826 | 3.7 |
General shopkeepers. | 1,014 | 3.3 |
Costers or street-sellers | 771 | 3.2 |
Boot and shoe-makers | 2,892 | 3 |
Shirtmakers | 384 | 2.2 |
Bakers and confectioners | 1,154 | 2.1 |
General labourers |
3,958 | 2 |
Cabmen, coachmen, and busmen |
2,714 | 1.9 |
Dressmakers and milliners. |
787 | 1.8 |
Carmen and carters |
1,698 | 1.5 |
Machinists |
87 | 1.3 |
Clerks |
2,019 | 1.1 |
While therefore the Strand, Soho, and St. Giles district has a far higher
percentage of tailors (reckoning by heads of families) than any other district
in London (with the [-62-] exception, of course, of the St. George's-in-the-East
and Whitechapel district, where the percentage is nearly double) its general
invertebrate character is shown in this: that it reaches a percentage of 5
and upwards in but two other industries, i.e., brewers and mineral-water
manufacturers, and lodging and coffee-house keepers.
If moreover, we compare it in this respect with other
districts, its remarkable deficiency in what I may call industrial identity
becomes conspicuously apparent:
Table showing the Number of Principal Trades (including those only which represent 5 per cent, and upwards of the entire trade in London) in various districts.
Registration District. |
No. of Trades representing 5 per cent, and upwards of Total Trade in London. |
Lambeth | 29 |
Islington | 28 |
Wandsworth | 24 |
Camberwell | 19 |
St. Saviour's, Southwark | 19 |
Mile End and Stepney | 19 |
Hackney | 17 |
St. Pancras | 14 |
Greenwich | 13 |
St. Olave, Southwark | 12 |
Fulham | 12 |
St. George's-in-the-East and Whitechapel |
11 |
Poplar | 11 |
St. Marylebone, and Hampstead | 10 |
Bethnal Green | 8 |
Woolwich | 5 |
Shoreditch | 4 |
Holborn*[-* Including Clerkenwell.-] | 4 |
STRAND, SOHO, AND ST. GILES |
3 |
[-63-] The comparative value of the above
statement is, of course, appreciably affected by differences in the size and
population of the districts compared, but when the utmost allowance is made for
this, it suggests a valuable and interesting clue to the general industrial
characteristics of the districts referred to.
An even more suggestive and valuable clue is offered by a
comparison of the total number of persons (represented by heads of families)
employed in various trades, in proportion to population, in different districts.
In the following table (which is based upon a careful
analysis of the most recent returns published by Mr. Charles Booth) I give the
results of such a comparison made between typical industrial districts in
different parts of London.
Table showing the Number of Persons (i.e., Proportion of Population) represented by heads of families employed in various trades in different districts. * [-* Merchants, shopkeepers, etc., are excluded from this list, and only those trades are included which represent at least ½ per cent, of the total population of the district.-]
Trades | St. George's-in-the-East and Whitechapel. | St. Saviour, Southwark | St. Olave, Southwark. | Strand, Soho and St. Giles |
Perc. of Population. | Perc. of Population. | Perc. of Population. | Perc. of Population. | |
Tailors | 14¾ | 1 1/3 | ¾ | 8 |
Bootmakers |
6½ | 2½ | 1 1/5 | 2¾ |
Dressmakers and milliners |
¾ | 1 | 2/3 | ¾ |
Shirtmakers | - | ½ | 2/3 | - |
Trimmings, artificial flowers, etc. |
1 | - | - | ¾ |
[-64-] Brewers and mineral-water manufacturers |
- | ½ | - | 2/3 |
Tobacco manufacturers |
3 | - | - | - |
Bakers and Confectioners |
1¼ | 1¼ | 1¾ | 1 |
Publicans |
1¾ | 1½ | 1 2/3 | 2½ |
Lodging and Coffee-house keepers |
1 | 2/3 | ½ | 3 |
Costers and Street sellers |
2 | 1¼ | - | ¾ |
Clerks | 1 | 3 | 2 2/3 | 2 |
Cabmen, busmen, etc |
1¼ | 3¼ | 1 | 2½ |
Carmen and Carters Railway service and labour |
¾ | 1 | 1¾ | - |
Seamen | ½ | - | 1¼ | - |
Lightermen |
1 | - | 3 | - |
Dock and wharf service and labour |
5 | 1 | 6 | - |
Warehousemen and messengers |
1¾ | 3¼ | 3½ | 3 |
General labourers |
5 1/3 | 5 | 8¾ | 3¾ |
Factory Labourers |
- | ½ | - | - |
Engine drivers and artisans |
2/3 | 1 1/3 | 2 | 2/3 |
No more convincing proof of the invertebrate character of the Soho district could be required than that which the above comparison affords.
[-65-]
CASUAL AND "SEASON" LABOUR
ANOTHER disastrous feature of the industrial life of Soho - a
direct result of the unrestricted luxury, and worse than useless extravagance
that characterize the wealthy neighbouring districts-is an exceptional, and
quite incalculable, amount of "season" or casual work, which terribly
intensifies the pressure of poverty in the district. Nearly all the trades,
indeed, are "season" trades; and, to make matters worse, the "London
Season" attracts to West London a vast army of casual workers for whom no
adequate permanent provision is possible.
In a previous chapter*[-*see Part I, pp.10-11-] I gave some figures bearing on this
point which were the result of my own investigations in a particular district.
It may be well to supplement those, which referred chiefly to men, by some
figures compiled by Mr. Charles Booth, which refer exclusively to women.
In Central London (which includes all Soho), "widows and
families," whose earnings are "casual" form no less than 26.4 per cent, of
the entire population, as against-
10.7
per cent. in Bethnal Green
8.8 per cent. in Whitechapel, St.
George's-in-the-East, and Stepney, and
8.1 per cent. in Poplar.
[-66-] If we take the case of unmarried women who are casual earners, the
difference, if not so striking, is still important. These
represent-
8.5 per cent. of the population in Central London
6.9 per cent. of the population in Bethnal Green
7.6 per cent. of the population in Whitechapel, St.
George's-in-the-East, and Stepney
5.9 per cent. of the population in
Poplar.
A considerable proportion of casual or "season" work is
naturally to be expected in a district that is specially devoted to the dress
trades, but West Central London suffers even more severely in this respect than
other similar districts (e.g., Whitechapel, and the tailoring districts
of St. George's-in-the-East) from the fact that it is so largely restricted to
the highest branches of the dress trades, and these are naturally more liable to
"seasonal" fluctuations than the "slop," or cheap work that is done in
East London.
The food trades of the West offer another illustration of
this increased liability to "seasonal fluctuations." For example, even
bakers, whose work elsewhere in London is practically constant, suffer acutely
in West London from the effects of the "London Season," and are
comparatively slack for three or four months in the year (e.g., from
August till November). If to these we add the large army of "season hands
-packers, porters, etc.- who find temporary employment in the large business
houses of the West, the seriousness of the problem of casual labour in Soho, and
the industrial districts which immediately adjoin it, at once becomes apparent.
I am well aware that the problem of season trades is an old [-67-] and
intricate problem. It bristles everywhere with difficulties that appear to be
insuperable. And yet I am persuaded that the evil is remediable to a much
greater extent than is commonly allowed. It often largely turns upon a question
of custom, or fashion, or prejudice. In the West End, at least, this is actually
the case, and it would be interesting to discover how far it is true of other
districts also. Leaving dress, for example, entirely out of the
question-although in the West this is by far the predominant trade, and one that
would certainly admit of some measure of reform - it would be interesting to
discover how much of painting and other work. that is now crowded into short and
ruinously busy "seasons," could be more evenly distributed. I have not space
in which to press the question, much as I should like to see it authoritatively
answered: I merely suggest it as a problem in social ethics, or practical
Christianity.
[-68-]
THE PROPORTION OF THE SEXES
ANOTHER noteworthy feature of the industrial life of the West
is the relatively high percentage of female heads of families. In Soho, for
example, they represent a higher proportion of the population than in any other
part of London: viz., 5.8 % as compared with-
4.3 % in Shoreditch
4.1% in Bethnal Green
3.9% in Whitechapel, St. George's-in-the-East, and Stepney.
3.7% in Poplar.
Of these the proportion of wage-earners is:
4.9% in Central London (which includes Soho)
3.8% in Shoreditch
3.6% inBethnal Grecn
3.3% in Whitechapel, St. George's-in-the-East, and Stepney, and
3.0% in Poplar. * [-* The extent to which women are family wage-earners is not
generally realized. For example, of the 82,000 heads of families engaged in the
dress trades of London, no less than 30,000 are females. This proportion is the
more striking when it is remembered that in cases where women keep their
husbands the man is nevertheless returned as head of the family.-]
[-69-] These figures are the more remarkable in view of the
interesting sociological fact that, speaking generally, women form a distinct
minority of the population of industrial districts (and this despite the fact
that in certain districts, e.g., Soho and Whitechapel, which are the
special centres of women's trades, an entirely opposite result might be
expected); whereas in wealthy districts they largely preponderate. * [-* in
considering this question allowance must, of course, be made for the large
number of female domestic servants employed in the wealthy districts.-]
In the civil parish of St. Anne, Soho, for example, which is
remarkable as the centre of the West End tailoring trade, there are actually 173
more males than females.
The following tables will show the distribution of the sexes
in various districts.
I. Table showing the Excess of Females over Males in various districts.
Registration District. |
Total No. of Females in excess of Males | Percentage of Females in excess of Males |
Hampstead |
14,862 | 55½ |
Kensington |
34,874 | 53 |
Paddington |
20,752 | 42¾ |
St. Marylebone (The increase here is most marked in the wealthy districts) |
17,660 | 28½ |
St. George's, Hanover Square |
12,414 | 20 2/5 |
Hackney |
18,920 | 18 |
Fulham |
14,766 | 17 |
Islington |
17,623 | 11 2/3 |
Chelsea |
5,015 | 11 |
St. Pancras (The increase here is chiefly in the wealthy districts, e.g., Regent's Park. In the poorer districts, e.g., Somers Town, the sexes are practically equal.) |
7,659 | 6 4/5 |
[-70-] St. Giles-in-the-Fields (Here again the increase is due to the wealthy districts, e.g., St. George's, Bloomsbury. In St. Giles South, there are nearly 700 less women than men.) | 1,082 | 5 3/5 |
Shoreditch | 2,429 | 4 |
Bethnal Green | 2,516 | 4 |
Holborn (including Clerkenwell) | 1,912 | 2¾ |
Westminster (Soho) (The sub-district of St. Anne, Soho, has 173 less women than men.) | 90 (less than) | ½ |
II. Table showing the Excess of Males over Females in various districts.
Registration District |
Total No. of Males in excess of Females | Percentage of Males in excess of Females |
Whitechapel |
3,408 | 9½ |
Stepney |
1,430 | 5 1/9 |
Poplar |
1,856 | 2¼ |
St. George's-in-the-East |
397 | 1 4/5 |
St. Olave, Southwark |
1,162 | 1 2/3 |
St. Saviour |
611 | 3/5 |
It will suggest the contrast even more clearly if we compare two closely
adjacent districts in the West, i.e., a wealthy district (Mayfair), and
an industrial district (St. Anne, Soho):-
Mayfair has 40 per cent, more females than males
St. Anne, Soho, has 3
per cent. less females than males
And this despite the fact that St. Anne, Soho, is the centre of the West End
tailoring trade.
[-71-]
CONDITION AS TO MARRIAGE
IN view of the foregoing facts it will be interesting to compare the condition of the population as to marriage, not only in Soho, but also in other industrial districts. It will be obvious that such a comparison is closely related to those already given. To make the comparison strictly just I select the two most overcrowded districts in East and South London. Taking the total number of persons of twenty years and upwards in each district, the following result appears:
Table showing the condition as to marriage of all Persons of 20 Years and upwards in various districts.
Registration District |
Single | Married |
Soho (St. James and St. Anne) |
41½% | 58½% |
St. Saviour, Southwark |
25 1/3% | 74 2/3% |
St. George's-in-the-East |
23 1/3% | 76 2/3% |
Average for all London |
31¼% | 68¾% |
If we raise the age standard and compare the number of persons of 35 years and upwards in the same districts, an equally remarkable result appears:
[-72-]
Table showing the condition as to marriage of all persons of 35 Years and upwards in various districts.
Registration District |
Single | Married |
Soho (St. James and St Anne) |
20 1/3% | 79 2/3% |
St. Saviour, Southwark |
11½% | 88½% |
St. George's-in-the-East |
9 2/3% | 90 1/3% |
Average for all London |
14% | 86% |
The difference under both standards of comparison is certainly remarkable, and while the figures for Soho may be affected in some small degree by the more prosperous parts of the St. James's parish, this in itself is an altogether inadequate explanation of so great a discrepancy. The true explanation of the difference, I venture to suggest, is to be sought, first, in exceptional industrial conditions; and, secondly, in the influence (subtle, but powerful) of the surrounding wealthy districts, in which, as the following figures will show, an even more marked abstention from marriage prevails.
Table showing the condition as to marriage of all persons of (a) 20 years and upwards; and (b) 35 years and upwards, in St. George's, Hanover Square, and Kensington.
20 years and upwards | 35 years and upwards | |||
Single | Married | Single | Married | |
St. George's, Hanover Square |
43 5/6% | 56 1/6% | 22 2/3% | 77 1/3% |
Kensington |
44¼% | 55¾% | 22¾% | 77¼% |
Average for all London |
31¼% | 68¾% | 14% | 86% |
II. Proportion of Early Marriages.
It is gratifying to find that the proportion of early marriages (i.e., of persons under twenty years of age) is [-73-] extremely insignificant. *
* Considerable misunderstanding appears to exist in the popular mind as to the prevalence of early marriages, especially in the industrial districts, and the number of such marriages is often greatly exaggerated. It may be interesting to supplement the above figures (which refer, it should be noted, to marriages of persons under twenty years of age) by percentages relating to the marriages of minors (i.e., persons under twenty-one years of age) in the whole of London during the last half century.
Table showing the proportion (i.e., percentage of total marriages) of marriages of minors in London daring the years 1851-'94.
Date.
Percentage of Males Percentage of Females 1851-60
2.77 11.95 1861-70
3.56 14.56 1871-80
4.71 16.90 1881-90
5.53 18.91 1891
4.86 17.45 1892
5.15 17.67 1893
4.75 16.80 1894
4.69 16.80 In this respect (as the appended table will show) London compares very favourably with the rest of England; a fact that is no doubt explained by the increased cost of living in the former.
Table showing the proportion (i.e., percentage of total marriages) of marriages of minors in England and Wales during the years 1851-'93.
Date.
Percentage of Males Percentage of Females 1851-60
5.70 17.99 1861-70
6.82 20.37 1871-80
7.96 22.03 1881-90
6.81 20.75 1891
5.90 19.01 1892
5.87 18.76 1893
5.59 18.08 If these figures are compared with the percentages given above, it will at once be seen that the marriages of persons under twenty years of age, form an extremely small proportion of the total number of marriages of minors.
The following table gives the proportion in each of the foregoing districts:
[-74-]
Table showing the proportion of early marriages (i.e., of persons under twenty years of age) in various districts.
Total No. of persons (Married) under 20 years of age | Percentage of Total Marriages | |||
Registration District. |
Males | Females | Total | |
St. George's, Hanover Square |
16 | 106 | 122 | ¼ |
Kensington |
29 | 142 | 171 | 1/3 |
Soho |
7 | 42 | 49 | 1/3 |
St. Saviour, Southwark |
69 | 321 | 390 | ½ |
St. George's-in-the-East |
14 | 88 | 102 | ½ |
Average for all London |
950 | 4,672 | 5,622 | 1/3 |
III. Proportion of Widows.
I have already referred* [-*see page 68-] to the relatively high percentage of female heads of families in Soho. If, pushing our analysis a little further, we deal simply with "widows," it will be seen that the proportion is again higher in Soho than in the east and south of London:
Table showing the number and proportion of "widows" in various industrial districts.
Registration District. |
Total No. of Widows | Proportion (Percentage) of Total Married Women |
Soho |
1,778 | 23 1/3 |
St. George's-in-the-East |
2,114 | 20½ |
St. Saviour, Southwark |
8,721 | 19 1/5 |
Average for all London |
186,479 | 20 2/3 |
[-75-]
INDUSTRIAL PARASITES
ANOTHER, by no means inconsiderable, factor which confronts
us in an analysis of the industrial life of Soho and the immediately adjacent
districts, is the strangely heterogeneous army of "touts," "loafers,"
and "casuals," who are attracted by the wealth of the West End, and who
succeed, by almost infinite resource, in eking out a sort of parasitic
existence, feeding upon the follies and vices and pleasures of wealthy West
London. Included in this innumerable army are hotel theatrical, and music-hall
employés (e.g., waiters, kitchen-porters, theatrical "supers,"
ballet-girls, chorus-singers, wig-makers, etc.); cab "touts" and
"runners" (who literally swarm in the squares and other wealthy thoroughfares of the West); sandwichmen (for
whom the numerous theatres,
music-halls, art-galleries, exhibitions, etc. of the West End provide ready but
miserable employment* [-* Of the 36 theatres in London, no fewer than 29 are in West
and West Central London; while of the 16 principal music-halls in London
no less than 8 are situated in the West.-]), and dossers of every description-a pitiable and
parasitic host who seriously affect the moral as well as the industrial life of
the district.
[-76-] These "dossers" are drawn from all classes of society,
and represent almost every conceivable type of character - from the professional
man who has fallen through drink and dishonesty (sometimes, but rarely, through
sheer misfortune), to the unskilled, seasoned loafer whose philosophic savagery
is abundantly satisfied with the price of his "kip" and one "square"
meal per day; and who, when even these fail, falls back in stoical equanimity
upon a tighter clasp of his belt, and an extra "screw" of kerbstone twist.
It will give some idea of the nondescript character of these
men when I mention that 144 "homeless men" who applied, to the Soho
Committee of the Charity Organization Society for assistance last winter (i.e.,
from October 1895 to March 1896), represented - nominally, at least - nearly 70
different professions and trades.* [-see Appendix XI-]
Their ages also vary greatly. While there is an increasing
number of young men under twenty-five, the majority average from twenty-five to
forty, while there are practically none over sixty.* [-*Of the 144 men mentioned above, 17
were under 25, and 127
above 25 years of age.-] Once past sixty they pass
into the work-house. It is probable that at least one half of the men admitted
into work-houses in West London Unions are drawn from the common lodging-houses
of the district.
Of these common lodging-houses there are no fewer than i66 in
West and West Central London alone.* [-I quote the figures for 1894-] The following table will show their
distribution:
[-77-]
Table showing the number and distribution of Common Lodging-houses in West and West Central London.
District |
Total. No. of Common Lodging-houses | Authorized No. of Lodgers |
Paddington |
4 | 66 |
Kensington |
33 | 960 |
Marylebone |
22 | 881 |
St. Pancras |
26 | 861 |
St. Giles-in-the-Fields |
43 | 2,178 |
St. Martin's-in-the-Fields |
6 | 225 |
Strand (including St. Anne, Soho) |
12 | 711 |
St. James |
2 | 142 |
Holborn |
18 | 725 |
166 | 6,749 |
In
addition to the above there are also 21 in Chelsea (with
authorized accommodation for 827 lodgers), and 25 in Westminster (with authorized accommodation for
1,683
lodgers).
But these figures give an altogether inadequate idea of the
actual numbers of this parasitic class in the West, inasmuch as very many of the
men sleep in shelters and refuges that are not registered as common
lodging-houses, and which therefore do not appear in the above list; while
others, again, who infest the central districts of the \Vest by day, regularly
resort to common lodging-houses in other districts at night.
II. Vagrants.
Then, again, there must be added to these the relatively
large number of vagrants who are attracted to West [-78-] London. It is noteworthy (as showing how powerfully the wealth of the
West
attracts this class) that of the total number of vagrants in London nearly one
half are to be found in West London.
It may be interesting if I give the figures in each case for the past five
years.
Table showing the number of Vagrants admitted to Casual Wards in (a) All London, and (b) West, and West Central London (excluding Fulham and Chelsea), on the 1st of January in each of the years 1891-'5.
(a) ALL LONDON |
|
Date |
Total Number of Vagrants admitted |
January 1st |
|
1891 |
754 |
1892 |
838 |
1893 |
769 |
1894 |
1,145 |
1895 |
1,211 |
(b) WEST, AND WEST CENTRAL LONDON |
|
1891 |
311 |
1892 |
334 |
1893 |
322 |
1894 |
483 |
1895 |
478 |
In some tables which appear in the Appendix to this volume I have shown the distribution of these vagrants in the different districts of West London. * [-* See Appendix XII.-]
[-79-]
GENERAL TRADES: (1) LAUNDRY WORK (2) CHARING
I COME now to a consideration of the condition of the workers
in the more regular trades of Soho and the immediately surrounding districts.
I take, first, the case of women. These may be divided
roughly into two general classes, viz., skilled and unskilled. The former
includes the workers in the various branches of the. dress trades (e.g., tailoresses,
mantle-makers, dressmakers, etc.); while the latter includes the more casual and
nondescript forms of labour (e.g., charing, laundry-work, * [-* I have included all laundry workers under this head,
although some branches of the trade should, perhaps, be regarded as skilled
labour.-] and general
factory work [-*A large number of women find temporary employment in the
busy seasons at Messrs. Crosse and Blackwell's, and other factories in Soho.-]).
The condition of the workers in each of these classes is exceedingly unsatisfactory. Work is extremely intermittent, and for the most
part, badly paid; competition is severe - in the case of the older women,
disastrous - while the hours of work (in the busy seasons especially) are often
excessive.
Take, for example, the case of the women employed [-80-] in
laundries. In the West (speaking generally) laundry-work
is almost exclusively a workshop industry; the high rents, and absence of proper
accommodation, chiefly accounting for this. This fact undoubtedly tends to an
improvement in the condition of the workers, and to a better organization of the
trade generally, but even then the lot of the workers is extremely
unsatisfactory. The hours of work (even as sanctioned by the Factory and
Workshop Act of 1895* [-* The hours allowed to women-workers in laundries by the Act
of 1895 are 14 per day (exclusive of meal hours and absence from work),
or 60 hours per week. But the Act does not apply to small hand-laundries.-]) are excessive, the work itself extremely arduous and
carried on under conditions that seriously injure the health of the workers (the
temperature of the rooms being often above 80º), while the wages (leaving out of
view the loss of work through slackness, which - owing to the "London season"
- is necessarily frequent) arc by no means high. In the washing branch of the
trade, for example, the women get from 2/6 to 2/9 per day; while ironers earn
from 3/- to 3/6. The following wages were paid in two typical West End
laundries.* [-*I quote from the Report of the Royal Commission on Labour-]
"A." In this laundry washers were paid at the
rate of 2/6 per day, best ironers 3/6 per day; the "preparer," 3/-
per day; while shirt ironers were paid at the rate of 1/3 to 1/6 per dozen. The wages book showed that in
one week (in the beginning of April)
1 worker had earned 25/-
5 workers had earned 20/- to 25/-
2 workers had earned 18/- to 20/-
12
workers had earned 15/- to 18/-
13 workers had earned 12/- to 15/-
6 workers had earned 10/- to 12/-
11 workers had earned 8/- to 10/-
7
workers had earned 6/- to 8/-
6 workers had earned under 6/-
"B." In this case children were employed as sorters
at 6d. per day.
The
"taker-out (i.e., at back of ironing machine) received 1/- per day
The
head-washer received 3/- per day
Ordinary
washers received 2/6 per day
The head-drier received 2/6 per day
Packers received 2/- to 2/6 per
day
Sorters received 2/- to 2/6 per
day
Finery
ironer received 3/- per day
Shirt
ironer received 3/- per day
The latter (i.e., shirt ironers) were
required to average 3 shirts and a collar per hour, for which the price charged
to customers was 1/1.
Overtime is generally paid for at the rate of 3d. per
hour, but, frequently (when less than 3/- per day is earned), at the
rate of 2d. per hour.
Very much of the overtime (which is frequently prolonged
until midnight)* [-* In the Report (1893) of H.M. Inspector of Factories cases
were reported of workers who were employed for three days and three nights at a stretch.-]
is due to the inconsiderateness of the public, who make the
most thoughtless and cruel demands. Many of the visitors at the West End hotels,
for example, are in the habit of giving out work overnight, which has to be
returned, ready for use, early next morning. Some of the hotels, however (e.g.,
the Grand, Metropole, and First Avenue), are now furnished with [-82-] private laundries, and this may modify, to some extent, the
evils of overtime. It is matter for very serious regret, however, that the Act
of 1895, which brought laundries (with certain notable exceptions) for the first
time under the provisions of the Workshop and Factory Acts, did not more
seriously curtail the legal hours of work.
It is also difficult to understand why the smaller laundries
(ie., hand-laundries) where the conditions of work are often much more injurious
to the workers, should have been exempted from the provisions of the Act.* [-* All laundries in which the only persons employed are
members of the same family dwelling on the premises with not more than two
other persons, are exempted from the Act.-] In
this class of laundry the hours of work are often outrageously excessive, while
the rooms, being small, are invariably overcrowded and full of steam. The wages
in hand-laundries, however, are remarkably uniform, averaging from 2/6 to
2/9 per day, with (generally) an allowance of beer. In these laundries the
workers are mostly married women, whereas in steam-laundries the women are as a
rule much younger.
Of women, again, who pick up a precarious living by charing,
there are a considerable number in Soho. The supply, indeed, in this, as in all
forms of unskilled labour, is far in excess of the demand, and consequently
wages, although fairly uniform, are often scandalously low. One case, for
example-that of a woman who had to scrub and clean from half-past five in the
morning until twelve at noon, for 8/2 a week - may be quoted as fairly
representing the rate of pay of many of these casual workers, a large proportion
of whom are married women with a bitter knowledge of the grip of hunger and
rent.
[-83-]
BUT by far the majority of the women workers in Soho are
employed in the dress trades of the West. Of these a few* [-*
It is probable that there arc not more than 500 shirt and collar makers in Soho and the immediately surrounding
districts.-] are shirt and collar
makers; a larger proportion dressmakers, mantlemakers, and milliners; while the
great majority are tailoresses.
Some branches of these trades (I refer to the two latter
divisions only) are fairly well paid, but all are season trades, and therefore
the wages are exceedingly irregular. Take the dressmaking for example. A girl
who has been an apprentice or improver, and is fairly clever at her work, can,
if she applies at the right time (e.g., at the end of March or the
beginning of April), readily get on as a season hand at one or other of the
large firms in the neighbourhood of Oxford Street, starting with wages of about
eight shillings a week, In the case of a skilled work-woman the wages average
fifteen or sixteen shillings per week. But the majority of them are season
hands, and if they begin work, say, at the end of March, they may be kept busy
until the end of August, with perhaps a few [-84-] extra weeks between October and December; but these are
uncertain. The intervals of slackness must be filled up as best they can.* [-* An interesting
clue to the seasonal fluctuations in the
dressmaking and millinery trades is afforded by some returns (relating to
1 2 firms) published by the Board of Trade. From these it appears that the staff
of workers is reduced by over 50% in the slack seasons.-] In
many of the West End houses the only permanent hands are the pupils, who pay a
premium (generally about £20) to learn the trade, and who have the option of
staying on as indoor hands when the apprenticeship is over, at a salary ranging
from £8 to £20 a year, with board. But this system is rapidly dying out,
chiefly because the excessive rents of the West make it impossible for employers to spare the room.
The following figures (which refer to West End firms, and
are quoted from the Report of the Labour Commission) may be interesting. It will
be seen that they closely correspond with the figures already given.
Of 82 dressmakers of whom evidence wvas given by one witness,
24
received 8/- per week
12
received 10/- per week
7
received 12/- per week
14
received 14/- per week
13
received 16/- per week
11
received 18/- per week
1
received 20/- per week
"Fitters," of course, are much more highly paid, the
head-fitter sometimes receiving as much as £250 a year with board and lodging.
Assistant bodice hands average from 8/- to 14/- per [-85-] week*
[-* Food is rarely given in these cases, but occasionally
dinner and tea are given.-] while experienced bodice hands earn from 16/-
to 18/- per week.
One firm in Regent Street (said to be "the best house in
London"), pays its skirt hands from 17/- to 27/- per week. These rates,
of course, apply to busy seasons only. The hours of work are generally from 8.30
to 7.30, with an hour, or an hour-and-a-half, for meals.
Then there are the machinists. This is a large industry.
Those who work for the best dressmakers can earn from sixteen to twenty-four
shillings per week, while in the heavier machine work, such as cloth mantles and
tailoring, wages range from eighteen to thirty shillings a week.* [-*These
figures, it must be remembered, refer only to busy seasons-] This
high rate of wages is naturally a powerful attraction, but the physical strain
is severe, and few women can stand more than a few years of constant work
without serious injury to their health.
So far I have dealt with the better paid work only; but in
Soho and the surrounding districts much of the work is miserably underpaid. One
well-known firm, for instance, that formerly employed a large number of mantle-makers at. good wages, now procures many of its mantles from abroad, and employs
the women chiefly in altering and fitting. This is done by piecework, and
frequent deductions are made in the shape of fines. In other cases, women are
paid as little as eightpence for making large ulsters, and then are required to
find their own cotton.
[-86-]
THE TAILORING TRADE
BUT it is in the tailoring trade of the West that the most
serious evils exist, and inasmuch as this is the principal trade in Soho, and
represents by far the majority of the workers (male and female) I propose to
give it much more detailed and searching examination, giving the results of long
and careful personal investigations, and including information supplied to me
from entirely reliable private sources.
Few trades, probably, have had a darker history than the
tailoring trades of London, and it may be questioned whether any have resisted
more successfully the spirit of reform. That there have been great and obvious
improvements in recent years - notably within the last five years- is undoubted;*
[-* It is unquestionable, for example, that there is far lees
drunkenness in the trade now than formerly; while the character of the workshops
and the sanitary conditions under which the workers live have undergone steady
improvement. How much, however, still remains to be done it will be the purpose
of this chapter to show.-] but these have been accompanied by other internal changes which have seriously
affected the position of the workers: while from a variety of causes [-87-] - some of which will presently
appear - both the spirit and
letter of the most important of recent reforms are constantly and easily evaded.
It is easy enough to account for this. The tailoring trade,
to begin with, is sadly deficient (so far at least as the workers are concerned)
in effective organization. This fact, in itself, is not surprising. The
conditions of the trade are altogether unfavourable to organization. Work is
extremely precarious and restricted - in the West especially - to ruinously short seasons; while the advent of the Jews has
seriously aggravated the evils of competition. But whatever the explanation, the
fact of dis-organization remains. Out of 52,346 persons engaged in the
tailoring trade in London (representing 18,253 males over 20 years of age) only
3,551 are members of Trade Societies.* [-*Life and Labour of the People, Vol.
VII-]
Domestic Workshops.
It must be remembered, moreover, that the tailoring trade is
one of the few industries that have survived (to any considerable extent) the
modern change-or revolution- in our industrial system: i.e., from
domestic workshop to factory. The trade, it is true, has not been altogether
unaffected by the modern spirit: clothing factories have sprung up here and
there (e.g., in East London, and in several provincial towns), but these
are restricted to "slop" or "contract" work. So far as the ordinary
trade is concerned the only appreciable change has been a steady and widespread
development which has substituted the small master, or "middleman", for the
private worker. * [-*I have dealt elsewhere with the way in which the factory
system of work (i.e., sub-division of labour) has affected the West End
trade. See p.99-]. [-88-] A few West End firms, it is true, provide their own
workshops, and this is undoubtedly, from every point of view, the most entirely
satisfactory arrangement. But until the provision of such shops is made
compulsory the number is not likely to be large, the extra accommodation needed
entailing-owing to the exorbitant rents charged in the West-a very considerable
additional expense.* [-* Even in cases where employers provide their own workshops
much of the work is given out to "outworkers," so that the existence of such
workshops is no guarantee that a particular garment has been made on the
premises. In too many cases, it is to be feared, the customer is misled on this
point.-]
Private, or domestic, workshops may have certain small
advantages in personal convenience to the worker, but these are a thousand times
outweighed by obvious disadvantages which are almost too serious to admit of
exaggeration.
To begin with, they are often shamefully overcrowded. This
will be readily realised when I mention that in the West (Soho), the tailors'
workshops are frequently private tenements of one or two rooms which are used
not only as workrooms (in which four, five, six, or even more persons, of both
sexes, may often be found working) but also as sleeping and living rooms for
the tailor and his family. I have already, in a previous chapter, given
illustrations of this overcrowding, but I will supplement the eases there given
with one or two others.
One room, for example, of which the particulars are before
me, was occupied by a man and his family (who used it as living and sleeping
room combined) and four other persons (one man and three women) who came early
each morning and worked until late in the evening. In [-89-] another
case (also living, sleeping, and workroom combined) six workers were employed
(two men and four women). There was absolutely no ventilation, and the steam
from the pressing made the room almost unbearable. In a third case reported to
me, a small back room (living, sleeping, and workroom) contained three workers.
The bed was laid upon the floor, which was wretchedly dirty and looked as if it
had not been scrubbed for months. In yet another instance (likewise a small back
room) two men and a woman were found seated upon the bed busily sewing.
Such
cases are by no means rare, nor are they the worst that could be given. They
simply represent what are frequent conditions in many of these small domestic
workshops. Many of the worst cases escape detection owing to the cleverness, or
cunning, of the devices adopted. In some cases, for example (one such was
reported to me), a man rents, say, two rooms both of which are ostensibly
workrooms,
but in order to save gas, and, at the same time, secure personal supervision, he
compels his workers (numbering, probably, from eight to twelve persons) to work
in one room. Should the Factory Inspector call warning is at once given and half
of the workers slip into the other room. It is by no means difficult to secure
this warning. The people are fertile in resource, and a number of devices are
systematically resorted to to escape detection. In some cases a small dog is
kept simply to give warning of the approach of strangers.
It
is obvious, therefore, that the work of inspection is made,
under any circumstances, extremely difficult, while, with
a limited staff of inspectors, such as, unhappily, is [-90-] the case at present,*
[-*
Under the Public Health (London) Act, 1891, the local sanitary authority, acting
through its sanitary inspectors, is solely responsible for domestic workshops,
which arc thereby excluded from the provisions of the Workshop and Factory
Acts. In cases of neglect or default, however, on the part of the local
authority, the power of summary action is entrusted to H.M. Inspectors of
Factories. In a previous chapter I gave particulars as to the number of Sanitary
Inspectors in Soho and other districts. It may be useful to supplement those
with figures shewing the number of Factory Inspectors in the United
Kingdom. The entire staff consists of the following-
1 Chief Inspector
5 Superintending Inspectors
13 1st.
Class Inspectors
27 2nd.
" "
1 Additional Inspector under Clause 24 of the Act of
1892
1 Assist.
"
21 Junior Inspectors
4 Lady "
25
Inspectors' Assistants
Total
98
The
number of registered workshops and factories, on the other hand, is as
follows-
Registered Factories 64,098
" Workshops
69,990
Total
134,088-] anything like efficient inspection is
out of the question. Much may be hoped, doubtless, from the effect of recent
provisions of the law requiring the registration and systematic visitation of
outworkers, but, nevertheless, it is open to grave question whether things can
ever be satisfactorily remedied while domestic or tenement workshops are allowed
to exist.
In any case it cannot too strongly be urged that the limit of
accommodation sanctioned by the law (i.e., 250 cubic feet per head) is,
in the case of domestic or tenement [-91-] workshops - where the means of ventilation are necessarily
imperfect - altogether insufficient. * [-*The evidence of Dr. Hamer, the Asst. Medical Officer of
Health for London, confirms this. In his report of a special inspection of 200
domestic workshops in Soho, made in 1893, he declares that "it was no
uncommon thing to find the air of the workrooms close and oppressive, and it
cannot be too strongly insisted upon that the standard of 250 cubic feet is a
low one, and when the air space per head approaches this limit, the means of
ventilation should be particularly attended to. Even when the air of rooms
occupied to this extent is renewed three or four times an hour, the amount of
carbonic acid pollution must necessarily be considerable, and when no special
means of ventilation are provided, such frequent renewal is impracticable. Under
the conditions which were found to obtain in the workshops visited, it is
unlikely that the air of the rooms was renewed more often than once or, at most,
twice per hour, and under these circumstances, pollution to a very serious extent
is quite compatible with the full allowance of 250 cubic feet of space per head."-]
Another very serious evil arising out of the use of private
tenement dwellings as workshops is that represented by the deficiency in
sanitary conveniences, to which reference has already been made. * [-*see pp. 16,
38-39 etc.-] It is a
sufficiently serious matter, from a sanitary point of view alone, that a house
intended originally for the accommodation of a single family, and furnished with
sanitary conveniences for one family only, should be let out in small tenements
to five, six, or even more families; but the evil is greatly aggravated when, as
is the case in Soho, these tenements are made to serve as workshops also. Under
these circumstances the supply of water- closets which, as I have already shown,
is often, even under ordinary circumstances, scandalously insufficient, has to
meet the requirements of an increased number [-92-] of persons, including workers of both sexes. I am perfectly
well aware that this state of things is entirely contrary to the provisions of
the Public Health Act, which requires* [-*Section 38, sub-sec. 1 . Public Health
(London) Act, 1891-] that "every factory, workshop, and
workplace shall be provided with sufficient and suitable accommodation in the
way of sanitary conveniences, regard being had to the number of persons employed
in, or in attendance at such building; and also where persons of both sexes are,
or are intended to be employed, or in attendance, with proper separate
accommodation for persons of each sex," but the evil exists notwithstanding, and
often in the most scandalous and aggravated forms. It is but another
illustration of the fact of which, in this district,. one is perpetually
reminded, that legislative reforms are in themselves useless in the absence of
adequate and efficient administrative arrangements.
It is here that the real and characteristic defect in our
social arrangements lies, and until we frankly recognise it, and proceed
earnestly to remedy it, it is useless - legislative reforms notwithstanding - to
expect any great improvement in the conditions of social and industrial life.
Another obvious evil of domestic workshops, but one to which,
strangely enough, the public, who are most concerned, have been singularly
indifferent, lies in the facilities they offer for the spread of disease. How
great are these facilities few, perhaps, realise; but it is not difficult to
estimate them when we consider the terribly crowded conditions under which
tailors live, the grave sanitary defects of their tenement-workrooms, and the
risks incurred in the promiscuous herding together in the fetid atmosphere of
small crowded workrooms of all sorts and [-93-] conditions of people. The law, it is true,
requires the
speedy notification of all cases of infectious disease, and imposes a fine (not
exceeding £10) upon the occupier of a workshop, or any other person, who allows
work to be done "in any dwelling-house (or building occupied with a
dwelling-house) in which any inmate is suffering from scarlet fever or
small-pox." But (even were no loophole of escape offered in the shape of a
"reasonable" plea of ignorance) the difficulty of enforcing the law is
obvious; while in the case of the worker (for whom notification may mean the
loss of an entire season s work), the temptation to evade the law may easily
become irresistible.* [-* The
Amalgamated Society of Journeymen Tailors, with commendable regard for the
protection of the public (which, it is to be feared, the public does not always
reciprocate), has an admirable provision to meet cases of this kind. The rule
reads as follows:-
"That in all cases where a member is prevented from
following his employment by the medical authorities, in consequence of some
member or members of the house in which he resides suffering from infectious
disease, the Committee of the Branch shall investigate the case and medical
certificate. They shall have power to grant lockout pay (i.e., 15/- a
week) to the member. The Secretary shall send a full report within seven days to
the Executive Council, who shall have power to grant such other payment as may
meet the case, until the medical officer certifies that his family is free from
infection."
This arrangement, however, refers only to members of the
Trade Society, whereas - as I have already shown - the vast majority of workers arc
non-unionists. For full particulars of the various benefits conferred upon
members of this Trade Society, the reader is referred to App. XIV-XV-] If may be interesting to mention in this Connection, a
case that came under my own knowledge a year or two ago, and for the
truthfulness of which I can vouch. A certain worker, whom I happen to know, and
who is one of the [-94-] best workers in the trade, had the misfortune some years ago
to have several of his children (I think three) down at one time with fever, one
of them subsequently dying from the disease. The man, however, not only failed
to notify the firm for whom he was working of the fact, but actually used the
work upon which he was at the time engaged as a temporary covering for the sick
children, and afterwards sent it home as finished in the ordinary way. Among the
garments so used was one that was being made for the late Cardinal Manning, and
which, I am informed, was subsequently worn by him during a visit to Rome!
In another instance - in this case a recent one - seven persons (viz.,
a tailor, his wife, three children, and two lodgers) were crowded together
in one room, which, like many others, had to serve the triple purpose of living
room, bedroom, and workroom. One of the children was stricken with fever, and
(notice having been given, in this case, to the sanitary authorities), the
family had to clear out to have the room disinfected. Iii the room at the time,
however, were several coats upon which the man and his wife had been working
while the child lay sick with the fever, and these when finished were sent back
to the firm (a fashionable West End firm) in the ordinary way.* [-* The recent scandal in connection with the Duke of York's
trousers is, perhaps, still fresh in the public mind.-] The
indifference of the clothes-wearing public on this whole question is as
extraordinary as it is appalling. It is probably due in great measure to
ignorance, but if so, it is an unhappy and dangerous ignorance, and one that
should be quickly dispelled. It can hardly be doubted that if the wealthy
residents of Mayfair and Belgravia [-95-] could be induced to visit the domestic workrooms of Soho, and
see for themselves the actual conditions under which their clothes are made, the
result would be a rude awakening that would speedily bring about a series of
healthy reforms. As it is the public seems well content to remain in ignorance
of the fact that nearly 50 per cent. of those actually employed in
making its clothes live under crowded and often scandalous conditions. That
individuals could do much to remedy things is certain. They could at least
insist upon knowing the conditions under which their clothes are made, or at all
events demand adequate guarantees for the cleanliness and effective supervision
of the workrooms. In America they have a system which (so long as domestic
workshops are tolerated) might with advantage be adopted here. The Massachusetts
Act 246 of 1893, for example, requires that all garments made in domestic or
tenement-house workshops shall be marked with a special label. A similar
arrangement would undoubtedly help matters in London.
Internal Changes. The Advent of the Jew.
The question of tenement or domestic workshops is also
related, more or less directly, to the various changes - many of them very serious
changes - which have gradually transformed the tailoring trade in Soho in recent
years. Prominent among these changes (I omit for the moment the enormous
increase in the number of women workers) may be mentioned the following:- (1)
Shorter seasons; (2) a cheaper class of work; and (3) less permanent work (i.e.,
a gradual dissolution of the informal, but more or less permanent, bond
formerly existing between particular workmen and the firms for which they
worked).
[-96-] All of these changes may be traced back to two chief causes
(which at bottom are one) viz., the introduction of machine work, and the
advent of the Jews.
The extraordinary manner in which the Jews (having possessed
themselves already of Whitechapel and St. George's-in-the-East) have recently
invaded and captured Soho, affords one of the most remarkable illustrations of
industrial change that probably any district in London could offer.
Less than ten years ago there were comparatively few Jewish
tailors in Soho, and these were confined, for the most part, to one or two
small streets. Now, however, the whole district is overrun with them.* [-* I have already shown (see p. 58) the large proportion of
foreigners in Soho and other districts. It may, however, serve to give a clearer
idea of the proportion of foreign tailors in London if I mention that out of
21,403 heads of families engaged in the tailoring trade in London, no fewer than
13,497, or 63%, wwre born out of London.-]
One reason for their success is found in the fact that they
give far less trouble than English workers. There is less danger of trade
disputes and strikes, and, moreover, they are comparatively indifferent as to
the class of work they get. They will gladly take the rough (or cheap) work with
the smooth, and are able (thanks to their sweating practices) to make the one
pay for the other. It is the rule among many of the West End firms to give these
men what are called "soft sews," and pay them something like 25%
less for making.
Then, again, they are willing to work at any time, and at all
hours, and are extremely useful when (as often happens) a garment is required to
be made in a few hours. A ease recently reported to me will illustrate this. A
[-97-] young married Jew in Soho had been without work all day. At
seven in the evening he went to his shop, and procured a job (a coat) that was
wanted immediately. He took it home and started work at once, working
incessantly through the night, assisted by his wife, who worked with a baby in
her arms, and in this way the garment was got ready for the shop by the required
time next morning.
Against this form of competition the English worker is never
safe, and its inevitable consequence has been to force long spells of night work
upon him also.
Moreover, it has practically revolutionised the trade by
destroying the more or less permanent tie that formerly existed between West End
firms and their out-workers. In the old days, and, indeed, up to a comparatively
recent date, men worked for the same firm for fifteen or twenty years, and, in
some cases even longer; while in the case of good workmen, the utmost (sometimes
ruinous) license was allowed. If work was a little late no one greatly cared,
while the men frequently went "on the drink" for weeks at a stretch,
sometimes borrowing money for the purpose from the firms for whom they worked. I
have information of one man who actually owed his firm £6, which he had
borrowed in this way. ,The competition of the Jew has, however, changed all
this, and while we may be thankful for some features of the change (it has
certainly contributed greatly to the discouragement of the prolonged, drinking
bouts that formerly disgraced the trade), it has, nevertheless, had other
results of an exceedingly injurious character.
Under the new conditions the slightest unpunctuality is
frequently followed by summary dismissal. In one week, [-98-] a few months back, several cases were reported to me where
workmen were summarily dismissed (i.e., refused further .work) for being
half an hour late with their work, and this in the "off ", or dead season,
meant six or eight weeks of enforced idleness and semi-starvation. If instead of
being private journeymen tailors (i.e. ordinary outworkers) these men had
been "sweaters" (i.e., had worked for a number of inferior firms,
employing for this purpose a number of women at cheap rates of pay) they would
have been considerably better off, and would have been secure from a risk of
this kind. As it is, the merest accident, or a special difficulty in a garment,
may easily make them a little late with their work.
In other cases heavy fines are resorted to. One such case was
reported to me recently. The man (who worked for a cheap firm in the West)
happened through no fault of his own to be a little late with his work.
Presently a messenger from the firm drove up in a hansom in quest of the work.
Shortly afterwards a telegram arrived, followed, immediately afterwards, by a
second messenger. At the end of the week the sum of five shillings was deducted
from the man's wages to cover the cost of the telegram and cab. Against this
system of deductions, or fines, the worker (owing to special conditions that
prevail in this class of trade) is practically helpless.* [-*I am told that cases have occurred where the fines have
actually amounted to more than the man's earnings.-]
Sweating Practices.
That the advent of the Jew has also been marked by a great
increase in "sweating" will be obvious from what I [-99-] have already stated. The
West End tailoring trade is
peculiarly liable to degradation of this kind. * [-* In discussing the West End trade it is very necessary to
keep well in view the different classes into which the trade is divided. On the
one side, for example, there are the good old-fashioned shops, representing
still the very best class of work, where all the workers (from the employers
downwards, and including the outworkers and their wives) are thoroughly skilled
and practical tailors. On the other side there are the so-called "merchant
tailors," and "slop" shops generally (disguised very frequently under a
brilliant show), where not only the master but even the cutter may have no
practical (i.e., thorough) knowledge of the trade, and where the workers,
with the exception of the leading hands, have but a partial knowledge of the
manufacture of a garment (e.g., machinists, fellers, buttonholers.
pressers, etc.).
In the former case, speaking generally, good prices are paid,
and ample trimmings and "sewings" are given out with the work. In the latter
case prices are low and ~sweating frequent, while "sewings" have to be found
by the worker. The gradual degradation of even the best class of trade through
the system of outwork is, however, becoming most marked.-] The fact that it is a
"domestic" trade, liable to constant fluctuations, and carried on at all
times under extremely precarious conditions, gives the "sweater" a
tremendous advantage of which he is not slow to avail himself. One most
disastrous result of the system (although here it is a little difficult to
distinguish precisely between cause and effect), is the serious decline of the
system of thorough apprenticeship, and the substitution of the factory system of
minute subdivision of labour.* [-* It has been stated that there are now no fewer than
twenty-five distinct sub-divisions in the tailoring trade (e,g., cutters,
basters, machinists, pressers, fellers. buttonholers, etc., etc.)-]
That this result has been accelerated by the poverty and
impatience of the parents, who are, speaking generally, too poor to support
their children through a long apprenticeship [-100-] is undoubtedly true; but it is much more largely true to say
that the new system owes its remarkable success to the very special facilities
which it offers for sweating practices, in which his scientific methods give the
Jew an immense advantage over the English worker. In any case, the change is
fatal to healthy pride of workmanship, and, indeed, threatens to make an entire
end of the thoroughly practical tailor. Under this system the absorbing
consideration is no longer a question of workmanship, but becomes instead a
question of profit.
Numerous cases of "sweating" have been reported to me
from time to time. I can mention but one or two.
In one case a young woman (a thoroughly skilled work-woman who
had frequently earned, as a weekly worker employed on the best class of work,
from 22/- to 26/- a week), was compelled through slackness to accept work
from a Jew who paid her piecework. At the end of the first week her wages were
7/- and during the whole time that she worked for him she never succeeded in
earning more than 8/- a week.* [-* Under this system of piecework she would be there all the
time but have work given to her at intervals as the necessity arose (e.g., a
garment to "fell" , or a set of button-holes to work). So that she might be
there for an entire day, but be idle for hours, and then be paid only for actual
work.-]
In another case a day-worker was paid 2/- per day (a
shilling per day less than she had always previously received); but although
paid two-thirds of a day's wage she was required to do what was virtually a
day-and-a-half's work, and then was fiercely bullied for not accomplishing more.
This man regularly robbed his employés of their half-hour for tea. This,
however, is constantly [-101-] done. One "sweater" of whom information was given me
regularly closed his front door at tea-time, and further guarded himself against
the contingency of a "surprise" visit from the Factory Inspector by
stationing a "scout" there to give warning. In the evening he would contrive
so to "distribute" his workers as to leave his workroom clear. * [-*
There are at least two distinct classes of "sweaters." First, the small man who employs few hands and whose workroom adjoins
(or indeed actually is) his dwelling-room; and, secondly, the large
"sweater" who employs a considerable number of "hands", and whose
workrooms (in many cases large and well lighted) are apart from his living
rooms.-]
It is indeed no uncommon thing for workers, working for Jews,
to be kept employed until nine, ten, and even twelve o'clock at night. One case
indeed was reported some time back where a girl was persistently overworked. She
went one morning to the workroom and found no work ready. She was told to come
again at 2 p.m. and was then started and kept at work until 3 o'clock
next morning. She went again at 8 a.m. and worked until 10.30 p.m. Next morning she began again at 8 a.m. and was kept
working until 10 p.m. Happily this case was reported and the "sweater" was
fined £5 and costs; but it is only occasionally that cases are discovered. It
must not be forgotten that in these cases the worker is helpless and is not free
to make terms with the "sweater." In the slack seasons especially, the
latter can take every advantage of his workpeople, knowing that they are
absolutely dependent upon him for work, and that, no matter what the
conditions are on which the work is offered, they must eagerly accept it.
[-102-] But sweating is by no means an exclusively Jewish vice.*
[-*The writer has no wish to be unfair to the Jews qua Jews.
There are doubtless many Jewish tailors in the West who conduct their workshops
on lines that would compare favourably with the methods of English tailors. But
it can hardly be doubted by anyone intimately acquainted with the trade that in
recent years the Jewish "sweater" has gradually supplanted the Irish
"sweater" who formerly had so large a monopoly of out-work in the
West; and
that, moreover, he has been greatly helped in this by his scientific methods,
which have led him to take full advantage of two important factors in the modern
development of the trade (of which the English worker has been much slower to
avail himself), viz:- female labour and machinery.-] It
prevails to a considerable extent among English "middlemen" also; while some
of the larger firms in the West are notorious "sweaters." The following may
serve to illustrate this.
A case was reported to me some time back where a man and his
wife (sober, respectable, and industrious people) worked as trousers hands
(finding their own workroom, and tools) for a large and well-known firm of cheap
tailors in the West. They were paid, to begin with, at the rate of 2/3 per pair,
but the prices were gradually cut down until the workers received but 1/6, and,
finally 1/- per pair! Moreover they were compelled to find their own "sewings"
(i.e., twist, etc.). * [-*A case was tried in the Lambeth County Court only a few
weeks back (August 1896) in which a middleman brought an action against a
tailoress for detaining nineteen coats belonging to him. The defence pleaded was
that the middleman declined to pay the price for work done which his wife had
offered. In the evidence given it was proved that the woman was paid at the rate
of ninepence per dozen coats for working five buttonholes and sewing on four
buttons on each, together with fetching and delivering the goods, finding her
own sewing materials, workroom, and lighting. "It takes me," said the woman,
"from 9 in the morning till 9 at night to do a dozen coats; I have to buy
my own material, and [-103-] pay
my fare (twopence) in fetching and carrying back work." The plaintiff (who
admitted the rate of pay) urged in extenuation that some of the most
fashionable West End and City tailors are making fortunes by sweating the
middleman and through him the worker, and added that he himself was working for
Members of Parliament. The National Average Time Log allows for this kind of
work as follows:-
"Five holes 1¼d., buttons with tacks ½d., making
a total of 1¾d."
See
The Tailor and Cutter. August 6th, 1896.-]
[-103-] These iniquitous sweating wages cannot be justified. They are
not to be justified even on a plea of economic necessity. It is possible even in
the lower class trade of the West to pay fair wages, for the cost of the
material used in this description of work is very small, amounting, probably, to
not more than 1/6 per yard (double width), for "suitings" and less than
1/-
per yard (single width) for trouserings.* [-* A suit of clothes can easily be cut out
of 3¼ yards of
double width material, and a pair of trousers out of 2½ yards of single width
material. In the case of the latter the average cost in the class of trade
referred to above would probably be as follows
Cost of material 2/6
Make up 1/-
Trimmings 1/-
Total 4/6
When it is added that the lowest price charged for
trousers (made to measure) in the West is 8/11, it will be seen that the
profits are enormous.-]
The men who take out this inferior class of work are often
not tailors, but men who have learnt the pressing, and who then marry a
tailoress with a knowledge of the class of work they want to do. But many of
these people can only keep at it for a few years. The long hours and the
incessant strain gradually, but surely, tell. The nerves become exhausted, and
the general health gives way until, presently, there is nothing for it but to
sell or lose the [-104-] home. The people to whom I have already referred, although
perfectly sober and respectable, lost machines, and home, and everything.
But even much of the better class work in this district is done under the "sweating" system. For example, I have information of a
well-known firm of so called "fashionable" tailors in the West who regularly
pay the "middleman" out-worker 7/6 for a jacket for which other firms pay
from 16/- to 18/-.* [-* The actual work put into the make-up of the cheaper garment
is, of course, of greatly inferior quality.-] Out of this 7/6 no less than
2/- was given
back by the "sweater" to the shop-foreman in what are called "salvages"
or bribes. So keen, however, is the competition among the "sweaters"
themselves, that on one occasion, I am credibly informed, a rival middleman
actually offered the foreman a "salvage" of 3/- out of every 7/6, and in
consequence obtained the work. This system of "salvages," or bribes, is one
of the most iniquitous of the many evil results of out-working, and cannot too
strongly be denounced; but that it prevails to a very considerable extent in the
trade of the West is notorious, and it probably offers the best explanation of
the fact that the "sweater" often takes from £40 to £70 per week in wages
while the men in the employer's own workshop are earning little or nothing.*
[-* The reader will do well to study in this connection the
evidence given by Mr. Edward M'Leod, the present West London District Secretary
of the Amalgamated Society of Journeyman Tailors, before the Royal Commission on
Sweating on July 10th, 1888. Mr. M'Leod showed conclusively that in the first
ten weeks of that year (i.e., the slackest time in the whole of the year)
one out-worker had taken £190, and another £75, in wages from the Army and Navy
Stores, while the workmen on the premises had beep almost completely idle. A
precisely [-105-] similar condition of things exists in many West End firms
to-day, and will probably continue to exist so long as out-working is
recognised.-]
[-105-] The case referred to above is probably an extreme one
(although in matters of this kind it is difficult to speak with assurance,
inasmuch as positive evidence is exceedingly difficult to obtain), but that
"salvages" of from 2/6 to 5/- in the £1 are frequently given is
notorious, as also is the custom of giving Bank-holiday and Christmas
"presents" to the shop-foreman.
But the system of sweating works most successfully in the
trousers branch of the trade. For example, I have before me now the name and
address of a man who employs about eight women and two men, and who regularly
receives work from a well-known firm of clerical tailors in the West. For
trousers for which he himself gets 3/6 per pair, he pays his workpeople as
follows:
Tailoress 1/3 per pair
Machinist -/3 per pair
Presser -/6 per pair
Total
... 2/- per pair.
This leaves him a clear profit of 1/6 per pair. When I add
that the women can make two pairs per day it will be seen that his profits are
enormous. From the total of these, however, must be deducted the cost of rent
and coke which in his case amounted to exactly 8/- per week.
From what has already been said it will probably be clear
that the rapid increase of women workers has played an important part in the
deterioration and disorganization of the tailoring trade in the West.
[-106-] The enormous extent of this increase in recent years is
little realised, but it is so startling as to seem at first incredible. The
following Table will show at a glance the extent and rapidity of the increase in
the trade as a whole:
Table showing the Increase of Women workers in the Tailoring trade (England and Wales) between the years 1871-1891.* [-* Quoted from a special Parliamentary Return published in 1895.-]
Total Males | Total Females | |
1871 | 111,860 | 38,043 |
1881 | 107,668 | 52,890 |
1891 | 119,496 | 89,224 |
That is to say, between 1871 and 1881 the number of men engaged
in the trade decreased nearly 4 per cent.; while in the same period the
number of women workers increased over 39 per cent. Between 1881
and 1891, again, the number of men increased nearly 11 per cent., while
in the same period the number of women increased over 68 per cent. Taking the
entire period of twenty years, (1871-91), the men have increased barely 7
per cent., while the women workers have increased over 134 per cent.!
The increase is, of course, to be explained in part by the
lightening of the work through the introduction of machinery, and, also, by
other changes which have already been referred to; but there can be no doubt
that in the absence of efficient organization, its general effect has been, in
several directions, exceedingly injurious to the workers themselves. If the
women's branch of the trade could be satisfactorily organized (a possibility
that, [-107-] I
confess, appears to me to be remote so long as domestic or tenement workshops
exist), many of the most serious evils of the trade would instantly disappear,
but, as it is, the workers are helpless. * [-*
It is satisfactory to note that women are now admitted as members of the
Amalgamated Society of Tailors, although the number who have joined is at
present extremely small. Taking the six West Central Branches of the Society (i.e.,
the West End, Dragon, Hand-in-Hand, Strand, International, and Pioneer) out
of a total of 1,467 members (Dec. 1895) only 18 were women.-]
The
evils of competition among women are seriously aggravated by the practice of
employing what in the boot and fur trades are called "greeners", i.e.,
apprentices, or learners, who receive little or no remuneration for their
work, and who can be easily turned adrift when the purpose of the "sweater"
is served. A painful illustration of this, and of the extent of competition,
generally, among women, may be seen at any time outside the shops where tailors'
advertisements are shown. The women - young and old alike - stand in groups,
sometimes in a great crowd, eagerly scanning the advertisements, or, as too
frequently happens, exchanging coarse jokes with their neighbours.
Women's Wages.
Of
course, under fair conditions, and in the busy seasons, tolerably good wages can
be earned. A girl, for example, who is industrious, and who is also fairly
clever at her work can earn in the busy season from 12/- to 18/-, or even
£1, per week; while' a skilled workwoman can earn from 18/- to £1 10s per
week: but the higher wages are exceptional, and, of course, are not regular, but
[-108-] season wages. In the slack seasons even a good
workwoman would probably not earn more than seven, or eight, or, perhaps, ten
shillings per week, while for several weeks together she may earn absolutely
nothing.
In the following tables I am able to give particulars (taken
from the workers' own "log" books) of the highest, lowest, and average
earnings of three women employed on good work during the three best months of
last year (i.e., April, May, and June 1895).
In
the first case the earnings were as follows:-
No. 1 | |
Highest weekly earnings | £1 9s. 6d. |
Lowest weekly earnings | 14s. 3d. |
Average weekly earnings (for the three best months in the year) | 19s. 2d. |
In the second case the figures were as under:-
No. 2 | |
Highest weekly earnings | £1 11s. 9d. |
Lowest weekly earnings | 5s. 0d. |
Average weekly earnings (for the three best months in the year) | £1 1s. 4d. |
In the third case the following result appeared:-
No. 3 | |
Highest weekly earnings | £1 2s. 3d. |
Lowest weekly earnings | 12s. 3d. |
Average weekly earnings (for the three best months in the year) | 18s. 4d. |
Men's Wages
In turning, however, as I now propose to do, to the
earnings of men engaged in the best class of work in the West, much greater difficulties present themselves. Here
[-109-] the
conditions vary so greatly that it is exceedingly difficult to strike an
average. It is probably true, however, to say that taking the three best months
in the year the average earnings of indoor workers engaged on the very best
trade of the West would be from £2 10s. to £3 per week.* [-* The
minimum Trade Union wage for indoor workers engaged on the best class of work is
£2 2s 0d. per week of 54½ hours.-] I am
authoritatively assured, however, that taking the entire year's work the
earnings of such men would not average more than 30/- per week. In the case of outworkers
it is much more difficult to estimate. Here, especially, the conditions vary
greatly. Some firms, for example, allow far more machine work than others, while
the workers themselves differ greatly in efficiency and. skill. A man, however,
who is a thoroughly skilled workman, and who is assisted by his wife, can earn
from £2 10s. to £5 per week during the best weeks of the season; but
the higher wages are the result of extreme pressure, and to earn them a man must
be able to secure a full share of work from his shop. Probably £3 per week
would be a fair average for an outworker and his wife during the three busy
months of the year.
Fortunately
I am able to give in the Appendix to this volume* [-*see Appendix XIII-] an entire year's earnings (i.e.,
from April 13th, 1895 to April 4th, 1896) of a skilled outworker and his
wife (with additional help in the busy season) employed on thoroughly good work
(coats) in the West. The case is probably as good an one as could be given, and
it will serve to show the actual state of things in this branch of the trade
under exceptionally favourable conditions. To begin with, both the man and his
wife are young and [-110-] entirely respectable, while both are skilled workers.
Moreover, as a glance at the figures (which are taken from the man's "log"
book) will show, they have been exceptionally fortunate in securing a regular
and full share of work. It will be seen that the highest sum taken in one week
was £5 9s. 6d., while the lowest sum was 5/1. The entire year's earnings
amounted to £175 13s. 9½d., giving an average of £3 7s. 6d.
per week.* [-* A further analysis which I made of the man's earnings
during the following seven months (i.e., from April 4th to October 3rd,
1896) gave a practically identical result.-] It must be remembered, however, that these figures represent the
earnings, not of one person, but of several workers. The man was regularly
assisted by his wife, a thoroughly skilled workwoman, while in the busy seasons
much additional help was required. For three months at a stretch, for example (i.e.,
from April 13th to the end of June), three persons were generally employed,
and occasionally four (including of course the outworker and his wife). Further,
the higher wages could only be earned by great pressure: the out- worker himself
frequently working all night (on some occasions having but two hours sleep in
thirty-six hours), and on Sundays also, while his wife often worked from 6 a.m.
to 12 p.m.
For a considerable part of the year the man and his wife
occupied two small rooms (living, and sleeping, and workrooms combined) on the
third floor of a house in Soho at a rent of eleven shillings per week, but had
to leave in consequence of the landlord's refusal to grant them a third room at
less than eight shillings per week extra.* [-*Single rooms in this house are
regularly let at 8/6 per week-] The man thereupon took three
rooms (which [-111-] they at present occupy) in a street a little to the north of
Soho, but within easy walking distance (less than a quarter of a mile) of their
former address, at a rental of 14/- per week. But - and this will show how
helpless the people are in their attempts to escape the pressure of exorbitant
rents - the change of address was immediately followed by a loss of work, for a
firm who before were willing to give the man work instantly withdrew their offer
when they learned that he was living on the northern side of Oxford Street. The
truth is - and it cannot be stated too strongly or too often - as things are at
present, and under the existing system of outwork, the workers in Soho are
absolutely powerless to escape from the crushing burden of ruinously exorbitant
rents.
Some Family Budgets.
It may not be uninteresting, at this point, to supplement the
figures already given by a statement showing how the wages so precariously
earned are spent. And for this purpose I have selected certain typical weeks in
the domestic life of a worker of a somewhat lower class than the one just
referred to, but who may be taken as a fair representative of a large number of
tailors in the West - a sober, respectable man, working quietly at home and
receiving occasional assistance from his wife, but unable to obtain a regular
supply of work.* [-* It may be stated at the outset that many of the workers in
the tailoring trade-good, bad, and indifferent alike-live for a large part of
the year in a chronic state of bankruptcy, pledging one week's earnings (in the
slack seasons, several weeks' earnings) to eke out another.-]
The family consisted of the man and his wife, and four
children (all of them too young to be wage-earners). At [-112-] the beginning of April 1895, following upon a winter of exceptional severity,
the man found himself several pounds in debt to landlord, baker, pawnbroker,
etc., while several of the children requited boots and underclothing.
For the week ending April 20th, 1895, the entire earnings of the family
amounted to £2 3s. 9d.; the household expenses were as follows:
s. | d. | |
Rent (including 2/- off arrears) |
13 | 0 |
Baker's a/c for bread (including 1/- off arrears) |
3 | 9 |
Groceries for week |
2 | 6½ |
Paid for washing (in consequence of wife working at trade) |
2 | 9 |
Joint of meat (to last three days) |
2 | 7½ |
Meat, for remaining 4 days |
2 | 3 |
Vegetables for week |
3 | 0 |
1½ cwt. coals (at 1/4 per cwt.) |
2 | 0 |
Butter for the week (1 lb) |
1 | 0 |
Sundry household requisites, soap, soda, etc. |
1 | 0 |
Oil |
8 | |
Insurance and Club money |
1 | 4 |
Hire of machine |
1 | 6 |
Fair of boots for child |
2 | 11 |
Total expenditure (for six persons) |
£2 0s. 4d. | |
Balance of income over expenditure |
3s. 5d. | |
Total |
£2 3s. 9d. |
The absence of any item of expenditure for beer or other alcoholic drinks is
noteworthy. Moreover, with the exception of one item of 2/11 for boots for one
of the children, there is no mention made of clothes, the cost of which, [-113-] for
a family of six persons would necessarily be great.* [-* it is said to have averaged, in this case,
7/- per week:
but this is probably excessive. Judging by ascertained returns in other trades,
the sum of 4/- per week would probably be a fairer estimate.-] Nor - to mark only one other
omission - is there any mention made in the above list
of necessary expenditure for wear and tear in household utensils, furniture,
etc., and other incidental expenses which are common to all households, and
inevitable where there are young children. I have tried to secure a rough
estimate of such expenditure, but it is difficult to determine it with anything
like accuracy, inasmuch as various sums were given to the wife at irregular
intervals; such, for example, as £1 on one occasion for new bedding, and a
further sum at another time for sheets, pillow-cases, etc. I shall certainly not
be overestimating this source of expenditure, however, in fixing it at a minimum
sum of £2 per annum.
Now it will be interesting to compare this statement, which
refers to what in this man's case was a fairly good week, with other similar
statements, having reference to the same family, for certain weeks in the slack
season. These statements will be of special value as showing the nature and
extent of the economies that are forced upon the people in times of slackness.
For the week ending January 5th, 1895, the wages of the
family amounted to 15s. 8d. The expenditure for the same week was as follows:
s. | d. | |
[-114-] Rent (half a week only) |
5 | 6 |
Boots for children (three pairs) |
10 | 9 |
Meat (frozen mutton) lasting 4 days |
2 | 3 |
Groceries |
2 | 6 |
Coals |
2 | 0 |
Vegetables |
1 | 0 |
Bread |
2 | 9½ |
Hire of machine |
1 | 6 |
Insurance and club |
1 | 4 |
Oil |
8 | |
Dinner for Thursday (six persons) |
10 | |
Dinner for Friday (six persons) |
6 | |
Meat tea Saturday (no dinner) |
9 | |
Sundries |
1 | 3 |
Total |
£1 13s. 7½d. | |
Deficiency (excess of expenditure over income) | 17s. 11½d. | |
This was met by the man pawning his best suit for £1 |
For the week ending January 26th, 1895, the wages of the
family were absolutely nil. This, although exceptional in the case of a good
worker, is by no means uncommon among workers of a lower class.
In this week, therefore, the expenses, of necessity, had to
be cut down to the barest minimum. In the first place, nothing could be paid for
rent, hire of machine, Sick Benefit Society, or Insurance. The landlord stormed,
and forcibly reminded the man and his wife that he was neither a Relieving
Officer, nor a relative, and had nothing to do with their troubles, but,
nevertheless, the rent could not be found.
The expenditure for the week was as follows:
[-115-] Saturday Tripe cuttings for Sunday's dinner (six persons) |
3½d. |
Saturday Potatoes and parsley for Sunday's dinner (six persons) |
2½d. |
Monday Dinner (2 bloaters) |
2d. |
Tuesday No dinner |
|
Wednesday (pledged pair of blankets for 4/-) |
|
Wednesday Stew for dinner |
9d. |
Wednesday Paid coal man 2/- owing to him (as he refused otherwise to send in any more coal, and family had no fire) |
2s. |
Thursday Dinner (potatoes and dripping) |
4d. |
Friday No dinner |
|
Saturday Dinner (haddock and butter) |
4d. |
Bread for week |
2s. 3d. |
Tea, Sugar, and Milk for week |
1s. 5½d. |
Oil |
3d. |
Sundries |
9d. |
Total expenditure for week |
8s. 9½d. |
Of this sum 4/- (as will be seen above) was raised by pawning a pair of
blankets (this in the depth of the winter!).
Let me conclude with the particulars of one more week. I select the week
ending February 9th, 1895.
For
this week the entire wages of the family amounted to 8/7. The expenditure was as follows:-
Rent (part of a week) |
7s. |
Meat for Sunday, etc. (3 lbs of salt beef at 2½ per lb.) |
7½d. |
Tea, Sugar, and Milk |
1s. 7d. |
Vegetables |
6d. |
Oil |
6d. |
Coals |
2s. |
Bread |
2s. 6d. |
Meat, vegetables, etc. for a stew (six persons) |
9d. |
Soap, soda, and other sundries |
6d. |
Potatoes and Lard (a "baked dinner") |
4d. |
Total expenditure for the week |
16d. 3½d. |
[-116-] Total deficiency on the week (i.e., excess of
expenditure over income) 7/8½.
For three days the family lived upon bread and tea. Nothing,
it will be noticed, could be paid this week for hire of machine, Sick Benefit
Club, or Insurance; nor is anything included for medical attendance incurred by
the illness of one of the children. The deficiency was covered by the man
pawning his overcoat. * [-* It will be noticed that in the three weeks of which I have
given particulars (and which, among the class of workers referred
to, are by no means so exceptional as may be supposed), the man had been
compelled to pawn an overcoat (the only one he possessed), a suit of clothes,
and a pair of blankets, and this in the face of the worst rigours of an
exceptionally hard winter.-]
That the winter of 1894-5 was an exceptionally severe one
must, of course, be borne in mind when considering these figures, but they,
nevertheless, indicate a condition of things that is sadly too common among the
workers of the West in the severe weeks of winter.
General Conclusions.
In view, therefore, of all the facts now given, it will be
evident that even in the busy seasons the circumstances of the average tailor
are by no means enviable. The comparatively high wages earned then are the
result of excessive and prolonged labour carried on under conditions that must
always be more or less injurious to health; while they are heavily discounted by
long intervals of slackness in which wages tend ever to the vanishing point. If
rents were lower and the work could be more evenly distributed throughout the
year, the circumstances of the worker would undoubtedly greatly improve; but as
things are it is difficult to see how the average tailor in [-117-] Soho can have other than a precarious and, indeed,
"hand- to-mouth existence, while for frequent and anxious periods -
especially during the winter months-his condition must necessarily be
one of acute distress.
The problem of reform is unquestionably an exceedingly
difficult one, as, indeed, all problems connected with the reform of "season" trades necessarily must be. That many of the evils connected with the
trade spring from the inconsiderateness of the clothes-buying public is certain.
In the best branches of the trade, for example, much inconvenience and monetary
loss are entailed upon the worker through the frequent failure of the customer
to keep his appointments for "trying on a garment. In many cases orders are
cut and "basted" to time, and then are allowed to hang in the shop for days
while the worker is kept in enforced idleness. In this way considerable time is
frequently lost to the worker in the height of a busy season.
It is equally certain, also, that a little consideration on
the part of the public would do much to remedy the evils of over-pressure of
work in the busy season, on the one hand, and of prolonged slackness in the
"off" season on the other. In the West End of London, for example,
there is naturally a very large demand for liveries, the orders for which are
given in the Spring, just when the tailoring trade is at its busiest. The work
is hard and badly paid, and, coming when it does, frequently destroys a good
worker's chance of more remunerative work. If, however, all livery orders were
given in the early months of the year (i.e., before March)- and there is
absolutely no reason why this should not be done-it would not only relieve the
pressure of the busy season, but also keep many a worker ot~t of debt during the
slack winter weeks.
[-118-]But, after all, these suggestions, however valuable in
themselves, touch but the fringe of the problem. The real remedy for the worst
evils connected with the trade lies, it can hardly be questioned, in the total
abolition of out-work and the compulsory establishment of employers' workshops.
In saying this I am by no means indifferent to the objections frequently brought
against employers' workshops by outworkers. That they tend, as at present
conducted, to limit personal freedom, and to place a worker at the mercy of his
employer's caprice, is doubtless true; but that is largely the result of the
present alternative system of outworking which gives the employer- especially if
he be unscrupulous-a tremendous advantage over the indoor worker. Moreover, as a
matter of fact, a precisely similar objection might be urged against the factory
system in all other industries. Nor am I indifferent, further, to the many
advantages that undoubtedly belong to the so-called "public" workshops that
have recently sprung up in the West. But whatever advantages these workshops
possess are sanitary and administrative advantages only, while the system of
payment for "sittings" fastens even more definitely and expressly upon the
worker a charge (amounting virtually to a deduction from wages) which our entire
industrial system acknowledges to belong rightfully to the employer.
Compulsory employers' workshops, on the other hand, would
secure (1) uniform rates of pay, (2) full and efficient inspection of
workshops (3) the abolition of excessive hours of work, and (4) improved
sanitary conditions for the workers. In a word: the better regulation of the
entire industry, and the abolition of "sweating" in all its forms.
[-119-] it
is useless, however, to expect speedy legislative interference in this
direction. The public is always singularly hard to convince in these matters,
while the workers themselves are by no means sufficiently agreed to make
immediate legislation practicable. Meantime, however, reform might well be
sought in fuller and more
efficient arrangements for the administration of the Factory and Public Health
Acts and especially in the abolition of the present dual responsibility in the
case of domestic workshops. It is not too much to say that at present many of
the most useful provisions of these Acts are rendered useless by the utter
inadequacy and confusion of our administrative arrangements. Administrative
machinery, it is true, is costly, but where the evasions of the law are so
deliberately and skilfully contrived, and, withal, are so ruinous to morality
and health, as we know them to be, for example, in Soho, the efficiency and
adequacy of such machinery are factors of supreme importance.
In
this district, at least, it is true that the general conditions of industry make
terribly against the dignity and inspiration that rightfully belong to it, and
it is difficult for the worker to escape the sense - I will not say the fact -
of
degradation. That this should be so is surely matter for serious concern to all
who deplore the social schisms of our age. That these largely proceed from, and
are considerably intensified by, the modern view of labour - a view which regards
it as an irksome, and narrowing, and unlovely thing-is as unquestionable as the
view itself is false. But wherein lies the remedy? simply, surely, in an honest
attempt to bring back labour in all its forms to pure and healthy conditions,
and in a consistent endeavour [-120-] to place it upon levels that will make it once more a joy and a delight, and
impart to it somewhat of the inspiration that was associated with craftsmanship
in the Middle Ages.
[----nb. grey numbers in brackets indicate page number, (ie. where new page begins), ed.----] |