change focus from how the industrial revolution happened to
what were its impacts?
Were people better off as a result of the industrial
revolution? Which people?
the answer is likely to be different for the rich and the
poor
compared to what? compared to people who worked on
farms
work on farms was becoming a less reliable living (next
chapter)
work on farms was more varied and perhaps healthier
upper class--aristocracy with inherited land (defined
by who your parents were more than how much money you have)
middle class--people who own a home or a business,
white collar
working class--anyone who works in a factory or for
wages on a farm or as a domestic servant, blue collar
what did people spend the additional money on?
luxuries and showing off
some factory owners spent surplus profits on expansion
and technology
we need to look not just at how much money people had,
but also at how prices changed
working class and middle class became more separate
public health issues led to worse health
crowding
workplace toxins
poor sanitation
How did the industrial revolution impact the different levels of
society?
rich landowners invested more in agricultural
improvements less in factories
factory owners were often middle class people who became
rich if they were successful. The richest industrialists
were integrated into the aristocracy (upper class by family)
the middle class saw success as its own reward,
didn't feel life disrupted
the working class did not share in the new wealth at
first and lost their traditional social structure--this is a
point that Hobsbawm sees as just as important as wages
We will focus on the working class:
Critical Thinking: What questions might we ask about the impact of industrialization on workers:
how well were they paid? how did prices change?
how did the experience and organization of work
change--more scheduled, repetitive
how did this new kind of work affect families
what were their lives outside of work like?
was there any protection or anything they could do to
improve their situation
Pay: Did the factory workers get a share of the new wealth?
proof that workers were not getting a share of the new
wealth before 1840:
Not in the early years (before about 1850)
the market was not based on workers being able to
purchase the goods they made
the workers were not getting a share of the new wealth
that resulted from the industrial revolution before 1840
Experience of work: How did industrial work compare
with agricultural work:
the BBC miniseries North
and
South based on a novel by Elizabeth Gaskell gives a good
sense of this (viewing this is one option for db2)
artificial, rigid schedule and pace of work (compared to
agriculture)
wage only, no human relationship
Families: This was a whole new way of life
factory jobs tended to be less physically strenuous and
easier to learn, therefore considered suitable for women and
children
an 1835 factory report found 43% of the workers were
under 18 (source)
another study estimates that in 1833 10-20% of workers in
textile factories were children under the age of 13
"According to the British Census, in 1841 the three most
common occupations of boys were Agricultural Laborer, Domestic
Servant and Cotton Manufacture with 196,640; 90,464 and 44,833
boys under 20 employed, respectively. Similarly for girls...
in 1841, 346,079 girls were Domestic Servants; 62,131 were
employed in Cotton Manufacture and 22,174 were Dress-makers."
(source)
Domestic servants usually worked 80 hours a week and might get
room and board but very little pay.
women and children were paid less than men so they were
hired for the easier jobs
cities grew rapidly and neither physical infrastructure
nor social infrastructure kept up with the increasing
population
in some areas 1/2 to 3/4 of worker families lived in
cheaply constructed housing with one room per family often
with a dirt floor and no plumbing (dumped their chamber pot
into the street or gutter), or at best with a pit toilet in
the courtyard Engels
on
conditions in Manchester
at best cities provided public water pumps every block
or so (image to right), but the water from which these drew
was sometimes contaminated with feces
in other cases water came from the same rivers into
which the gutters drained sewage
conditions in the industrial cities were so unhealthy
that more than half of children died before their 5th
birthday
factory owners believed that if you paid people more than
a bare subsistence wage they would be unreliable workers
(there was no minimum wage). Worked around 70 hours a
week
Laws were based on the traditional belief was
that ordinary people could and should watch out for
themselves--buyer beware (as consumer goods came to be made
far away instead of locally and technology became more complex
that didn't work so well any more).
employees had no right to compensation for
accidents from their employers because of a legal principle
called "fellow servant"
the new industrial cities lacked community structures
Poor
laws, which provided minimal welfare but intended to
make it humiliating
people who could not support themselves were generally
required to live in poorhouses, which were not much better
than prisons
attempts to reform the poor laws sometimes made things
worse
there were no laws to protect workers, no law requiring
workers
compensation for injury on job
voluntary associations, which focused on creating
community (leading to criticism that they spent money on
funerals, not basic needs)
there were some existing structures for collective
action--traditions of riot by the poor and associations
(unions) of skilled workers
Political response to a situation where many factory workers were
hopeless and hungry (see also Hobsbawm p. 51):
Luddite
movement--beginning in 1811, a few gangs of home textile
workers burned factories and smashed machines because
they saw that the factories were putting them out of
work. This pretty much disappeared after the "Frame
Breaking Act" of 1812 made smashing machines a capital
offense. One of those executed was a 12 year old boy
named Abraham
Charlson.
before 1832 only landowners had the right to vote, so the
government tended to act in the interest of the rich and
middle class
1832 reform act reapportioned parliamentary
representation based on population and gave the vote to heads
of household with at least 10 pounds net worth or renting land
for at least 50 pounds a year, about 1/5 of the male
population
reform laws started in 1833--
factory act of 1833 forbade employment of children under
9 and limited hours for children to 9 hours a day for children
9-13 and 12 hours a day for children 13-18
this page written and copyright Pamela E. Mack
last updated 9/2/2019
