Crime -- England -- London -- History -- 19th century; London (England) -- Moral conditions; London (England) -- Social conditions
It is a great scandal that such a system should be permitted to exist;
and a body of employers mean enough to connive at such bargain-making,
can expect but small sympathy from the public if the dishonesty it
tacitly encourages picks it to the bones. What are the terms of the
contract between employer and employed? In plain language these: “We are
perfectly aware that you apply to us well knowing our system of doing
business, and with the deliberate intention of robbing us all you safely
can; and in self-defence, therefore, we will pay you as what you may, if
you please, regard as wages, _two-pence three farthings an hour_, or four
shillings per day of seventeen hours. We know that the probabilities
are, that you will add to that four shillings daily to the extent of
another five or six. It is according to our calculation that you will do
so. Our directors have arrived at the conclusion, that as omnibus
conductors, of the ordinary type, you cannot be expected to rob us of a
less sum than that, and we are not disposed to grumble so long as you
remain so moderate; but do not, as you value your situation with all its
accompanying privileges, go beyond that. As a man who only robs us of
say, five shillings a day, we regard you as a fit and proper person to
wait on our lady and gentleman passengers; to attend to their convenience
and comfort, in short, as a worthy representative of the L. G. O. C. But
beware how you outstrip the bounds of moderation as we unmistakably
define them for you! Should you do so, we will kick you out at a
moment’s notice, and on no consideration will we ever again employ you.”
Taking this view of the case, the omnibus conductor, although entitled to
a foremost place in the ranks of thieves non-professional, can scarcely
be said to be the least excusable amongst the fraternity. There are many
who, looking down on the “cad” from their pinnacle of high
respectability, are ten times worse than he is. Take the shopkeeper
thief for instance. He is by far a greater villain than the half-starved
wretch who snatches a leg of mutton from a butcher’s hook, or some
article of drapery temptingly flaunting outside the shop of the clothier,
because in the one case the crime is perpetrated that a soul and a
woefully lean body may be saved from severance, and in the other case the
iniquity is made to pander to the wrong-doer’s covetous desire to grow
fat, to wear magnificent jewellery, and to air his unwieldy carcase
annually at Margate.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account