Working Life of Women in the Seventeenth CenturyClark, Alice
History
Working Life of Women in the Seventeenth Century
Clark, Alice
Women -- Employment -- Great Britain -- History -- 17th century; Women -- Great Britain -- History -- 17th century
The relation of wages to the cost of living is seldom alluded to by
contemporary writers, but a pamphlet published in 1706 says of a
labourer’s family, “a poor Man and his Wife may have 4 or 5 children, 2
of them able to work, and 3 not able, and the Father and Mother not able
to maintain themselves and Families in Meat, Drink, Cloaths and House
Rent under 10s. a week.”[151]
Footnote 151:
Haynes, (John.), _Present State of Clothing_, p. 5, 1706.
A similar statement is made by Sir Matthew Hale, who adds “and so much
they might probably get if employed.”[152] But no evidence has been
found from which we can imagine that an agricultural labourer’s family
could possibly earn as much as 10s. a week in the seventeenth century.
Our lower estimate is confirmed by a report made by the Justices of the
Peace for the half hundred of Hitching concerning the poor in their
district; “when they have worke the wages geven them is soe small that
it hardlye sufficeth to buy the poore man and his familye breed, for
they pay 6s. for one bushell of mycelyn grayne and receive but 8d. for
their days work. It is not possible to procure mayntenance for all these
poore people and their famylyes by almes nor yet by taxes.”[153]
Footnote 152:
Hale, (Sir Matt). _Discourse touching Provision for the Poor_, p. 6,
1683.
Footnote 153:
_S.P.D._ ccclxxxv., 43. Mar. 8, 1638.
The insolvency of the wage-earning class is recognized by Gregory King
in his calculations of the income and expense of the several Families of
England, for the year 1680. All other classes, including artisans and
handicrafts show a balance of income over expenditure but the families
of seamen, labourers and soldiers show an actual yearly deficit.[154]
Footnote 154:
King (Gregory). _Nat. and Political Observations_, pp. 48-9.
NO. OF FAMILIES. YEARLY
INCOME PER EXPENSE LOSS PER
PERSONS. HEAD. PER HEAD. HEAD.
50,000 Common Seamen 150,000 £7. £7. 10s. 10s.
364,000 Labouring 1,275,000 £4. 10s. £4. 12s. 2s.
people &
outservants
400,000 Cottagers & 1,300,000 £2. £2. 5s. 5s.
Paupers
35,000 Common 70,000 £7. £7. 10s. 10s.
soldiers
A still more convincing proof of the universal destitution of
wage-earners is shown in the efforts made by churchwardens and overseers
in every county throughout England to prevent the settlement within the
borders of their parish of families which depended solely on wages.
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