The Boot and Shoe Trades in London and Paris in the Long Eighteenth Century

6.5.2 The misleading role of labour costs
According to the committee, the London market's inferiority was due to the
higher wages paid when compared to Paris. London master shoemakers were
complaining that the labour market in France was not regulated and that the
French masters could impose very low wages. The French Civil Code of 1781
established that "a master shall be believed on his affirmation as to what wages
he agreed to give" and for the French Penal Code the journeymen "must not
mutually agree as to wages". 4' These rules, completely absent in Britain, were
enforced in France in order to prevent journeymen to seek "employment from
town to town (as) they cannot leave their Master and obtain work without his
consent".42 The low wage level in France in the 1820s is supported by Levy-
Leboyer' analysis.43 In 1832 if a Parisian shoemaker was paid three francs per
day, a butcher could earn from four to four and a half francs.' Although true
that the French State stopped the workers' attempts to strike, this form of
regulation was not the only difference in the labour market between London
and Paris.45
The problem of wages created clear divisions between masters and
journeymen in their action against French competitors. If masters underlined
the high power of French employers in setting wages; the London journeymen
shoemakers showed how their wages had already been subject to considerable
reductions since the end of the wars with France. Since 1814, an increase in the
supply of work in shoemaking did not cause an increase in the size of the
shoemaking trade. It caused a marked decrease of general wages. The English
' French Civil Code (1's Sept. 1781, ch. 3). Only the Apprentices Law of 1851 defined the
mutual obligations of masters and apprentices and established that apprenticeship contracts
should be written. This was rarely done and in 1864 only 23 per cen of the 20,000 apprentices
in Paris had written contracts. In E. Dolfus-Francoz, Essai historique sur la condition legale du
mineur, app renti, ouvrier d'indusrrie, ou emploje de commerce (Paris, 1900), pp. 51-52.
42 PRO, BT 6/175, f. 15. Recent studies confirm the role of the French State in stopping any
workers' attempt to strike. See M. Hanagan, 'Industrialization and urban society in 19thcentury
France', Journal of Urban History, XIII -2 (1986-87), P. 226.
M. Lvy-Leboyer, 'La croissance économique en France au XlXme siècle. Résultats
préliminaires', Annales ESC, XXIII —4 (1968), p. 795.
Parliamentary Papers, First Report of the Commercial Relations between France and Great
Britain, cit., p. 178.
M. Hanagan, 'Industrialization and urban society', cit., p. 226.
PRO, BT 6/175, f. 13.
270