working life of women seventeenth century - School of Economics ...

AGRICULTUREThe conduct of the magistrates in fixing maximumwages at a rate which they knew to be below subsistencelevel seems inexplicable ; is in fact inexplicableuntil it is understood that these wages were neverintended to be sufficient for the support of a family.Statute 31 Eliz. and others, show that the wholeinfluence of the Government and administration wasdirected to prevent the creation of a class of wage-earners.It was an essential feature of Tudor policy to fosterthe Yeomanry, from whose ranks were recruited thedefenders of the realm.Husbandmen were recog-nised as " the body and stay " of the kingdom.' Theymade the best infantry when bred " not in a servileor indigent fashion, but in some free and plentifulmanner."2 If the depopulation of the country-sidewent on unchecked, there would come to pass " amere sollitude and vtter desolation to the whole Realme,furnished only with shepe and shepherdes instead ofgood men ; wheareby it might be a prey to oureenymies that first would sett vppon it."3Probably the consideration of whether a familycould be fed by a labourer's wage, seldom entered theJustices' heads. They wished the family to win itsfood from a croft and regarded the wages as merelysupplementary. The Justices would like to haveexterminated wage-earners, who were an undesirableclass in the community, and they might have succeededas the conditions imposed upon the women madethe rearing of children almost impossible, had noteconomic forces constantly recruited the ranks ofwage-earners from the class above them.The demands of capital however for labour alreadyexceeded the supply available from the ranks ofhusbandmen, and could only be met by the establish-' Lipson, Economic Hist. of England, p. 153.'Bacon, Works, Vol. VI., p. 95.a Lamond (Eliz.) Discottrse of the Common weal, 1581.AGRICULTUREment of a class of persons depending wholly on wages.The strangest feature of the situation was the fact thatthe magistrates who were trying to exterminate wageearnerswere often themselves capitalists creating thedemand.The actual proportion of wage-earners in theseventeenth century can only be guessed at. Thestatement of a contemporary1 that Labourers andCottagers numbered z,oo3,ooo persons, out of a populationof only ~,ooo,ooo must be regarded as anexaggeration ; in any case their distribution was uneven.Complaints are not infrequently brought beforeQuarter Sessions from parishes which say they areburdened with so great a charge of poor that they cannotsupport it ; to other parishes the Justices are sometimesdriven to issue orders on the lines of a warrantcommanding " the Churchwardens of the townes ofScrewton and Aynderby to be more diligent in relievingtheir poore, that the court be not troubled with anyfurther claymours therein."2On the other hand there were many districts wherethe wage earner was hardly known and the authorities,like the Tithing men of Fisherton Delamere couldreport that they " have (thanks to the Almighty Godtheirfor) no popish recusants ; no occasion to levytwelvepence, for none for bear to repair to divine service;no inns or alehouses licensed or unlicensed, no drunkenperson, no unlawful weights or measures, no neglect ofhues and cries, no roads out of repair, no wanderingrogues or idle persons, and no inmates of whom theydesire inf~rmation."~ Or the Constable of Tredingtonwho declared that " the poor are weekly relieved, felonsnone known. Recusants one Bridget Lyne, the' Grasicr's Complaint, p. 60.Torks. N.R. Q.S. Rcc., Vol. I., p. 22-3, 1605.Hist. MSS. Com.Var. Coll.,Vol. I., p, 93. Wilts Q.S. Rec., 1621. A similar detailedreturn war made from the Hundred of Wilton in 1691. Many often return ' omni?bene ' and the like in brief.