|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ |
| In response to rapid population growth, the government commissioned the first modern census in 1801. The records show that Britain's working practices changed dramatically during the 19th century, and that the changes varied greatly throughout the land. |  |
During the 18th century, more and more families in Britain came to earn a living from industrial work rather than from agricultural work. And this trend continued in the 19th century, although work providing services rather than in making goods rose to prominence. At the same time, the country's population increased more rapidly than ever before, a marked upturn in the rate of growth occurring from the late 1700s. As a result, a far greater number of people were involved in making manufactured goods in early Victorian times than had been the case in early Georgian times.
'...the gloomy Thomas Malthus predicted that, unless checked, such rapid population growth would outstrip food supplies...'
The rapidity of population growth from the late 18th century caused a great deal of interest at the time and brought no little anxiety. Thus the gloomy Thomas Malthus predicted that, unless checked, such rapid population growth would outstrip food supplies, leading to starvation. In the event this did not happen, but concern about population growth led to the first national census of Britain's population taking place in 1801.
Since then, censuses have been taken every ten years, except during 1941 when wartime disruption occurred. The early censuses give some information on occupations and hence on how people earned a living. But it is only from 1841 that detail of the occupations of individuals rather than of groups of people is given.
This crucial change arose because, for the first time, households were issued with forms (or schedules) on which they were legally required to record details of everyone who stayed in the household on census night. In 1851, the schedules required fuller information, including occupations. This information was usually collected by local people.
John Pearson had to sign a statement declaring: 'I certify and declare that the Account of the Population of the District for which I am Enumerator, contained in this Book, has been truly and faithfully taken by me, and that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, the same is correct.'
'He was also required to "obtain a thorough and minute knowledge" of the district he had agreed to enumerate ...'
An important part of his work was to familiarise himself with the householders' forms and the enumerator's book he would use. He was also required to 'obtain a thorough and minute knowledge' of the district he had agreed to enumerate, including the total number of houses he would have to visit. Then, during the week leading up to census day, he had to deliver census schedules to each household, so that details about individuals - including name, age, occupation and birth place - could be recorded on census night.
The day after, starting as early as possible in the morning, Pearson had to collect the schedules, checking with the householders that the information was complete and correct and making any necessary amendments. Next he had to copy the information from all the schedules into his enumerator's book. He was instructed to use pen and ink rather than pencil - a permanent record was required - and to sign the book as a declaration that he had made a true record.
Altogether, he had to complete entries relating to 159 households containing 840 people and to finish his work by 8 April. If he failed to do so, his fee of 26 shillings (perhaps around twice his average weekly earnings) would be reduced by 5 shillings. In the event he did meet the deadline, signing off his book on 7 April.
As far as occupations are concerned, totals were made of the numbers of people employed in various types of jobs, the totals relating to counties and districts within counties, as well as to the country as a whole. And the figures were further broken down according to age and gender.
The 1851 printed census abstracts (which are widely available in local libraries and record offices) can be used to create a snapshot of how early Victorians in general earned a living. Of course, the range of occupations they followed was extremely wide, so that a classification is necessary if we are to obtain a reasonably clear picture.
Fortunately, at national and county levels, we can make use of the work undertaken by the historian CH Lee. Using the occupational categories he distinguishes, we can group the labour force into those concerned with agricultural work; those in mining and quarrying; those working in manufacturing; those engaged in building; and those providing services. However, Lee was not able to classify all the occupations neatly into these categories.
It was not clear, for example, into which category those described as 'general labourers' should be placed; indeed, they might have moved between occupational groups, such as farming or building, as opportunity arose. Accordingly, he created an unclassified category.
In the table below, the approximate numbers and proportions of people employed in each of these categories in 1851 are recorded. Additionally, figures derived from the 1901 census have been included, so that the changes that occurred in occupational structure during the Victorian period can be considered.
The next most important group was service work. This group included: transport workers; domestic servants; professional people - doctors, teachers, lawyers and the like; those in banking and insurance; and those in the wholesale and retail trade. Service workers comprised about 25 per cent of those recorded by the enumerators, a rather higher proportion than those employed in agriculture. That agriculture occupied a relatively small proportion of the labour force reflects the high level of industrialisation that had arisen in Britain by the early Victorian period.
' ... these figures probably exclude a great deal of part-time work ... especially that undertaken by married women.'
The comparison of 1851 figures on occupational groups with those for 1901, shows that notable changes took place. The changes relate to both the total labour force and the way the labour force was distributed between occupational groups. As far as the total labour force is concerned, Table 1, above, shows that a considerable increase occurred, reflecting the rapidity with which Britain's population was growing at the time.
The census figures reveal that the labour force reached 16.4 million by 1901, about 75 per cent above the 1851 figure. Over the same period, the population increased by about 78 per cent, reaching 37 million. However, it is important to recognise that these figures probably exclude a great deal of part-time work that went unrecorded, especially that undertaken by married women.
Firstly, the importance of agriculture in relation to other occupational groups continued its decline; the numbers employed fell by one-third and the percentage by more than one-half. These developments arose as British people could rely on obtaining increased supplies of imported food paid for by growing exports of the manufactured goods and services in which they specialised.
Secondly, there was a fall in the relative importance of manufacturing, though the numbers employed in that group increased by no less than 40 per cent, as the output of manufacturers continued to expand.
Thirdly, a striking change arose with regard to service occupations, the importance of which increased considerably in both absolute and relative terms; indeed, by 1901, service workers were far more numerous than workers in manufacturing. Such a change partly reflects the tremendous rise of commercial activity, but also the growing mechanisation of manufacturing processes.
Agriculture remained highly important in Cambridgeshire, occupying almost a third of the labour force. However, in both Durham and Lancashire, agriculture gave employment to fewer than three per cent of the workforce, a figure well below the national average.
Conversely, manufacturing provided jobs for only about 15 per cent of the Cambridge workforce, compared with nearly 30 per cent in Durham and as much as 46 per cent in Lancashire. Plainly, Cambridgeshire was far less industrialised than the other two counties. However, to use the figures on manufacturing employment to suggest that Durham was less highly industrialised than Lancashire is misleading. Durham had almost a quarter of its labour force employed in mining, a far higher proportion than occurred nationally.
If mining and manufacturing are taken together, then both Durham and Lancashire had around half their labour forces employed in industrial work. Such variations in the nature and extent of industrial activity are associated with the natural advantages of site that some regions enjoyed, including local coal supplies, as well as the location advantages they could acquire, such as skilled labour forces and the growth of support industries. The service industries were well represented in all three counties, a reflection of their widespread importance, though the proportions employed in the two industrial counties fell somewhat short of the national average.
Developments like these might have encouraged people to move from one place to another to find employment, perhaps on several occasions during their working lives. And such moves might have required them to work in quite different circumstances, perhaps switching from outdoor to indoor work; from working with hand tools to operating machines; or from working alone to working with others. Increasingly, too, earning a living became an urban-based activity as a growing proportion of the population became town dwellers.
Nor should we forget that all too many workers experienced periodic unemployment as the business cycle moved downwards, sometimes to a marked degree. For many Victorians, earning a regular wage might have been no more of a certainty than staying in the same job for any length of time.
This article can be found on the Internet at:
© British Broadcasting Corporation
For more information on copyright please refer to:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/about/copyright.shtml
http://www.bbc.co.uk/terms/
大象传媒 History
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/