# British Wages in the 1840s? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [December 26, 2012, 7:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-wages-in-the-1840s/645170 "2012-12-26T07:55:04Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 16\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![X.L.Lent](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/a5b964/32.png) [@X.L.Lent](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/X.L.Lent)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2012, 7:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-wages-in-the-1840s/645170/1 "2012-12-26T07:55:04Z")
In Charles Dickens “A Christmas Carol” the miserly Mr. Scrooge pays his clerk, Bob Cratchit, 15 shillings a week. Is this truly a bad wage for the period when the story was written (1840s)? Could Cratchit have supported his family - a wife and six (if I have counted correctly) children on this income? Fifteen Shillings a week would be a yearly income of 39 Pounds, correct? ---
**Author:** ![Elmer\_J.Fudd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/elmer_j.fudd/32/1211_2.png) [@Elmer\_J.Fudd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elmer_J.Fudd)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2012, 8:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-wages-in-the-1840s/645170/2 "2012-12-26T08:25:04Z")
It might give you an idea of just how cheap Scrooge was when you consider Dickens’ book sold for 5 shillings when it was first published. So if Bob’s wage was equal to three new hardbacks you’re talking about around $100 a week at most in today’s money ( assuming the relative cost of new hardback best sellers hasn’t changed.) ---
**Author:** ![Aspidistra](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspidistra/32/3894_2.png) [@Aspidistra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspidistra)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2012, 8:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-wages-in-the-1840s/645170/3 "2012-12-26T08:27:05Z")
By comparison, here’s a couple of quotes from Elizabeth Gaskell’s “North and South”, written in 1855 A wealthy character talking of his early hardships: > [@](#): > > “Sixteen years ago, my father died under very miserable circumstances. I was taken from school, and had to become a man (as well as I could) in a few days. I had such a mother as few are blest with; a woman of strong power, and firm resolve. We went into a small country town, where living was cheaper than in Milton, and where I got employment in a draper’s shop (a capital place, by the way, for obtaining a knowledge of goods). Week by week our income came to fifteen shillings, out of which three people had to be kept. My mother managed so that I put by three out of these fifteen shillings regularly. This made the beginning; this taught me self-denial.” …and a conversation between the main character and a member of the working classes. > [@](#): > > ‘Miss there’—for Margaret had re-entered the room, and stood silent, listening—‘has often talked grand o’ the South, and the ways down there. Now I dunnot know how far off it is, but I’ve been thinking if I could get ‘em down theer, where food is cheap and wages good, and all the folk, rich and poor, master and man, friendly like; yo’ could, may be, help me to work. I’m not forty-five, and I’ve a deal o’ strength in me, measter.’ > ‘But what kind of work could you do, my man?’ > ‘Well, I reckon I could spade a bit—— ’ > ‘And for that,’ said Margaret, stepping forwards, ‘for anything you could do, Higgins, with the best will in the world, you would, may be, get nine shillings a week; maybe ten, at the outside. Food is much the same as here, except that you might have a little garden—— ’ > ‘The childer could work at that,’ said he. ‘I’m sick o’ Milton anyways, and Milton is sick o’ me.’ > ‘You must not go to the South,’ said Margaret, ‘for all that. You could not stand it. You would have to be out all weathers. It would kill you with rheumatism. The mere bodily work at your time of life would break you down. The fare is far different to what you have been accustomed to.’ > ‘I’se nought particular about my meat,’ said he, as if offended. > ‘But you’ve reckoned on having butcher’s meat once a day, if you’re in work; pay for that out of your ten shillings, and keep those poor children if you can. I owe it to you—since it’s my way of talking that has set you off on this idea—to put it all clear before you. You would not bear the dulness of the life; you don’t know what it is; it would eat you away like rust. Those that have lived there all their lives, are used to soaking in the stagnant waters. They labour on, from day to day, in the great solitude of steaming fields—never speaking or lifting up their poor, bent, downcast heads. The hard spade-work robs their brain of life; the sameness of their toil deadens their imagination; they don’t care to meet to talk over thoughts and speculations, even of the weakest, wildest kind, after their work is done; they go home brutishly tired, poor creatures! caring for nothing but food and rest. You could not stir them up into any companionship, which you get in a town as plentiful as the air you breathe, whether it be good or bad—and that I don’t know; but I do know, that you of all men are not one to bear a life among such labourers. What would be peace to them would be eternal fretting to you. Think no more of it, Nicholas, I beg. Besides, you could never pay to get mother and children all there—that’s one good thing.’ > ‘I’ve reckoned for that. One house mun do for us a’, and the furniture o’ t’other would go a good way. And men theer mun have their families to keep—mappen six or seven childer. God help ‘em!’ Given those, Bob Cratchitt’s fifteen shillings, for an educated man with a fair sized family, in London (which must have been expensive in those days as well as now) must have been pretty hard to live on. ---
**Author:** ![Mississippienne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d2c977/32.png) [@Mississippienne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mississippienne)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2012, 9:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-wages-in-the-1840s/645170/4 "2012-12-26T09:30:57Z")
In _Victorian London: The Tale of a City 1840–1870_ by Liza Picard, she gives sample prices for certain goods and services during this period. Handily, she gives the weekly expenses for a labourer in 1856: Two rooms in London: 5s Coals for fire (less in summer): 1s 1d Bread (6 four lb loaves): 4s 6d Vegetables: 1s 1d Meat: 2s 6d Milk: 3d Coffee, tea, and sugar: 2s 6d However, the labourer who’s expenses were studied by Picard was married but had no children. Cratchit would’ve been feeding more mouths on a skimpy salary. ---
**Author:** ![SanVito](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sanvito/32/2805_2.png) [@SanVito](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SanVito)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2012, 10:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-wages-in-the-1840s/645170/5 "2012-12-26T10:06:33Z")
> [@Mississippienne](#): > > In _Victorian London: The Tale of a City 1840–1870_ by Liza Picard, she gives sample prices for certain goods and services during this period. Handily, she gives the weekly expenses for a labourer in 1856: > > Two rooms in London: 5s > Coals for fire (less in summer): 1s 1d > Bread (6 four lb loaves): 4s 6d > Vegetables: 1s 1d > Meat: 2s 6d > Milk: 3d > Coffee, tea, and sugar: 2s . A sobering reminder of the cost of food compared to our age of abundance. ---
**Author:** ![aruvqan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aruvqan/32/2891_2.png) [@aruvqan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aruvqan)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2012, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-wages-in-the-1840s/645170/6 "2012-12-27T00:40:40Z")
> [@Mississippienne](#): > > In _Victorian London: The Tale of a City 1840–1870_ by Liza Picard, she gives sample prices for certain goods and services during this period. Handily, she gives the weekly expenses for a labourer in 1856: > > Two rooms in London: 5s > Coals for fire (less in summer): 1s 1d > Bread (6 four lb loaves): 4s 6d > Vegetables: 1s 1d > Meat: 2s 6d > Milk: 3d > Coffee, tea, and sugar: 2s 6d > > However, the labourer who’s expenses were studied by Picard was married but had no children. Cratchit would’ve been feeding more mouths on a skimpy salary. Remember at least one of Bob’s daughters was in service somewhere, not being boarded at home. I remember reference to at least one girl making it home for Christmas. ---
**Author:** ![X.L.Lent](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/a5b964/32.png) [@X.L.Lent](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/X.L.Lent)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2012, 2:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-wages-in-the-1840s/645170/7 "2012-12-27T02:01:21Z")
> [@aruvqan](#): > > Remember at least one of Bob’s daughters was in service somewhere, not being boarded at home. I remember reference to at least one girl making it home for Christmas. That’s correct. Bob’s oldest daughter Martha comes to visit and is described as “poor apprentice at a milliner’s” but no mention of her income, if any, is made. Bob is also trying to get a job for his son Peter: “…which would bring in, if obtained, full five-and- sixpence weekly.” Given the answers to my question here I don’t see how Bob could have supported his family and four room house on 15 shillings a week. ---
**Author:** ![aruvqan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aruvqan/32/2891_2.png) [@aruvqan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aruvqan)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2012, 3:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-wages-in-the-1840s/645170/8 "2012-12-27T03:54:46Z")
> [@X.L.Lent](#): > > That’s correct. Bob’s oldest daughter Martha comes to visit and is described as “poor apprentice at a > milliner’s” but no mention of her income, if any, is made. Bob is also trying > to get a job for his son Peter: “…which would bring in, if obtained, full five-and- > sixpence weekly.” > > Given the answers to my question here I don’t see how Bob could have supported his > family and four room house on 15 shillings a week. Most apprentices got room and board, and a certain amount of clothing [typically 2 work outfits and 1 sunday going to meeting outfit] and if seriously lucky got tipped and got to keep the tips. Just not having a teenager at home eating is a great help. ---
**Author:** ![Rampant\_Coypu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/439d5e/32.png) [@Rampant\_Coypu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rampant_Coypu)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2012, 4:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-wages-in-the-1840s/645170/9 "2012-12-27T04:04:20Z")
Mr Guppy in _Bleak House_ was a law clerk who made a hundred pounds a year and was on his way to becoming a lawyer. He lived with his mom and was able to bank a considerable sum of money, enough to hang his shingle as a lawyer at the end of the book. ---
**Author:** ![Aspidistra](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspidistra/32/3894_2.png) [@Aspidistra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspidistra)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2012, 8:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-wages-in-the-1840s/645170/10 "2012-12-27T08:29:07Z")
Is it possible that Cratchit might have owned the house? Inherited it, perhaps. That would remove one fairly major expense. ---
**Author:** ![SanVito](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sanvito/32/2805_2.png) [@SanVito](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SanVito)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2012, 9:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-wages-in-the-1840s/645170/11 "2012-12-27T09:09:17Z")
> [@Aspidistra](#): > > Is it possible that Cratchit might have owned the house? Inherited it, perhaps. That would remove one fairly major expense. Unlikely. The vast majority of working and lower middle classes would have rented in those days. ---
**Author:** ![casdave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c6cbf5/32.png) [@casdave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/casdave)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2012, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-wages-in-the-1840s/645170/12 "2012-12-27T14:23:23Z")
He was actually fortunate in many ways, he had secure employment with a skill that was not oversupplied. His family was not all that large by the standards of the day and he could reasonable expect at least one third to on half of his children not to make it to their teens. His house had more than one room, in fact he had a whole house to himself and his family. He also had access to reasonably good services - certainly not to our eyes - but compare his conditions to mill workers in the Northern industrial towns - it could have been far worse. Conditions in Bradfored, West Yorkshire were so bad that average lifespans were spectacularly low, 24 years for a skilled worker - mainly due to poor water and huge infant mortality. Conditions were so bad that these cities could not even maintain their own populations and instead had to rely in inward migration from London, Ireland and Scotland - hence many such towns have districts named for regions where those immigrants came from. ---
**Author:** ![Neil\_Giumelli](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Neil\_Giumelli](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Neil_Giumelli)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2014, 1:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-wages-in-the-1840s/645170/13 "2014-05-13T13:37:10Z")
I’ve done a bit of research into the Corn Laws era, and all the below is taken from a large variety of websites - but one thing still has me puzzled: Imagine a 40 acre farm growing wheat: All I’ve seen so far of the farming practices of the time indicates approximately 1 man-years labor (270 - 300 days) plus probably 50% again to feed the horses or oxen, to get an average 25-28 tons of wheat. Allowing 1/4 retained as next years seed, that’s a sale of say 20 tons x 14 pounds = 280 pounds. Now we know that Prussian (and assumedly US) wheat (pre-tax) was somewhat less than 1/2 the price of British - allowing for transport this means the real COST of producing that wheat is in the vicinity of 100 pounds. A farm laborer of the time might get 30 pounds a year (less than his city cousin, but accommodation and food would be cheaper), plus allowing for the working animals and equipment / buildings - lets say 50 pounds max. So how do these two figures line up? Am I allowing too much / not enough for feeding the working stock? Women and children did much of the harvesting / threshing work, which reduces the average cost of labor. Crop rotation would play a part (particularly the fallow year), but it also pre-supposes a loss in producing the other crops grown, to be made up in the year growing wheat. Was there that much “other work” done (maintenance of fences, drainage, etc - weeding is allowed in the above 1 year figure)? Assume Prussian / US wheat is much closer to “real” cost, ie. minimal “rent” which was the over-riding feature of the British system. The Corn laws were designed to keep the domestic cost of wheat at approx. 70 shillings (3.5 pounds) per “quarter” = slightly more than 14 pounds per ton. Prussian wheat (pre-tax) was 30 shillings = 6 pounds per ton. Roughly 29 British bushels to the ton, 100 bushels to 5 acres in an average year. Were Prussian bushels much smaller than British? What I’ve seen indicates approx. 25 days plowing, 10 days to harrow and scatter seed, 120 to reap, 75 to thresh, with the rest to weeding. Not all by one person, of course, but this is the total days of the various teams. This is pre widespread use of seed drills / reapers / threshing machines. What am I missing? Could someone with a better knowledge of farming and the commerce of the time please comment! ---
**Author:** ![casdave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c6cbf5/32.png) [@casdave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/casdave)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2014, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-wages-in-the-1840s/645170/14 "2014-05-13T16:14:37Z")
I have seen an analysis of Cratchett’s income somewhere, and would like to add a few points. In general terms, for a single man, Cratchett’s income was reasonable but not outstanding, and certainly liveable. I can’t remember how many children he had, but his income would have been a struggle for them. There are one or two complications though - English society was very class stratified such that appearance was very important, and it was a matter of expectation that individuals were seen to dress according to their status, no matter what their income. Class at that time meant much more than land holdings and titles, it also depended upon what you did for a living. Work that was office bound was not all that well paid, yet it was seen as a career with expectations of moving up. Such staff were required to dress for the part and the work clothing of an office worker was expensive, but pretty much \*de rigeur \* and they were expected to live in certain areas, which again added more cost. Those workers who were skilled craftsmen and tradesmen were not expected to dress in this way, and indeed there was a social pressure not to do so, however they could easily expect to earn significantly more than a junior accountant. The junior accountant would tend to live in genteel (but very real) poverty until they were inducted into the company as a partner - sort of like paying your dues. Christmas Carol is much more than a ghost story, its a story of social make up and would have been very recognisable to Victorians. It would not have worked with an apprentice trade worker, so there was always the implicit irony of the well dressed junior accountant living in worse circumstances than the skilled manual worker, however the junior accountant would still be seen as being above the skilled manual worker in terms of social status - despite the income disparity. If you want to know about living conditions in the 1840s, then you could also look at Dr Bakers report into the mortality of Leeds and the consequent use of his data by Edwin Chadwick in ‘Report on the Sanitary Conditions of the Labouring Population of Great Britain’ [http://www.victorianweb.org/history/chadwick2.html](http://www.victorianweb.org/history/chadwick2.html) I have some contemporary publications that put the lifespan of a skilled worker in 1840s Bradford at less than 30, and for labouring classes at under 20 years! This is extremely heavily affected by infant mortality, if you got past your teens it was reasonably likely that you would make 40 years before death. In fact if you reached 40, you could not get life insurance from one of the friendly societies as you were seen as too great a risk. If you want some academic analysis of the costs of living then you could look at some incredibly detailed work of a slightly later period then you should look into the studies by Sebohm Rowntree. He produced an analysis of the exact needs to live, including the costs of all the essentials including rent. From this he identified certain absolute levels of poverty, and also of relative poverty. > **[Poverty in York - The Rowntree Society](https://www.rowntreesociety.org.uk/explore-rowntree-history/rowntree-a-z/poverty-in-york/)** > > Seebohm Rowntree showed that 27.8% of the people in York were living below the poverty line in 1900. Of these 9.91% lived in primary poverty, and 17.78% in secondary poverty. He showed further that poverty was a cycle, and that the poor were not... > **[Joseph Rowntree Foundation Centenary: Poverty](https://www.envoy.uk.net/jrf/poverty.html)** > > Centenary website on the history of the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, its work building and managing homes, researching into poverty and finding solutions for social problems. His first study in York produced a sensation in English parliament because it had been carried out so systematically that is was virtually impossible to refute. This report was taken up by social reformers who in turn put huge pressure upon politicians, and its this that largely led to the Liberal party manifesto to start a welfare state, indeed it was the very same manifesto that identified the reluctance of the wealthy to assist and also that charity was inadequate to deal with the pressing social needs of poverty, and that poverty relief could only be carried effectively with the use of state resources. In turn this directly led to the early parliamentary crisis that stripped the House of Lords of much of its veto over legislation. This itself is a major turning point in English history - but the subject of another thread perhaps ---
**Author:** ![Meurglys](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/258eb7/32.png) [@Meurglys](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Meurglys)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2014, 11:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-wages-in-the-1840s/645170/15 "2014-05-14T11:20:31Z")
I haven’t read the whole document but [this pdf](http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&ved=0CE4QFjAF&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.econ.ucdavis.edu%2Ffaculty%2Fgclark%2Fpapers%2Ffarm_wages_%26_living_standards.pdf&ei=l0tzU429IqOd7gawi4GIBQ&usg=AFQjCNGfDhRX-D_9wjCOMo6_s1g4Ck8T7A&bvm=bv.66699033,d.ZGU&cad=rja) seems to have some useful information on farm labourer wages and earnings. It doesn’t go into the exonomics of actually turning a profit on a crop though. I did look at page 31 on cottage rents across the years and an average weekly rent in the 1830s was around £3/5/- or so a year - almost one and thupence a week. As for wages, all sorts of extra tasks earned a labourer more money and his income would fluctuate across the seasons. ---
**Author:** ![MarcusF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/67e7ee/32.png) [@MarcusF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MarcusF)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2014, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/british-wages-in-the-1840s/645170/16 "2014-05-14T16:37:59Z")
> [@casdave](#): > > Conditions were so bad that these cities could not even maintain their own populations and instead had to rely in inward migration from London, Ireland and Scotland - hence many such towns have districts named for regions where those immigrants came from. Absolutely agree with the rest of your points but is this last one right? No cite but my understanding was that the death rate in mid-nineteenth century London was such that it - like all other mega-cities throughout history until the 20th century - had to rely on inward migration to maintain its own population. Was there really much movement from London to the industrial north? If you have a source for this I’d be really interested.