| OCR Text |
Show 288 OF THE WAGES OF LABOUR. [ CH. IV. is, I think, fairly borne out by facts. If according to the last authentic accounts which had been obtained of the price of labour, previous to 1814, it appears that on an average of the returns of thirtyseven counties in 1810 and 1811, the weekly \vages of day labour were 1L1s. 6d.,-a price, \vhich, con1- pared with the wages of 1767, 1768 and 1 770,* is equal to the rise in the price of wheat during the same period, while it is known that in n1any counties and districts in the southern parts of England, \vages in 1 810 and I 811 were unnaturally kept down to 12s., lOs., 9s. and even 7s.6d. by the baneful system of regularly n1aintaining the children of the poor out of the rates, it may fairly . be concluded that if this syste1n had not prevailed over a large part of England, the wages oflabour \vould have risen higher than in proportion to the price of \Vheat. 1\nc:l this conclusion is still further confirn1ed by \vhat has happened in Scotland and son1e parts of the north of England. In these districts, all accounts agree that the rise of wages \Vas in fact greater than the rise of corn, and that the condition of the labourer till 1814 was decidedly in1proved, even in spite of the taxes, in any of \vhich certainly bore heavily on "the conveniences and co1nforts of the labourer, though they affected but little his con1n1and over strict necessaries. In considering the corn wages of labour in the course of this revie\v, it l1as not been possible to * Annals .of Agriculture, No. 271. pp. 215 and 216. SEC. v.] OF THE \~' AGES OF LABOUH. £89 n1ake any distinction between the effects of a fall in the price of corn and a rise in the price of labour. In n1ereJy con1paring the t\\'O objects \vith each other, the result is precisely sin1ilar; but their effects in the encou.argen1ent of population are so1netin1es very dissi1nilar, as I have before intin1ated. 'fhere is no doubt that a great encouragen1ent to an increase of population is consistent with a fall in the price of ra\v produce, because, not\ vithstandinbo· this fall, the exchano·eable value b of the whole produce of the country n1ay still be increasing con1pared 'vith labour; but it n1ay son1eti1nes happen that a fall in the price of raw produce is accon1panied by a din1inished power and vvil1 to en1ploy labour; and in this case the den1and for labour and the encouragen1ent to population \Viii not be in proportion to the apparent corn \vages of labour. If a labourer co1nn1ands a peck. instead oft of a peck of \Vheat a day in consequence of a rise of w~ges occasioned by a den1and for labour, it is ce.rta~ n. that all labourers 111ay be employed who are w~lhng and able to \Vork, and probably also their W1ves and chjldren ; but if he is able to corr1n1and this_ additional quantity of \Vheat on account of a fallin,Jhe price ·of corn vvhich ditninishes thecapital of the farmer, the advantage may be more apparent than real, and though labour for son1e tune n1ay not noininally fall, yet as the den1and for labour ~1ay be stationary, if not retrograde, jts current prrce \viii not be a certain criterion of what might be earned by the united labours of a · large u |
