“What number of men do you employ?—Between 500 and 600.
“Have you ever observed any effects produced in the habits of the labouring classes in respect to drinking intoxicating liquors by the mode in which they are paid their wages?—Yes, there are two modes in which wages are most frequently paid, and both these modes are prejudicial in their effects. The first effect is connected with the place of payment. Some masters pay at the public-house, others pay the men at the counting-house after the work is completed. The effects produced by payment at the public-house are to oblige the workman to drink. He is kept waiting in the public-house during a long time, varying from two to three hours, sometimes as much as five hours. The workman cannot remain in the house without drinking, even if he were alone, as he must make some return to the landlord for the use of the room. But the payment of a number of men occupies time in proportion to their numbers. We find that to pay our own men in the most rapid way requires from two to three hours. The assembled workmen, of course, stimulate each other to drink. Out of 100 men, all of whom will, probably, have taken their quart of porter or ale, above a third will go home in a state of drunkenness—of drunkenness to the extent of imbecility. The evil is not confined to the men; the destructive habit is propagated in their families. At each public-house a proportion of the poor women, their wives, attend. According to my own observation, full 10 per cent. of the men have their wives and children in attendance at the public-house. The poor women have no other mode of getting money to market with on the Saturday night than attending at the public-house to get it from their husbands. They may have children whom they cannot leave at home, and these they bring with them. The wives are thus led to drink, and they and their children are made partakers at the scenes of drunkenness and riot; for there are not unfrequently quarrels leading to fights between the workmen when intoxicated.
“Do not these late hours, consequent on such a mode of payment, also lead them to the inferior markets, and prejudice the domestic economy of the labourer’s household?—Yes, they have the less money to purchase with, and must purchase an inferior quality of provisions. I have observed that they do so. They are driven to the inferior shopkeepers who keep open late; and they are also driven to make purchases on the Sunday morning. It is only the inferior shopkeepers or hucksters who will sell on the Sunday morning, and they sell an inferior commodity at a higher price. Then the Sunday morning is thus occupied; the husband, and sometimes the wife, is kept in a state of feverish excitement by the previous night’s debauch: they are kept in a state of filth and disorder; even the face is unwashed; no clean clothes are put on, and there is no church attendance, and no decency. Indeed, by the pressure of the wants created by habits of drinking, there is soon no means to purchase clean or respectable clothes, and lastly, no desire to purchase them. The man, instead of cleaning himself, and appearing at church on the Sunday, or walking out with his family on the Sunday afternoon in a respectable condition, remains at home in filth, and in a filthy hovel. Of course there are no contributions to sick-clubs under such circumstances; and if the workman has been previously led to join a club, he is almost always in arrear with his contributions, and is ultimately expelled. On the occurrence of the disease to which such habits predispose him, there is nothing but the most abject and complete destitution and pauperism. I have served the office of churchwarden and overseer in Leeds three years, and, having attended the weekly Board where applications for relief are made, I have seen the end of this train of circumstances in the applications for relief from parties who had previously been in the receipt of good and sufficient wages (and even high wages) to have prevented such applications. I have observed the whole train of these consequences in several large works in London as well as in this town.
“Are there not consequences too to the employers themselves, as well as to the ratepayers, in connexion with the habits of labourers thus created?—One consequence of these habits is the loss of time at the commencement of the week, and the comparative inefficiency of the workmen when they do come. The workman who has been absent from drunkenness comes to his work pale, emaciated, shattered, and unnerved. From my own observation in my own branch of manufacture, I should say that the quantity and quality of the work executed during the first day or so would be about one-fifth less than that obtainable from a steady and attentive workman.
“This deterioration, then, in a large number of workmen engaged in a manufactory, may be noted as an important item of saving for the consideration of a provident manufacturer?—Undoubtedly. Another consideration for the master is the fact that such workmen, the most idle and dissolute, are the most discontented, and are always the foremost in mischievous strikes and combinations.
“You have spoken of the consequences of making the public-house a place of payment; what are the comparative effects of making the payments at the counting-house?—A considerable reduction of the evil. Payments to large numbers at the counting-house is still, however, attended with much inconvenience and evil. The payment of the number of men employed at our works (between five and six hundred) would, as I have stated, occupy between two and three hours. This mode of payment, therefore, implies the keeping of a large crowd together during that time. During that time appointments are made of meetings at public-houses to drink that would not otherwise take place. It also generates discontent: it gives an opportunity, by assembling a crowd, for any discontented or mischievous person to operate upon a large mass of people. Formerly the business of my manufactory, and the welfare of the working people, were very seriously interrupted by strikes; and I could not help observing the facilities which such meetings gave to such mischievous persons.
“What is the mode of payment which you have adopted?—I send the pay clerk into each room in the manufactory immediately after the dinner hour, and he pays each man individually. Each man is scarcely taken from his work half a minute. I may observe, that some masters, to save themselves trouble, so as to avoid the inconvenience of getting small change, will pay several men together. This again leads to the public-house, where the men commonly go to get change to divide the money amongst them; I therefore avoid paying any two men together, and subjecting them to temptation as well as inconvenience and cost. Each of my workmen being paid in the shop, without the loss of a minute, may go at once directly home at the time when the work closes. He is thus afforded an opportunity of going at once to the market at an early hour, and is subjected to no factitious inducements to drink, disorder, improvidence, and destitution.
“What is the average time thus saved to each of the 550 workmen in your manufactory, as compared with the more ordinary mode of payment?—About an hour and a half, or half the three hours of payment.
“Then, by this means, instead of bringing 550 persons to the one person, the pay clerk, sending that one person to the 550 persons, you save to them upwards of 800 hours of inconvenient waiting?—Just so.
“How many persons, on the average, have you absent from work on the Monday morning?—Not more than from four to five, until eight o’clock in the morning; and on the return to work after dinner from one to two persons.