| £ | s. | d. | |
| 400,000 persons living in London expend in clothing (at 2l. 10s. per annum) | 1,000,000 | 0 | 0 |
| 400,000 persons living in better atmospheres in rural parts, and with the same stock of clothes, expend one-third less, or | 666,666 | 13 | 4 |
| Difference | 333,333 | 6 | 8 |
It would be pushing the inquiry to exceeding minuteness were I to enter into calculations as to the comparative expense of boots, hats, and ladies’ dresses worn in town and country; suffice it, that competent persons in each of the vestiary trades have been seen, and averages drawn for the accounts of their town and country customers.
All things, then, being duly considered, the following conclusion would seem to be warranted by the facts:—
| Annual cost of clothes to 800,000 of the metropolitan population (those belonging to the class who have incomes above 150l. per annum) at 4l. per year each | £3,200,000 |
| Annual cost of clothes to 1,600,000 of the metropolitan population (those belonging to the class who have incomes below 150l. per annum), at 1l. per year each | 1,600,000 |
| £4,800,000 | |
| Annual cost of the same clothes if worn in the country | 3,600,000 |
| Extra expense annually entailed by dust and dirt of metropolis | £1,200,000 |
In the above estimate I have included the cost of wear and tear of linen from extra washing when worn in London, and this has been stated on the authority of the Board of Health to be double that of linen worn in the country.
In connection with this subject I may cite the following curious calculation, taken from a Parliamentary Report, as to the cost of a working man’s new shirt, comprising four yards of strong calico.
| Material.—Cotton at 6d. per lb. | d. | |||
| 1¼ lb., with loss thereupon | 8·25 | |||
| Manufacture,— | d. | |||
| Spinning | 2·25 | |||
| Weaving | 3·00 | |||
| Profit | ·25 | |||
| —— | 5·50 | |||
| 13·75 | ||||
| Bleaching about | 1·25 | |||
| 15·00 | ||||
| Grey (calico) 13·75d. | + | 9d. (making) | = | 1s. 10¾d. |
| Bleached 15d. | + | 9d. „ | = | 2s. |
As regards the loss and damage occasioned by the injury to household furniture and decorations, and to stocks-in-trade, which is another important consideration connected with this subject, I find the following statement in the Report of the Philanthropic Institution:—“The loss by goods and furniture is incalculable: shopkeepers lose from 10l. to 150l. a-year by the spoiling of their goods for sale; dealers in provisions especially, who cannot expose them without being deteriorated in value, from the dust that is incessantly settling upon them. Nor is it much better with clothiers of all kinds:—Mr. Holmes, shawl merchant, in Regent-street, has stated that his losses from road-dust alone exceed 150l. per annum.”... “In a communication with Mr. Mivart, respecting the expenses of mud and road-dust to him, that gentleman stated that the rent of the four houses of which his hotel is composed, was 896l.; and that he could not (considering the cost of cleaning and servants) estimate the expense of repairing the damage done by the dirt and dust, carried and blown into these houses, at a less annual sum than that of his rent!”
An upholsterer obliged me with the following calculations, but so many were the materials, and so different the rates of wear or the liability to injury in different materials in his trade, that he could only calculate generally.