THE PROGRESS OF THE WORKING-CLASSES. 31 



— showing still an enormous improvement in the workman's con- 

 dition. 



It may be pointed out, however, that houses are undoubtedly of 

 better value all round than they were fifty years ago. More rent is 

 paid because more capital is in the houses, and they are better houses. 

 It appears, also, that fifty years ago there were far more exemptions 

 than there are now, rural dwellings particularly being favored as 

 regards exemption. The increase of rent for the same accommodation, 

 there is consequently reason to believe, has not been nearly so great as 

 these figures would appear to show. It has further to be considered 

 that the whole annual value of the dwelling-houses under £10 even 

 now is £17,885,000 only, the number of houses being 3,124,000. This 

 must be a very small proportion of the aggregate earnings of those 

 portions of the working-classes who live in houses under £10 rent, and 

 even adding to it the value of all the houses up to £20, which would 

 bring up the total to £34,925,000, the proportion would still be very 

 small. On the 5,000,000 families at least of the working-classes in 

 Great Britain, the sum would come to about £7 per family, which is 

 not the main portion of an average working-man's expenditure.* 



We return, then, to the conclusion that the increase of the money 

 wages of the working-man in the last fifty years corresponds to a 

 real gain. While his wages have advanced, most articles he consumes 

 have rather diminished in price, the change in wheat being especially 

 remarkable, and significant of a complete revolution in the condition 

 of the masses. The increased price in the case of one or two articles — 

 particularly meat and house-rent — is insufficient to neutralize the gen- 

 eral advantages which the workman has gained. Meat formerly was 

 a very small part of his consumption, and allowing to house-rent a 

 much larger share of his expenditure than it actually bore, the increase 

 in amount would still leave the workman out of his increased wage 

 a larger margin than he had before for miscellaneous expenditure. 

 There is reason to believe, also, that the houses are better, and that 

 the increased house-rent is merely the higher price for a superior 

 article which the workman can afford. 



It has to be added to all this, that, while the cost of government 

 has been greatly diminished to the working-man, he gets more from 

 the government expenditure than he formerly did. It would not do 

 to count things twice over, and as the benefit to the working-man of 

 diminished taxes has already been allowed for in the lower prices of 



* It may be convenient to note here that the figures as to dwelling-houses which 

 I have made use of are those relating to the inhabited house duty. The figures as to 

 houses in the income-tax returns include shops and factories as well as dwelling-houses, 

 and are not available in a question of house-rent. I have also omitted the question of 

 rates. The rates per pound, however, have not increased as compared with what they 

 were formerly, and it would make no material difference if they were to be included. 

 The workman's payment for rates and rent together can not have increased more than is 

 here stated for rent. 



