article on the Labour of Children in Manufactures tells one nothing, or next to nothing, of foreign legislation with regard to this matter; and this omission one cannot but regret. Admirable models for Lectures to students are furnished by the two articles "Competition and Custom" and "Competition and Regulation."

The names of the authors mentioned are innumerable; and to my shame be it said (no less than to the credit it does to the erudition of the Editor) that a very great number of them were unknown to me. It was a little surprising not to find Channing's name, who, though he was not an Economist, still exercised on the Social movement a greater influence probably than many others whose biographies appear in the Dictionary. To make up for this, three or four columns are devoted to Calvin, which are most instructive. Not without interest, too, are the biographies of Carey, Carlyle, and Auguste Comte. But the article . which deals with Buchez does not give an adequate idea of his social theories, or of his importance as the founder of the first Co-operative Productive Society. It is somewhat curious to observe the importance attached nowadays to the biography of Cantillon, who, in the large Dictionnaire d'Economie Politique, published by Guillaumin in 1852, had only three lines in which there were as many mistakes, and who does not appear even in the collection of great French economists brought out by the same publisher.

I do not quite see why the articles are signed with initials only: one is perpetually obliged to refer each time to the list of contributors on the cover, which after a time becomes rather trying.

CHARLES Gide.

LIFE AND LABOUR OF THE PEOPLE IN LONDON. Edited by CHARLES BOOTH. Vol. i.-East, Central, and South London [320 pp.]. Vol. ii.-Streets and Population Classified [235 pp., and Appendix, 62 double pages]. Vol. iii.-Blocks of Buildings, Schools, and Immigration [306 pp.]. Vol. iv.-The Trades of East London [354 pp.]. [8vo. 3s. 6d. each vol. Macmillan. London and New York, 1892 and 1893.]

That a new and cheaper edition of Mr. Charles Booth's work should be brought out so soon after its original appearance is very satisfactory evidence of the reception which the public has given to a valuable and laborious undertaking. Vol. i. of the original edition was published in 1889; a third edition of it and vol. ii. with appendix (in separate binding) appeared in 1891. In this new edition the title has been altered by the addition of the words "in London," to express the actual limitation of the subject-matter: the text has also to some extent been

:

rearranged. The changes are described as follows in the preface to vol. i. "In place of two large volumes with a separate appendix there will be four volumes of more convenient size. In the first of these, which gives the original description of East London, will be found also that of Central and South London, etc. In the second volume the whole of London is again dealt with, in smaller divisions, by School Board blocks and street by street. The third volume will consist of various chapters on special subjects, and conclude with an account of London children and their schools. The studies of East-end industries will form the fourth volume, and will lead the way to an industrial analysis of the whole population, which will be the subject of the fifth and sixth volumes. Each volume will be sold separately;

as will also the maps of London Poverty, referred to in volumes i. and ii., which are published in a case." It may serve the convenience of those who possess the earlier editions to say that vol. i. part i. chaps. i.-vi. of the old edition correspond to vol. i. part i. chaps. i.-vi. of the new; part iii. chap. iv., to part i. chap. vii. ; vol. ii. part i. chaps. i.—iii. of the old, to vol. ii. part i. chaps. i.-iii. of the new; vol. ii. part ii. chap. i. of the old, to vol. i. part ii. chap. i. of the new; chaps. iii.-vi. of the old, to chaps. ii.-v. of the new; vol. ii. part. iii. chaps. i.-iii. of the old, to vol. i. part. iii. chaps. i-iii. of the new. The appendix A of the old vol. i. reappears as part ii. of the new vol. ii. The new vol. iii. contains the old vol. ii. part i. chap. iv. (on “Blocks of Model Dwellings," referred to in a "Note" in this Review, vol. i. No. 4, October, 1891), vol. i. part iii. chap. ii., and vol. ii. part iii. chap. iv. (on "Influx of Population"-the two chapters being now placed beside one another), vol. i. part iii. chap. iii., and the whole of part iv. The new vol. iv. corresponds to the old vol. i. part ii. The chapter in old vol. ii. part ii., "On the Tailoring and Bootmaking Trades of Central London," is also inserted in new vol. iv.

In his inaugural lecture as Professor of Economic History in Harvard University (published in the Harvard Quarterly Journal of Economics, January, 1893), Professor Ashley cites Mr. Booth's work and Mr. Seebohm's Village Community as examples of studies of economic facts, in neither of which "has economic theory been of any visible service." It might indeed be suggested that economic theory of the "pure" or abstract kind has benefited history and inductive inquiry by the stimulus of antagonism. We may perhaps question whether any one would have thought of writing either the one book or the other, with so studious an avoidance of economic theory, had not economic theory first of all directed attention to the nature of landtenure on the one hand and to the causes of poverty on the other. The

abstract Ricardian theories of rent and of wages, coming into apparent conflict with evident facts, have at least done the service of rousing the historian to the necessity of studying economic history, and the social reformer to the necessity of studying present economic conditions.

66

What makes Mr. Charles Booth's work specially valuable is the objectivity" of his descriptions and his studious avoidance of exaggeration. Mr. Booth and those who have assisted him have worked solely in the endeavour to get at the truth. The object of these volumes is not to rouse the apathy of the indifferent to the necessity of considering "the condition of the people." They presuppose an interest in the question, an interest which has to be guided and directed into practical channels. Their object is not to open the purse-strings of the wealthy; the evil effects of Mansion House Funds (i. p. 163), and of other sentimental charities are too fully recognized. "Much of the same sort of thing [as the work of the "Salvation Army "] is being done broadcast amongst the poor of the East End by many agencies; and the more of it, the more solid and sodden will the poverty become with which we have to deal" (i. p. 127). The methods are the methods of the scientific sociologist: and such practical inferences as are drawn are based on a study of the facts as a whole and not on a vision of the "Inferno" of "Darkest England" only. The careful reader will further note that he is several times reminded that the standard of comfort, by which the line between the poor and the well-to-do is drawn, is not a very high one: and that even among the great central mass of regularly employed workmen earning good wages, "the uncertainty of their lot, whether or not felt as an anxiety, is ever present as a danger. The position of the class may be secure-some set of men and their families must hold it—but that of the individual is precarious."

66

Mr. Booth's classification of the inhabitants of London has come to be pretty well known. (It is referred to in a "Note" in this Review, vol. ii., No. i.). Class A consists of occasional labourers, loafers, and semi-criminals; Class B of those whose earnings are "casual"-the "very poor;" Class C of those whose earnings are intermittent, and Class D of those whose earnings are small but regular. Classes C and D together are the poor." Class E contains those with regular standard earnings; F includes the more highly paid artisans, foremen, etc.; G is the lower middle-class; H includes all above "G," and may be shortly defined as the "servant-keeping class." In the accompanying maps of London, streets occupied mainly by class A are coloured black, those where class B is predominant are coloured dark-blue, those occupied by C and D are light-blue; streets where there is a mixture of D and E are

coloured purple; where the inhabitants belong to E and F they are pink, G being red, and H yellow. The want of complete symmetry between the lettering of the classes and the colouring of the streets helps to warn the student that various classes and various districts cannot always be separated from one another by quite distinct lines.

According to the summary of results for all London, only 0.9 per cent. of the population belong to Class' A, 7.5 per cent. to Class B, while 51.5 per cent. belong to classes E and F (ii. p. 21). In East London, taken by itself, the proportions are slightly different-A (necessarily a rough estimate only) constituting 1 per cent. of the population, B 11 per cent., whilst E and F combined would be 55 per cent. (i. pp. 37 seq.). These figures, supplemented by the detailed pictures, obtained mainly from the reports of the school-board visitors, are sufficiently encouraging to prevent despair, while-if all that they suggest is really thought out-they have enough of what is dark about them to prevent a too contented acquiescence in things as they are. Class A is much smaller than any one believed before the publication of Mr. Booth's volumes; it contributes so largely to that portion of the poor who come most under the notice of the public, that it has been over-estimated in the general imagination. Although it is constantly receiving recruits from the unfortunate of the classes. above it, "there appears to be no doubt that it is now hereditary to a very considerable extent" (i. p. 38). Class A can only be dealt with by being "harried out of existence" (i. p. 169). Enforcement of sanitation, prevention of overcrowding, the demolition of the worst streets will at least scatter its members and prevent the formation of new Alsatias (i. p. 174). Class B presents the hardest problems; it is "du trop. The competition of B drags down C and D, and that of C and D hangs heavily upon E. . . . Industrially we gain nothing from B. All that B does could be done by C and D in their more idle hours" (i. pp. 162, 163). Mr. Booth's proposal for dealing with the class of casual labourers is to bring them under State regulation by an extension of the Poor Law. "If this class were under State tutelage say at once under State slavery-the balance-sheet would be more favourable to the community " (i. p. 166). The suggestion of "slavery" reminds one of Fletcher of Saltoun's famous scheme for sending paupers as slaves to the plantations: but that was two hundred years ago. Slavery is out of the question now. 'My idea is," says Mr. Booth, "that these people should be allowed to live as families in industrial groups, planted wherever land and building materials were cheap. . . . In exchange for work done, the Government should supply materials and whatever else was needed. . . . There

66

...

would be no competition with the outside world. It would be merely that the State, having these people on its hands, obtained whatever value it could out of their work." When any family proves itself too incapable, it must exist no longer as a family, but be relegated to the poor-house. The important feature in this scheme, as distinct, e.g., from that of the other Mr. Booth ("General" Booth), is the avoidance of all competition with the outside world. Any scheme which, by the help of private "charity" or otherwise, enables the products of inferior labour to compete with the products of superior labour, is just like lengthening a blanket at the lower end by cutting a piece off the upper. Mr. Charles Booth's scheme of limited State socialism would give fair play to the upward tendencies already observable in the great central mass of the population. "Class E," he says elsewhere (i. p. 177),"contains those whose lot to-day is most aggravated by a raised ideal. It is in some ways a hopeful sign, but it is also a danger. Here, rather than in the ruffianism of Class A, or the starvation of Class B, or the wasted energy of Class C, or the bitter anxieties of Class D, do we find the springs of Socialism and Revolution. The stream that flows from these springs must not be dammed up, and therefore it is to this class and its leaders in Class F that I particularly appeal in favour of what I have called 'limited socialism'— a socialism which shall leave untouched the forces of individualism and the sources of wealth." It would be absurd in a short space to attempt to discuss the practicability of Mr. Booth's proposal. As he himself suggests, much might be learnt from an experiment carefully tried in some selected district.

I take only a few other examples of matters on which Mr. Booth's conclusion seems likely to give rise to profitable reflection and discussion; though every page of these volumes contains material of permanent value for the sociologist, and of immediate interest for all who care for social reform. My examples are purposely taken from the earlier part of vol. i., which has not previously been noticed in this Review. One marked distinction between Classes D and E-between the ill-paid and well-paid of those in regular employment-is to be found in the fact that in Class D "the women do a good deal to eke out the men's earnings," whereas in Class E, as a rule, the wives do not work for wages (p. 50). Of the "clubs of the East End "—apart from the so-called "proprietary clubs "-a favourable view is taken on the whole. "The leaders may consciously realize the higher ideas of the movement; but the rank and file are not above the average of their class, and usually join clubs with no higher motives than those which influence the ordinary club-goer of any class, or would otherwise