the evidence on the point is comparatively scanty. It was
enforced throughout the century in which it was passed, and it probably
continued in force generally until the Restoration, while subsequently
it was put in operation to meet special emergencies, such as times of
distress when some settlement of wages seemed desirable (cf. Rogers, v.
611; Hewins, _English Trade and Finance_, p. 82; Cunningham, _Growth of
English Industry and Commerce: Modern Times_, i. 168). It was not
repealed till 1814.
From 1585 to 1622 there was, it is said, a slight increase in labourers'
wages, which fluctuated from 5s. 3/8d. to 5s. 8-1/4d. a week, with a
declining standard of comfort and at times great distress. Then there
was a marked increase of wage till 1662 and "a very marked improvement;
the rate of increase being very nearly double that of the earlier
periods," and reaching 9s., "as the highest weekly rate for the whole
period." Then from 1662 to 1702 there was "a slight improvement"
(Hewins, p. 89). It would seem indeed that the stir of the times between
1622 and 1662 may have caused a great demand for labour. But with the
Restoration, when the assessment system was falling into desuetude, came
the Poor Relief Act of 1662 (13 & 14 Car. II. cap. 62), which brought in
the law of settlement, and a settlement for relief of a very strict
nature was added to the industrial settlement of the Artificers and
Labourers Act. Thus, if the influence of that act, which had so long
controlled labour, was waning, its place was now taken by an act which,
though it had nothing to do with the assessment of wage, yet so settled
the labourer within the bounds of his parish that he had practically to
rely, if not upon a wage fixed by the justices, yet upon a customary
wage limited and restricted as a result of the law of settlement. And
the assessment by the justices, in so far as it may have continued,
would therefore be of little or no consequence. Settlement also, like
the Artificers and Labourers Act, would prevent the country labourer
from passing to the towns, or the townsmen passing to other towns. At
least they would do so at the risk of forfeiting their right to relief
if they lost their settlement without acquiring a new one. Hence the
industrial control, though under another name and other conditions,
remained in force to a large extent in practice.
By the Artificers and Labourers Act then, in conjunction with other
measures, the labourin
|