The Condition of the Working Class in England

In the Introduction Engels outlines the gradual changes leading to the formation of the proletariat. Before the mid-18th century, weaver families lived in small towns or villages and owned some land. Their main source of income was the production of cloth, and they could work as much or as little as necessary and spend the rest of the time tending their land or socializing. The entire family would help with the weaving process, but the children who lived at home would not be expected to toil for 10 or 12 hours a day. At that time in England there was one market and practically no competition, as weaver families lived at some distance from each other. The entire production process happened under the same roof.

Similarly, small land owners, or yeomen, used to be mostly self-sufficient and produced as much as they needed, with the small amount of surplus traded for goods they could not produce themselves.

Overall, the author paints an idyllic picture of country life, which he believes can still be found in some places in Germany. However, such a lifestyle made people “intellectually […] dead” (52). The majority could not read or write, and they were not concerned with politics. Their lives were focused on their “petty, private interest” (52) with no concern for people in other parts of the country or the world.

The introduction of the first industrial machine, the jenny, invented by James Hargreaves in 1764, gradually changed this lifestyle. The jenny and its subsequent improvements and related machines, combined with the use of water and steam engines, allowed both increased production and decreased cost, as fewer and fewer people were needed to operate the machinery. Consequently, the demand for cloth also rose because of its diminished price. There was a bigger need for weavers, so their labor became more valuable. They no longer needed to grow their own food, thus allowing weavers to become exclusively focused on producing cloth. In this way, the “newly arising class of weavers who lived wholly upon wages” became the first proletarians (52).

After the invention of the loom, it was no longer necessary to house the entire cloth-production process in the same space. Families began to specialize: Some would support themselves by spinning, others by weaving. This is how the division of labor gradually took shape.

At about the same time, while the industrial proletariat was coming into being in the towns, a similar introduction of machines into farming helped shape the agricultural proletariat. Prior to the industrial revolution, farming in England was primitive and inefficient. After the weavers withdrew from any kind of farming, their holdings were taken over by the newly developing class of large tenants who could hold a hundred or more acres. With new machines improving tillage and production, these new tenants could sell their produce cheaper than traditional yeomen. Thus, if the small holding could not support the family, farmers had to either become weavers by investing in a jenny or hired agricultural laborers on a large farm.

In 1804 Edmund Cartwright invented the power-loom, which could successfully compete with a hand-weaver. This assured “the victory of machine-work over hand-work” (54). As a result, English manufactured products became increasingly cheaper, conquering foreign markets and rapidly increasing national wealth. At the same time, the multiplication of capital was mirrored by the multiplication of the proletariat.

Engels goes on to detail the changes taking place in all industry branches for the 60 years preceding his book. The introduction of mechanical power fundamentally changed all aspects of English life. Manufacturing centers like Manchester increased their population more than 10 times. The need for better communication and transportation resulted in the private sponsorship of roads and canals. The need for raw materials, such as silk, motivated the development of steam ships. The ability to cheaply produce iron allowed for the building of iron bridges and railways, as well as the manufacturing of bolts, nails, and other components needed to build machines. Because of these rapid and fundamental transformations affecting both the economy and social organization, Engels concludes that “the industrial revolution is of the same importance for England as the political revolution for France, and the philosophical revolution for Germany” (61).

The industrialization and specialization of labor resulted in the destruction of the lower-middle class. In the past a workman could aspire to establish himself as a master and employ his own journeymen and laborers. However, in the 19th century an individual could not compete with factories and large capital was needed to achieve independence from factory owners. As a result, a new permanent working class came into being with no opportunity for social mobility. Engels believes that eventually the proletariat will assert its interests since the working class makes up the majority of the British population and their poverty is the direct result of the middle class’s enrichment. The author predicts that unless the situation changes, the wrath of the poor will erupt into a revolution that will overshadow the French one of 1794.