See Eliza Picard book. Restoration London in Short one could have 50 maids at 2 quid wage a year. or buy carriage and pair for 100 pounds or have 10 years rent from house in Kentish town or it could be two years wage for clergyman or if thy wanted, one could buy 130 pairs of silk stockings. A house could be built and paid for with 300 pounds in the Strand, now add 5 naughts.
Running my eye accidentally through the household book of Sir Roger Twysden, from 1659 to 1670, it occurred to me to make a comparison between the relative prices of meat and wages, as there given, in order to ascertain the position of our peasantry in these parts, at the close of the 17th century. I send you a few extracts, by which it will be seen that, in Kent, at least, our agricultural labourers appear to have been in far better condition than those of the rest of England, who, in Mr. Macaulay's brilliant work, are represented as living "almost entirely on rye, barley, and oats," owing to the exorbitantly high price of meat, as compared with the ordinary scale of wages.
As to meat, I find the following entries:--
"1659. Beef 2s. and 1s. 8d. per stone. a loin of mutton 1s. 6d. 1662. Beef 2s. per stone. a shin of beef 1s. 10d. a loin of veal 3s. 4d. a calve's head 1s. 2d. a quarter of mutton 4s. 4d. and 5s. a side of mutton 9s. 1664. 8 quarters of mutton 32s. 1 quarter of do. 4s. 6 stone of beef 10s. 4d. 1666. 6 stone of beef 10s. 4d. a fat weather 12s. 8d. 32 fat weathers 19l. 1667. 10 stone of beef and 2 lb. of suet 18s. 22 stone of beef 2l. 23 stone of beef 2l. 3s. a chine and a quarter of veal 8s. 1670. A chine and a quarter of mutton 5s. a quarter of lamb 2s. 6d."
Through this period we have:--
"Cheese per load, _i.e._ 56 lb., at 14s., 11s., 10s., 4d., 9s. 6d."
The wages of labourers through the same period are entered:--
"Sawyer 2s. 6d. per hundred. a farm carpenter 1s. 6d. per day. or, 'I finding him,' 1s. per day. common labourers, generally 1s. per \ day; sometimes, but less frequently, > in 1849, 2s. 9d. per day / threshing wheat, 16d. per quarter in 1849, 3s. mowing, from 1s. to 1s. 8d. per acre in 1849, 3s. 6d. mowing oats, 1s. 3d. per acre in 1849, 2s. 6d. mowing clover, 1s. 6d. per acre in 1849, 2s. 6d. hayers, 2s. and 2s. 6d. per week in 1849, 6s. reaping, 2s. per acre in 1849, 10s. to 14s. sheep shearing, 1s. per score in 1849, 2s. 6d. hedging 2-1/2d. per rod in 1849, 4d. hoeing, 6d. per acre in 1849, 4s. women 8d. per day in 1849, 1s., and 1s. 4d. boys, 4d. per day in 1849, 6d. and 3d. making faggots, 18d. and 20d. per hundred; in 1849, 3s."
A reference to the household-books of the Derings, in East Kent, gives the same results.
The wages given by Sir Roger Twysden to his household servants at this time were:--
"Housekeeper 5l. per annum. maids 2l. 10s. and 3l. men 5l. 10s., 5l. and 4l."
{226}I have added, in most instances, the prices now paid to labourers in these parts, having obtained my information from the farmers of the neighbourhood.
The price of butchers' meat at present, in this neighbourhood, is from 6d. to 7 1/2d. per lb.; by wholesale, 3s. 6d. or 3s. 8d. per stone.
As far, then, as the relative prices of wages and meat can guide us, the labourer, in these parts, was as well able to purchase meat in 1670 as he is now.
Unhappily for him, the imprudence of early marriage entailing upon him the charge of a family, he is precluded from the indulgence in fresh meat, except as an occasional treat. Cheese and bacon, however, are still within his reach. The improvidence of early marriage rarely occurred in former days, and palpably, if our Kentish labourers lived _entirely_ on oats and rye, it was not of _necessity_ that they did so. I am inclined to think that, in many of the instances given above, especially in haying and harvest, provisions of some sort were found by the employer, over and above the wages. When I have more leisure, I will endeavour to obtain correct information on this point; and meanwhile, send you the entries just as I find them. I observe an entry of "peas to boil for the men." They had porridge then, at all events, in addition to their wages; and these wages, if they had so chosen, could further have purchased them meat, quite as well as at the present day; though, alas for our poor peasantry, this is not saying much for them; and even of that little smack of meat they will soon be debarred, if the present system--but I am intruding on sacred ground, and must leave the poor fellows to their hard work and scanty meals.
L&M: "But all concluded that the bane of the Parliament hath been the leaving off the old custom of the places allowing wages to those that served them in Parliament, by which they chose men that understood their business and would attend it, and they could expect an account from, which now they cannot; and so the Parliament is become a company of men unable to give account for the interest of the place they serve for.
"The medieval custom whereby constituencies paid wages to their M.P.'s [held the purse strings] -- usually 2s. a day in the case of boroughs and 4s. in the case of counties -- had been greatly weakened from the 16th century onwards by competition by parliamentary candidates and by the tenure of borough seats by 'strangers' [those not owning property in the borough].
"Almost all members now served without wage, and under the terms of a bargain by which they promised not to claim any. A few of the larger cities (London among them) continued to pay wages, although not regularly: the last-known case being that of Bristol in 1696."
Having posted the above, it occurs to me that this accounts somewhat for why MPs were so happy to accept money from Louis XIV -- although, of course, more money is always better, so matter where it comes from.
Extract from a longer entry about the working conditions of Scottish coal miners and salt makers:
In 1606, it was statute and ordained, under a penalty of £100, that no person within the realm should hire or employ colliers, coal bearers, or salters, unless furnished with a sufficient testimonial from the master whom he had last served; and further, "that sae mony colliers, coal bearers, and salters," as without such testimonial received such "fore wages and fees, should be esteemed, repute, and holden as thieves and punished in their bodies" ...
This Act, however stringent as it may seem, was found insufficient; there was a class of persons employed in the pits whom it did not include; and so in 1661, it was further enacted, "that because watermen, who lave and draw water in the coal-heugh-heads, and gatesmen who work the ways and passages in the said heughs, are as necessary to the owners and masters of the said coal heugha as the coal hewers and coal bearers, it is therefore statute and ordained, that they should come under exactly the same penalties as the others, in the event of quitting their masters without certificate; and that it should be equally illegal, in the lack of such a document, for any person to employ them."
But even that was not considered sufficient. The poor coaI worker, discontented and miserable, grumbled at his lot, and wanted wages; but such an unreasonable demand, while it was nominally complied with, was practically denied, for it was further enacted that it should "not be lawful for any coal master in the kingdom to give any greater fee than the sum of twenty merks in fee or bountith" — a clause which, according to the interpretation of Lord James, fixed the large sum of 1l. 2s. as the yearly wages of colliers and salters.
It was found that at times the poor men became uncontrollable, and refused to work on any terms, and so there was a further clause devised to deal with the difficulty, which ran as follows: "Because coal hewers within the kingdom, and other workers within coal heughs, with salters, do lie from their works at Pasche, Yule, Whitsunday, and certain other times of the year, which times they employ in drinking and debauching to the ffrecLt offence of God and prejudice of their masters, it is therefore statute and ordained that the said coal hewers and salters, and other workmen in coal heughs in the kingdom, work all the 6 days of the week, except the time of Christmas."
Thus were these poor people — men and women — treated.
"There was also two occasions more of difference at the table; the one being to make out a bill to Captain Smith for his salary abroad as commander-in-chief in the Streights. Sir J. Minnes did demand an increase of salary for his being Vice-Admiral in the Downes, he having received but 40s. without an increase, when Sir J. Lawson, in the same voyage, had 3l., and others have also had increase, only he, because he was an officer of the board, was worse used than any body else, and particularly told Sir W. Batten that he was the opposer formerly of his having an increase, which I did wonder to hear him so boldly lay it to him. So we hushed up the dispute, and offered, if he would, to examine precedents, and report them, if there was any thing to his advantage to be found, to the Duke."
L&M Companion: £2 a day was the normal daily rate at this time for a vice-admiral. Mennes had been Commander-in-Chief in the Downs in the winter of 1661-2; Lawson in that of 1662-3. The authority quoted is Tanner's 'Pepys and the Navy'. [40s. is £2.] https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/… and https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/…
Of course, Mennes also had his salary from being an Officer of the Navy Board.
British History Online has a whole section devoted to the evolution of the Navy Board. A few highlights which concern the Diary years: https://www.british-history.ac.uk…
Throughout the period 1660-1832 the members of the Navy Board were known both singly and collectively as Principal Officers and Commissioners of the Navy. (fn. 1) Until 1796 the Board was usually composed of officials of theoretically equal standing, some of whom supervised the conduct of specific areas of business, and some of whom, known as Extra Commissioners or Commissioners at Large, performed general duties. In 1660 the Board was composed of a Controller, a Surveyor, a Clerk of the Acts and two Extra Commissioners. (fn. 2) From then until 1686 its composition changed regularly and the number of its members fluctuated between 5 and 10. The Controller, Surveyor and Clerk of the Acts (fn. 3) were permanent members. In 1667 the offices of Controller of Treasurer's Accounts and Controller of Victualling Accounts were created to relieve the Controller of two of his duties, (fn. 4) ... From one to four Extra Commissioners were employed in the years 1660-8 and 1672-82.
In 1660 salaries of £500 were made available to the Controller and the Extra Commissioners, of £490 to the Surveyor and of £350 to the Clerk of the Acts. (fn. 27)
There were 4 principal officer positions in the Navy Board when it began in 1660: Treasurer — Sir George Carteret. for his salary, see below. Comptroller — Sir Robert Slingsby (followed by Sir John Mennes when Slingsby died within a year). Surveyor — Sir William Batten. Clerk of the Acts — Pepys.
Sir George Carteret, an impeccable royalist whose service at sea had begun under King Charles and who had held Jersey for him, was appointed treasurer in 1662. He had official lodgings at Whitehall, a house in Pall Mall, another at Deptford and a country mansion near Windsor, and he was the highest paid,with 2,000l. a year and the right to three pence in every pound he handled -- this was a remnant of the old way of doing things. He was also on Charles II's Privy Council at least in the early days of the Diary https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…
APPOINTMENT DATES: 1660 13 July Pepys, S. 1660 4 July Berkeley of Stratton, Lord 1660 4 July Penn, Sir W. 1662 14 May Coventry, Hon. W. 1664 7 Dec. Brouncker, Viscount 1665 20 Jan. Harvey, Sir T. 1667 16 Jan. Brouncker, Viscount 1667 25 Nov. Middleton, T.
There were also Commissioners at some of the major dockyards, like Commissioner William Pett at Chatham, and Gen. Thomas Middleton at Portsmouth. They don't appear to be covered by BHO.
And, like Carteret, the London Navy Commissioners were given free housing on site. Plus they were expected to supplement their salaries with commissions, as a sign of being savvy business people. But not too much in commissions or there would be consequences. Pepys frequently takes care to document how he saved the King money, while discreetly adding a few feathers to his private nest.
Ther Navy Board maintains the Navy, the Admiralty wages war. They work closely together with many shared interests, but have vastly different functions.
9 Annotations
First Reading
dirk • Link
Daily Money Wage Rates of Building Craftsmen and Labourers in Southern England:
http://privatewww.essex.ac.uk/~al…
bitter o salt • Link
See Eliza Picard book. Restoration London
in Short one could have 50 maids at 2 quid wage a year.
or buy carriage and pair for 100 pounds or have 10 years rent from house in Kentish town or it could be two years wage for clergyman or if thy wanted, one could buy 130 pairs of silk stockings. A house could be built and paid for with 300 pounds in the Strand, now add 5 naughts.
Terry Foreman • Link
WAGES IN 17TH AND 19TH CENTURIES.
Running my eye accidentally through the household book of Sir Roger Twysden, from 1659 to 1670, it occurred to me to make a comparison between the relative prices of meat and wages, as there given, in order to ascertain the position of our peasantry in these parts, at the close of the 17th century. I send you a few extracts, by which it will be seen that, in Kent, at least, our agricultural labourers appear to have been in far better condition than those of the rest of England, who, in Mr. Macaulay's brilliant work, are represented as living "almost entirely on rye, barley, and oats," owing to the exorbitantly high price of meat, as compared with the ordinary scale of wages.
As to meat, I find the following entries:--
"1659. Beef 2s. and 1s. 8d. per stone.
a loin of mutton 1s. 6d.
1662. Beef 2s. per stone.
a shin of beef 1s. 10d.
a loin of veal 3s. 4d.
a calve's head 1s. 2d.
a quarter of mutton 4s. 4d. and 5s.
a side of mutton 9s.
1664. 8 quarters of mutton 32s.
1 quarter of do. 4s.
6 stone of beef 10s. 4d.
1666. 6 stone of beef 10s. 4d.
a fat weather 12s. 8d.
32 fat weathers 19l.
1667. 10 stone of beef and 2 lb. of suet 18s.
22 stone of beef 2l.
23 stone of beef 2l. 3s.
a chine and a quarter of veal 8s.
1670. A chine and a quarter of mutton 5s.
a quarter of lamb 2s. 6d."
Through this period we have:--
"Cheese per load, _i.e._ 56 lb., at 14s., 11s., 10s., 4d.,
9s. 6d."
The wages of labourers through the same period are entered:--
"Sawyer 2s. 6d. per hundred.
a farm carpenter 1s. 6d. per day.
or, 'I finding him,' 1s. per day.
common labourers, generally 1s. per \
day; sometimes, but less frequently, > in 1849, 2s.
9d. per day /
threshing wheat, 16d. per quarter in 1849, 3s.
mowing, from 1s. to 1s. 8d. per acre in 1849, 3s. 6d.
mowing oats, 1s. 3d. per acre in 1849, 2s. 6d.
mowing clover, 1s. 6d. per acre in 1849, 2s. 6d.
hayers, 2s. and 2s. 6d. per week in 1849, 6s.
reaping, 2s. per acre in 1849, 10s. to 14s.
sheep shearing, 1s. per score in 1849, 2s. 6d.
hedging 2-1/2d. per rod in 1849, 4d.
hoeing, 6d. per acre in 1849, 4s.
women 8d. per day in 1849, 1s., and 1s. 4d.
boys, 4d. per day in 1849, 6d. and 3d.
making faggots, 18d. and 20d. per hundred; in 1849, 3s."
A reference to the household-books of the Derings, in East Kent, gives the same results.
The wages given by Sir Roger Twysden to his household servants at this time were:--
"Housekeeper 5l. per annum.
maids 2l. 10s. and 3l.
men 5l. 10s., 5l. and 4l."
{226}I have added, in most instances, the prices now paid to labourers in these parts, having obtained my information from the farmers of the neighbourhood.
The price of butchers' meat at present, in this neighbourhood, is from 6d. to 7 1/2d. per lb.; by wholesale, 3s. 6d. or 3s. 8d. per stone.
As far, then, as the relative prices of wages and meat can guide us, the labourer, in these parts, was as well able to purchase meat in 1670 as he is now.
Unhappily for him, the imprudence of early marriage entailing upon him the charge of a family, he is precluded from the indulgence in fresh meat, except as an occasional treat. Cheese and bacon, however, are still within his reach. The improvidence of early marriage rarely occurred in former days, and palpably, if our Kentish labourers lived _entirely_ on oats and rye, it was not of _necessity_ that they did so. I am inclined to think that, in many of the instances given above, especially in haying and harvest, provisions of some sort were found by the employer, over and above the wages. When I have more leisure, I will endeavour to obtain correct information on this point; and meanwhile, send you the entries just as I find them. I observe an entry of "peas to boil for the men." They had porridge then, at all events, in addition to their wages; and these wages, if they had so chosen, could further have purchased them meat, quite as well as at the present day; though, alas for our poor peasantry, this is not saying much for them; and even of that little smack of meat they will soon be debarred, if the present system--but I am intruding on sacred ground, and must leave the poor fellows to their hard work and scanty meals.
LAMBERT B. LARKING.
Notes & Queries 1850.02.09 by Various http://www.fullbooks.com/Notes--Q…
JWB • Link
In '69 Newton made Lucasian Prof. of Math at salary ~100 pounds + room & board.
Thomas Levenson, "Newton and the Counterfeiter"
Third Reading
San Diego Sarah • Link
An essay on how members of parliament were paid in the 16th and 17th centurues.
https://academic.oup.com/ehr/arti…
L&M: "But all concluded that the bane of the Parliament hath been the leaving off the old custom of the places allowing wages to those that served them in Parliament, by which they chose men that understood their business and would attend it, and they could expect an account from, which now they cannot; and so the Parliament is become a company of men unable to give account for the interest of the place they serve for.
"The medieval custom whereby constituencies paid wages to their M.P.'s [held the purse strings] -- usually 2s. a day in the case of boroughs and 4s. in the case of counties -- had been greatly weakened from the 16th century onwards by competition by parliamentary candidates and by the tenure of borough seats by 'strangers' [those not owning property in the borough].
"Almost all members now served without wage, and under the terms of a bargain by which they promised not to claim any. A few of the larger cities (London among them) continued to pay wages, although not regularly: the last-known case being that of Bristol in 1696."
San Diego Sarah • Link
Having posted the above, it occurs to me that this accounts somewhat for why MPs were so happy to accept money from Louis XIV -- although, of course, more money is always better, so matter where it comes from.
San Diego Sarah • Link
Extract from a longer entry about the working conditions of Scottish coal miners and salt makers:
In 1606, it was statute and ordained, under a penalty of £100, that no person within the realm should hire or employ colliers, coal bearers, or salters, unless furnished with a sufficient testimonial from the master whom he had last served; and further, "that sae mony colliers, coal bearers, and salters," as without such testimonial received such "fore wages and fees, should be esteemed, repute, and holden as thieves and punished in their bodies" ...
This Act, however stringent as it may seem, was found insufficient; there was a class of persons employed in the pits whom it did not include; and so in 1661, it was further enacted, "that because watermen, who lave and draw water in the coal-heugh-heads, and gatesmen who work the ways and passages in the said heughs, are as necessary to the owners and masters of the said coal heugha as the coal hewers and coal bearers, it is therefore statute and ordained, that they should come under exactly the same penalties as the others, in the event of quitting their masters without certificate; and that it should be equally illegal, in the lack of such a document, for any person to employ them."
But even that was not considered sufficient. The poor coaI worker, discontented and miserable, grumbled at his lot, and wanted wages; but such an unreasonable demand, while it was nominally complied with, was practically denied, for it was further enacted that it should "not be lawful for any coal master in the kingdom to give any greater fee than the sum of twenty merks in fee or bountith" — a clause which, according to the interpretation of Lord James, fixed the large sum of 1l. 2s. as the yearly wages of colliers and salters.
It was found that at times the poor men became uncontrollable, and refused to work on any terms, and so there was a further clause devised to deal with the difficulty, which ran as follows: "Because coal hewers within the kingdom, and other workers within coal heughs, with salters, do lie from their works at Pasche, Yule, Whitsunday, and certain other times of the year, which times they employ in drinking and debauching to the ffrecLt offence of God and prejudice of their masters, it is therefore statute and ordained that the said coal hewers and salters, and other workmen in coal heughs in the kingdom, work all the 6 days of the week, except the time of Christmas."
Thus were these poor people — men and women — treated.
The beginning of the article is at
https://www.pepysdiary.com/news/2…
San Diego Sarah • Link
Salary disputes are always uncomfortable:
"There was also two occasions more of difference at the table; the one being to make out a bill to Captain Smith for his salary abroad as commander-in-chief in the Streights. Sir J. Minnes did demand an increase of salary for his being Vice-Admiral in the Downes, he having received but 40s. without an increase, when Sir J. Lawson, in the same voyage, had 3l., and others have also had increase, only he, because he was an officer of the board, was worse used than any body else, and particularly told Sir W. Batten that he was the opposer formerly of his having an increase, which I did wonder to hear him so boldly lay it to him. So we hushed up the dispute, and offered, if he would, to examine precedents, and report them, if there was any thing to his advantage to be found, to the Duke."
L&M Companion: £2 a day was the normal daily rate at this time for a vice-admiral. Mennes had been Commander-in-Chief in the Downs in the winter of 1661-2; Lawson in that of 1662-3. The authority quoted is Tanner's 'Pepys and the Navy'.
[40s. is £2.]
https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/… and
https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/…
Of course, Mennes also had his salary from being an Officer of the Navy Board.
British History Online has a whole section devoted to the evolution of the Navy Board. A few highlights which concern the Diary years:
https://www.british-history.ac.uk…
Throughout the period 1660-1832 the members of the Navy Board were known both singly and collectively as Principal Officers and Commissioners of the Navy. (fn. 1) Until 1796 the Board was usually composed of officials of theoretically equal standing, some of whom supervised the conduct of specific areas of business, and some of whom, known as Extra Commissioners or Commissioners at Large, performed general duties.
In 1660 the Board was composed of a Controller, a Surveyor, a Clerk of the Acts and two Extra Commissioners. (fn. 2)
From then until 1686 its composition changed regularly and the number of its members fluctuated between 5 and 10. The Controller, Surveyor and Clerk of the Acts (fn. 3) were permanent members.
In 1667 the offices of Controller of Treasurer's Accounts and Controller of Victualling Accounts were created to relieve the Controller of two of his duties, (fn. 4) ...
From one to four Extra Commissioners were employed in the years 1660-8 and 1672-82.
In 1660 salaries of £500 were made available to the Controller and the Extra Commissioners, of £490 to the Surveyor and of £350 to the Clerk of the Acts. (fn. 27)
There were 4 principal officer positions in the Navy Board when it began in 1660:
Treasurer — Sir George Carteret. for his salary, see below.
Comptroller — Sir Robert Slingsby (followed by Sir John Mennes when Slingsby died within a year).
Surveyor — Sir William Batten.
Clerk of the Acts — Pepys.
San Diego Sarah • Link
CONCLUSION:
Sir George Carteret, an impeccable royalist whose service at sea had begun under King Charles and who had held Jersey for him, was appointed treasurer in 1662. He had official lodgings at Whitehall, a house in Pall Mall, another at Deptford and a country mansion near Windsor, and he was the highest paid,with 2,000l. a year and the right to three pence in every pound he handled -- this was a remnant of the old way of doing things.
He was also on Charles II's Privy Council at least in the early days of the Diary https://www.pepysdiary.com/encycl…
APPOINTMENT DATES:
1660 13 July Pepys, S.
1660 4 July Berkeley of Stratton, Lord
1660 4 July Penn, Sir W.
1662 14 May Coventry, Hon. W.
1664 7 Dec. Brouncker, Viscount
1665 20 Jan. Harvey, Sir T.
1667 16 Jan. Brouncker, Viscount
1667 25 Nov. Middleton, T.
There were also Commissioners at some of the major dockyards, like Commissioner William Pett at Chatham, and Gen. Thomas Middleton at Portsmouth. They don't appear to be covered by BHO.
And, like Carteret, the London Navy Commissioners were given free housing on site.
Plus they were expected to supplement their salaries with commissions, as a sign of being savvy business people. But not too much in commissions or there would be consequences. Pepys frequently takes care to document how he saved the King money, while discreetly adding a few feathers to his private nest.
The Admiralty had their own Commissioners, and British History Online has a section about them.
https://www.british-history.ac.uk…
Ther Navy Board maintains the Navy, the Admiralty wages war. They work closely together with many shared interests, but have vastly different functions.